Dykes on bikes

[661-Pete]

Exquisite breed of nastiness there: looks like a slight on cyclists and homophobia all rolled into one. But this is the Press - and the Mudrock Press to boot! What else can we expect? Remember that furore over the "decapitate cyclists with wire" article, a year or two ago?

Makes me wonder again, whether CycleChat ought to have a 'Press' forum. Plenty of existing threads would fit in there nicely! But I fear, it would get even more 'lively' than P&L...

 

[Spinney]

So normally Clare Balding doesn't say what she's thinking, except in this case when it accidentally slipped out, thereby betraying a part of her normal thought process and you're villifying AA Gill for saying things as he thinks it. At least I know AA Gill is a muppet, I just suspect Clare Balding is not as nice as she appears. It's just a case of double standards isn't it?

She said it in an interview. Spur of the moment? Too late to get it back once it had slipped out.

He said it in a newspaper article, which he (and his editors, who should be seen as just as guilty) had time to consider/edit/reread etc before publishing.

Not quite the same.

 

[Davidc]

Gill is an obnoxious, intellectually defective, bigot. That's why he's in the position he's in. It sells papers.

I'm glad Claire Balding is taking the action she is, it's what the paper and Gill deserve. I just hope they get censured for the article, although fat lot of good it'll do.

The correct response is not to buy Murdoch's papers or buy Sky TV. I have to admit to not quite following that course of action as I usually buy the Times on Saturday.

 

[brokenbetty]

I'm still feeling queasy at the description of Jeremy Clarkson as "perhaps the epitome of the heterosexual male".

I can't think of anything less attractive to this straight girl.

 

[Spinney]

I'm still feeling queasy at the description of Jeremy Clarkson as "perhaps the epitome of the heterosexual male".

I can't think of anything less attractive to this straight girl.

I should think many heterosexual males would be offended too...

 

[Crackle]

She said it in an interview. Spur of the moment? Too late to get it back once it had slipped out.

He said it in a newspaper article, which he (and his editors, who should be seen as just as guilty) had time to consider/edit/reread etc before publishing.

Not quite the same.

That's kind of the point though isn't it, here's a bloke who's just won the Grand National and she focuses the attention on his appearance which was obviously going through her head first. Makes you wonder what else is in her head that remains unsaid. Whereas with AA Gill, you know what's going through his head.

Have you never been shocked by someone suddenly coming out with a view which you would never have otherwise subscribed to them, I have. In fact I tend to find these are the people who are deeply dangerous at a prejudicial level. AA Gill on the other hand, may well be an idiot but I've never got the impression he's predjudiced, in fact he's no more than an outlet for the buttoned up middle classes who lack the wherewithal to be rude or offensive themselves and so secretly delight in someone else being it for them. Of course the other purpose of such articles is they give the slatheringly indignant a chance to oil their hanging ropes.

 

[Over The Hill]

Some celebs present themselves as a "gay" personality (Alan Carr for example) and tend to use that as a theme in their shows. If Carr did a program on bikes then it may be fairly OK to make a bit of a joke about him and his perhaps gay attitude to the subject.
However, some people are in the public eye and make no reference to their sexuality (lile Balding) and so it is then very wrong for a critic to start making cheap gay remarks about them. In such cases their sexuality is a private thing and Gill is crossing a line he should not cross.

 

[ComedyPilot]

I'm still feeling queasy at the description of Jeremy Clarkson as "perhaps the epitome of the heterosexual male".

I can't think of anything less attractive to this straight girl.

Tell that to the scores of starry-eyed sycophantic girls in the front row of 'his' show every week.

 

[brokenbetty]

Tell that to the scores of starry-eyed sycophantic girls in the front row of 'his' show every week.

I don't think it's his heterosexual credentials they are drawn to as much as his financial ones.

 

[Jezston]

Sadly, this kind of thing from AA Gill is not out of the ordinary. He seems to have a habit of making forthright statements, shall we say. He probably prides himself on 'calling a spade a spade'.

And he's probably using 'spade' in the racially derogatory context.

 

[Jezston]

Tell that to the scores of starry-eyed sycophantic girls in the front row of 'his' show every week.

