[Closed] World gone mad?

Lois Lane.

Claire Balding.

It's easy to find female journalists who have seduced/been seduced

Seduced?

Really? So if famous person meets, falls in love with and marries a journalist it's seduction, but for Joe Bloggs its what???

Both Balding and Finnigan met fellow journalists when colleagues. I'm looking for a famous female who has married a journalist who interviewed them.

Seduction is available to all of us, Bob. We all use it, most wisely. You can seduce in many ways; professionally, artistically, socially, sexually.

Both Balding and Finnigan met fellow journalists when colleagues

Workplace hanky panky?

let's flip that around - how do you like being referred to as "boy"

Doesn't bother me. It's how I describe myself fairly regularly.

....particularly when being spoken down to?

That's not how it was used in this case, so thats a pointless addition to the question.

Edukator - Troll

A challenge for you all. Find me a famous female who has married a journalist.

Konnie Huq

[quote=DaRC_L ]

we're not allowed to use the term "girl" for an adult female

Until this story surfaced I had no idea that Marsellus Wallace even played cricket:

[img] [/img]

"Brooker became engaged to former Blue Peter presenter Konnie Huq after dating for nine months, having met while filming an episode of Screenwipe"

Once again colleagues marry. I'm still looking for a famous womam who has married a journalist. All you've given me so far are female journalists/presenters who've married work colleagues (which Mel Mclaughlin did to, marrying one of the set crew and then divorcing a couple of years later). I'm looking for a famous female minister, singer, sports personality ... who has married a journalist who interviewed them.

[url= http://www.voanews.com/content/****stani-politician-cricket-legend-marries-former-bbc-journalist/2590456.html ]First Google result in English[/url]

Is there a point to this quiz.

Is there a point to this quiz.

Look at his moniker, he's just wasting your time for the sake of it. Don't feed it.

Yes. But some people on this forum are so good at putting words into my mouth or distorting what I've said I'll let the facts speak for themselves.

[url= http://www.voanews.com/content/****stani-politician-cricket-legend-marries-former-bbc-journalist/2590456.html ]First Google result in English[/url]

I was at his first wedding.

It was much better 😉

GrahamS - Member
Until this story surfaced I had no idea that [s]Marsellus Wallace[/s] Lenny Henry even played cricket:

Yeah, they all look the same 🙄

Time this thread was closed IMO.

don't close it yet......[url= http://www.hellomagazine.com/brides/2014120122200/scarlett-johansson-romain-dauriac-secret-wedding/ ]I win![/url]

Have I missed it or has no one linked to [url= http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2016/jan/05/its-not-just-chris-gayle-sport-medias-blokesworld-mindset-needs-to-change ]this response[/url] yet?

Congratulations, Rockape63! Not easy to find, eh!

Worse than "girl", he called her "baby"!

What could it mean? Does he think she is a baby? I think he is just confused.

Doesn't bother me. It's how I describe myself fairly regularly.

Yet it was sometimes used by American police officers to demean black men. Context, innit.

Yeah, they all look the same 🙄

Oh come on...

[img] http://s22.postimg.org/bjnjggmch/ving.jp g" target="_blank">http://s22.postimg.org/bjnjggmch/ving.jp g"/> [/img]

There [i]is[/i] a passing similarity there - I don't think that's particularly racialist to say is it?

Not all sport people are intelligent you know ... 😀

Why people keep looking to sport people for "inspiration" or "wisdom" I don't know? 😆

I would say it was just about borderline cheeky until he says "don't blush baby". You don't call any female "baby" in the workplace, it's derogatory and demeaning and makes a mockery out of her and her professional aspirations. And on camera too, it's not like she can retaliate or even defend herself in that situation and he knew it.

I'm glad he got a fine as it sets an example, female journos are there to interview people, they are not there as playthings and eye-candy for cockwombles like him.

I totally condone meeting women in professional environments but only in a discreet, respectful way which isn't going to put her career at risk!