I think they are more interested in the camera than him.

 

[Baggy]

That's kind of the point though isn't it, here's a bloke who's just won the Grand National and she focuses the attention on his appearance which was obviously going through her head first. Makes you wonder what else is in her head that remains unsaid. Whereas with AA Gill, you know what's going through his head.

Have you never been shocked by someone suddenly coming out with a view which you would never have otherwise subscribed to them, I have. In fact I tend to find these are the people who are deeply dangerous at a prejudicial level. AA Gill on the other hand, may well be an idiot but I've never got the impression he's predjudiced, in fact he's no more than an outlet for the buttoned up middle classes who lack the wherewithal to be rude or offensive themselves and so secretly delight in someone else being it for them. Of course the other purpose of such articles is they give the slatheringly indignant a chance to oil their hanging ropes.

If you don't think he's prejudiced I'd recommend reading up on him a little bit more, and reading a bit more of his writing.

Whether either of them are "nice" or not, there's a difference between the two incidents and their outcomes here: Clare Balding later apologised to the jockey (though apparently by text!), with the BBC also issuing an apology. The message given out was it's not ok to mock someone's appearance.

Gill's attack uses language that most people would agree is pejorative, and the Times' response that "it's just a joke, right?", sends out the basic message that the lesbian community should shut up and accept any abuse. Just because he's paid to offend doen't mean he shouldn't be challenged.

 

[Crackle]

Is he prejudiced, actually, or does he just use the language of prejudice as part of his charm.

I'll admit I don't make a habit of reading his stuff. I've read one of his books, picked up and read before I even knew who he was. I liked it, I didn't agree with everything he said but it stimulated my own thought processes, always a good thing. I'm not arguing he's a toss£r either. After reading his Gibbon shooting exploits, there can be little doubt of that status. I'll admit I do find him entertaining which probably puts me in the buttoned up middle class status I described above but I imagine he appeals to a small well educated minority, intelligent enough to discern his true aim and not the kind likely to whip up a mob and march on Lesbian kind.

I'm not sure you're right about the message it sends out either. Given Gill's context, it's no more than a personal sleight or insult much the same as Clare Baldings orthodontic slip up. I actually think the description he goes on to give about her in Lederhosen with erect nipples is far worse (and amusing).

 

[Mad Doug Biker]

Sadly, this kind of thing from AA Gill is not out of the ordinary. He seems to have a habit of making forthright statements, shall we say. He probably prides himself on 'calling a spade a spade'.

There's nothing more insulting than false sincerity and all that?
Sometimes it's nice, but at other times it's just hurtful and annoying, I agree.

But is there anyone NOT on twitter these days?

Umm, me!!

By the way, it hadn't occurred to me that she was gay, but I was wondering, where does the work Dyke actually originate from?? (and no, I don't mean the big walls in the Netherlands).

A bit like Gay, Poof, etc etc, where....why are they used??

 

[jujubi]

Nothing definite anywhere. Best I can find: http://www.glbtq.com...opic.php?t=1294 Some other sources say the word bulldyke is as old as the word dyke or precedes it, which is interesting.

As with all words that have been "reclaimed", it's pretty much a matter of who uses it and how. Context context context.
I don't think the word is always negative. In fact when I first read the thread title, not realizing it referred to that article, I thought someone was trying to summon the lesbian contingent of Cycle Chat members (is there one?) for a pleasant all-lesbian Sunday ride...

Even though Gill is a bit of a cock, I'm not sure he meant to denigrate her for her sexuality. (He was just trying to be funny and wasn't, as usual.) I'm not even sure she is genuinely offended herself. But she seems to take issue with the word on behalf of other people in other situations. Which is weird. Not sure she is in the position to do that. Of course the word can be an insult in the playground or a threat in some dark backalley, but Gill neither screamed it at her in the playground while pushing her face into the snow or as part of a threat to beat her up. He used it in a largely descriptive way, childishly attracted to the rhyme with bike...

That said, there was other stuff in the article I found offensive.

And then again, Balding got people to discuss the issue, which is good and helps us to know where we stand as a society on gay equality.