[url= http://villains.wikia.com/wiki/Marsellus_Wallace ]marsellus wallace[/url]

[i]Congratulations, Rockape63! Not easy to find, eh![/i]

au contraire mon ami, au contraire....I just did that googly thing and Voila! 8)

Yet it was sometimes used by American police officers to demean black men

Exactly.

So how was the use of the word "girl" worthy of criticism in this case ?

Rather than the use of a different word, in a different situation.

So how was the use of the word "girl" worthy of criticism in this case ?

Because it was condescending.

(Being condescending' is when you talk down to someone...)

So how was the use of the word "girl" worthy of criticism in this case ?

He was hitting on her during a professional interview. It was inappropriate and demeaning.

Ransos you are a bit confused, re read the thread and try to keep up.

Johnx2 and Ransos.

D- for comprehension. 🙂

nealglover - Member
Yet it was sometimes used by American police officers to demean black men
Exactly.

It was also used in a similar vain by Captain Manwairing to his lower officers, especially private Pike.

Ransos you are a bit confused, re read the thread and try to keep up.

Being endowed with at least basic abilities in comprehension, I suggest that I am capable of understanding the meaning of "West Indies cricketer Chris Gayle has been fined A$10,000 ($7,200; £4,900) by his club for "inappropriate conduct" after he asked a TV reporter for a date in a live interview."

If you need some help, please ask.

ransos - I think they were referring to the meaning of all the posts between the OP and your one.

(Being condescending' is when you talk down to someone..)

For that gag to work properly, it's best done without the stray apostrophe 😉

A Chris Gayle story I have heard (and seen in print I think).

Apparently a few years ago he was sat next to chap called John Barclay at some dinner or somesuch. John Barclay being very much old school MCC - tour manager on several England (probably more in the days when England toured as MCC) etc.

Apparently Barclay was desperately trying to engage Gayle in conversation with utterances like:

"Had a splendid time in Jamaica a few years back, the fishing was simply marvellous"

And

"The one place I love to tour is Jamaica, the food is simply first rate and the golf courses are magnificent"

Etc.

Apparently Gayle totally blanked him until he decided to give up.

Then Gayle cut him dead with:

"So tell me. On this trip to Jamaica - did you get much pussy man?"

I think this clash of two worlds sums things up nicely.

Gayle at least makes very little pretence about what he is - this is the best thing I can credit him with.

Other than this he is a simple mercenary who will play his sport for the highest price - just so long as it doesn't go on too long to demonstrate that he is just a big slogger with nothing more to his game. Bearing this in mind, it is not unexpected that he likes the things that money can buy and is probably not interested unless he can get them quickly.

If you need some help, please ask.

Keep digging 😆

ransos - I think they were referring to the meaning of all the posts between the OP and your one.

Nealglover specifically referred to "this case".

Given you can offset charity donations against tax in most countries I doubt it will cost him much at all.

In fact the more I think about this there are lots of winners here:

The cancer charity
Mel McLaughlin - she handled/is handling the situation pretty well.
Female journalists who don't appreciated unsolicited advances.
The public, who are being reminded hitting on people in professional situations is inappropriate.
The public as some of the more rampant journos are demonstrating how excessive their reactions are here and probably elsewhere.
STW with lots of hits
Even Chris Gayle can view it as cheap publicity for his strip room and will perhaps get contacted by hopeful users

Ransos I believe the argument about the use of the word girl stems from the usage by the delectable JHJ, who as far as I know never hit on anyone, Well not the sports reporter in question. As far as I know.

For that gag to work properly, it's best done without the stray apostrophe

bollocks shit and ****. Actually it was a stray inverted comma, and on reflection 'being' is redundant.

I call girls 'lasses'. As in 'that lass who did that thing' (ie professor x, y, or z.) Only at home though and I get told off for it.

'Boy' is a reasonable analogy for 'girl' when testing terminology across genders. In fact it's pretty much the only one.

You realise the term profession has lost all meaning when it is applied to journalism.

Ransos I believe the argument about the use of the word girl stems from the usage by the delectable JHJ, who as far as I know never hit on anyone, Well not the sports reporter in question. As far as I know.

Makes you think though.

Nealglover specifically referred to "this case".

I specifically quoted what I was referring to in every post I've made, to make it clear what I was talking about.

As was said earlier, keep up 😉

I remember seeing Hazel Irvine interviewing Ally McCoist after a match a few years ago. His team had lost and she asked "Disappointed not to score tonight Ally?" He grinned, winked at her and replied "The night's still young Hazel".

She laughed. Was probably flattered too. She certainly didn't provoke a whole load of people going around pretending to be offended.

...a whole load of people going around pretending to be offended.

Just out of interest ... Who's pretending to be offended ?

Ransos I believe the argument about the use of the word girl stems from the usage by the delectable JHJ, who as far as I know never hit on anyone, Well not the sports reporter in question. As far as I know.

It's a tough life being hit on and harrassed by world class athletes, believe you me...

he laughed. Was probably flattered too.

I doubt she was flattered, but there's a difference between a witticism, as that was, and a naked proposition.

Pretending to be offended is the trendy thing to be nowadays. You see it all over the place. Facebook, the Guardian and Independent, Twitter etc.

I genuinely don't believe people can be offended by some of the utterly trivial stuff out there so the only logical conclusion is they are pretending.

There are a lot of things in the world worth getting up in arms about. This isn't one of them.

Someone the other day posted a great YouTube clip about comedian Steve Hughes on people being "offended". Well worth a watch. I'd post a link myself if I wasn't technically useless.

molgrips - Member
he laughed. Was probably flattered too.
I doubt she was flattered, but there's a difference between a witticism, as that was, and a naked proposition.

Ally is fairly quick witted and picked up on an potential double entendre, Chris Gallery ignored the question completely and fairly boorishly propositional the presenter. They're very different scenarios. If I'd done that at work I'd be getting disciplinary action and potentially dismissed.

If he'd answered the question then asked her out it'd have been less bad but ignoring her shows complete contempt.

I doubt she was flattered, but there's a difference between a witticism, as that was, and a naked proposition.

I strongly suspect she was. And with Ally McCoist I suspect it was more than just a witticism. Her having the hots for him was a standing joke on Scottish comedy shows back in those days. Not that anything ever happened though.

Pretending to be offended/professionally offended is the trendy thing to [s]be[/s] talk about nowadays.

FTFY

I remember seeing Hazel Irvine interviewing Ally McCoist after a match a few years ago.

Was it a few years ago as in the 1970s?

Ally is fairly quick witted and picked up on an potential double entendre, Chris Gallery ignored the question completely and fairly boorishly propositional the presenter. They're very different scenarios. If I'd done that at work I'd be getting disciplinary action and potentially dismissed.

A fair point. However the interviewer should just have slapped him and walked away. He'd have deserved it.

There are a lot of things in the world worth getting up in arms about. This isn't one of them.

Says the man... So all those women who ARE up in arms about this kind of thing in general - what are they complaining about? Are they all silly little emotional women or what?

Was in the 80s I think. After a Scotland match.

It's a tough life being hit on and harrassed by world class athletes, believe you me...

[img] [/img]

Pretending to be offended is the trendy thing to be nowadays. You see it all over the place. Facebook, the Guardian and Independent, Twitter etc.

So who's pretending to be offended here, as you said.

I can see lots of people saying he was wrong to do what he did was wrong etc.

Nobody pretending to be offended though.

Or did you mean the interviewer ?

Was in the 80s I think. After a Scotland match.

RIght. Not really what I would describe as being 'a few years ago'.

So who's pretending to be offended here, as you said.

I was speaking in more general terms than just on here.

 

Fair enough.

Although I've not really seen anyone pretending to be offended over this anywhere really.

Just people saying he was being a dick etc.

Says the man... So all those women who ARE up in arms about this kind of thing in general - what are they complaining about? Are they all silly little emotional women or what?

I don't think so. Do you? You chose those words, not me. Interesting choice of phrase. Not something I'd use myself

I'd say that in general they have a flawed sense of perspective. Both the men and the women. Or the boys and the girls. Whatever.

@kennyp - shall we make a list of what you're allowed to be offended of? Sounds very dictatorial...

Just people saying he was being a dick etc.

I agree with you there.

@kennyp - shall we make a list of what you're allowed to be offended of? Sounds very dictatorial...

Yeah, if you want. Go for it. I'm off to have my dinner though.

All this copying and pasting and Junky isn't even here yet!

Bravo, STW!

All this copying and pasting !

All this copying and pasting !

All this copying and pasting !

All this copying and pasting !

All this copying and pasting !

All this copying and pasting !

John Barclay is about 60, used to play for Sussex and was county captain. He was president, an honourary position, of the MCC a few years ago and has been team manager for England on a couple of tours. Definitely old school, but also a very fine cricketer who wasn't miles away from captaining England.

I'd say that in general they have a flawed sense of perspective.

But as we discussed on the other sexism thread, you can't dismiss someone's point on a subject about which you do not know as much.

It'd be like me telling someone their snowboard's rubbish.

But I'm not dismissing their opinions as such. I'm giving my own opinion, which is that I believe they are wrong. And they in turn are quite entitled to say mine are wrong. I certainly won't be offended or outraged if they do.

And it's a pretty straightforward subject. Transcript of the interview is freely availabilite. A quick read provides all the information you need. Equally though, I wouldn't try and give an opinion on someone's snowboard either. I know next to nothing about snowboards.

I believe they are wrong.

On what basis, though?

The saddest thing is that we are talking about this on a day when a black african scored a century for South Africa.

On the basis of hugely overreacting to something pretty trivial. Or in the case of a lot of the folk tweeting, being desperate to be publicly seen to being outraged.

YOU think it's trivial

There's some dodgy logic there, isn't there? You think it's trivial, people tell you it's not, so you then think they are being silly, because they are upset about something that you think is trivial, but you won't listen to them because you think they're silly, because you think it's trivial.

Is it possible for you to learn anything here?

Yes I think it's trivial. However I didn't say anything about people being silly. You did. For some reason. That's the second time you've tried to attribute me with saying things I didn't say. Please stop.

And I have listened. I've read lots of people's comments. Some I agree with some I don't. There's no dodgy logic. Someone expressed an opinion. I considered that opinion to be incorrect and therefore said so. And as I said, I'm equally happy for people to say that my opinion is wrong.

Oh for ****'s sake. You knew full well what I meant. I posed the question that you (or whoever else) might be somewhat more dismissive of the people who are telling you that it's a problem because they are women - subconsciously or otherwise.

Now if you disagree, then put a counter argument, don't talk rubbish about me putting words into your mouth. Why the hell would I do that? I'm not personally attacking you, I'm trying to draw out good arguments.

Like maybe you tell us why you think casual sexism is trivial.

.... However I didn't say anything about people being silly. You did. For some reason. That's the second time you've tried to attribute me with saying things I didn't say. Please stop.

No, but you did claim that they weren't really bothered by it at all, and were in fact just pretending.

I was disagreeing with both men and women. Therefore I can't put a counter argument because there isn't a case to argue against.

I believe the whole thing is trivial in that it was nothing more than a daft remark. Nothing to do with sexism, just someone saying something they maybe shouldn't have. Hardly worthy of the huge media attention. There are far more important things in the world to get worked up about

And by saying "so you think......" you are trying to attribute to me opinions that I don't actually hold. Had you put a question mark after the statements that would have changed the context greatly. That's why I asked you to stop. No need to swear.

Yes I do believe a lot of people, particularly public figures using Twitter, are pretending to be outraged. Some people probably are genuinely annoyed. Fair enough. I think they are wrong to be but they are quite entitled to their opinions.