People are offended at everything?

I don't want to know you.

 

I reported Cyclone's post. He said Hammond said something which YOU have just agreed he didn't. That is misquoting. I offered him the chance to watch the video again and he didn't. He continued to say Hammond said something he didn't. That is against forum rules.

 

I look silly? I'm not the one offended by Richard Hammond's stupid joke.

I'm not interested in continuing this debate with you as it seems to have descended into personal attacks (on both sides).

As you yourself said, you interpret what Richard said your way I'll interpret it my way.

Cyclone said in post 180.

 

 

 

No. He didn't. So Cyclone is wrong about what he said. As the video you have watched proves.

No, you're interpreting it in a deliberately weird way so that he didn't say that.

It's quite clear that he did mean that.

 

You interpret what Richard said your way I'll interpret it my way. Are you entitled to think your interpretation is right and mine is wrong? No room for subjectivity? Well I'm entitled to the contrary belief then surely? Hard luck.

Since your interpretation required you to invent an entirely different conversation I'd say that's good evidence that your opinion is wrong.

 

I'm saying don't watch the Grand Tour if you find it offensive. Complain about all or nothing. You aren't special.

Do you think you're special? Are you in a special position to tell everyone not to be offended because he meant something different?

No.

 

I provided the link the prove Hammond didn't say what Cyclone said. That was obvious. It was for everyone to see and realise Cyclone is quite clearly wrong. And you ask me if I'm being deliberately obtuse?!

Well, most people seem to agree with my interpretation, which doesn't require a fictional different conversation to have taken place.

---------- Post added 30-12-2016 at 19:15 ----------

If that's how you interpret it. I interpreted it as him saying he doesn't enjoy eating ice cream because he isn't gay not that he's worried about looking gay.

 

As I say, it makes no sense.

Just a reminder, this is your interpretation.

It's not that he doesn't want to look gay???

If the bickering and insults continue I will be handing out suspensions.

only on Sf could this topic turn sexual

I agree, and having read Harvey's posts I didn't see anything homophobic in any his comments, and those who implied that were totally out of order.

I'm happy being totally out of order then thanks. His comments showed a deep lack of tolerance and were insulting.

---------- Post added 31-12-2016 at 12:03 ----------

Hey what happens to television viewers who are offended by two gay blokes kissing on Emmerdale?

They can turn the TV off?

If they get offended by that then it's something they have to deal with because in the real world, blokes snog each other.

---------- Post added 31-12-2016 at 12:05 ----------

Excellent post.

 

I thought Harvey19 had been treated unfairly.

He was given many chances to correct or clarify what he was saying. He declined, so really we can only draw inferences on what he said.

National Trust volunteers refuse to wear LGBTQ badges

"All of our staff and volunteers sign up to our founding principles when they join us - we are an organisation that is for ever, for everyone.

"We are committed to developing and promoting equality of opportunity and inclusion in all that we do."

But its not for people that don't want to wear these badges.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-40825660

Badges are silly.

Most people have grown out of wearing them by the age of 12.

National Trust volunteers refuse to wear LGBTQ badges

 

"All of our staff and volunteers sign up to our founding principles when they join us - we are an organisation that is for ever, for everyone.

"We are committed to developing and promoting equality of opportunity and inclusion in all that we do."

 

But its not for people that don't want to wear these badges.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-40825660

They should give people a choice between "gay pride" or a "I love straight sex" badge

It should be equal

They should give people a choice between "gay pride" or a "I love straight sex" badge

 

It should be equal

Good idea. Why not?

They should give people a choice between "gay pride" or a "I love straight sex" badge

 

It should be equal

Good idea. Why not?

The sentiment behind a "I love straight sex" badge would be viewed by many as a churlish sign of disapproval of same sex relationships.

They should give people a choice between "gay pride" or a "I love straight sex" badge

 

It should be equal

In what way is I Love Straight Sex equal when the other badge doesn't say I Love Gay Sex?

---------- Post added 05-08-2017 at 16:19 ----------

Good idea. Why not?

Do you not understand what equal means either?

National Trust volunteers refuse to wear LGBTQ badges

 

"All of our staff and volunteers sign up to our founding principles when they join us - we are an organisation that is for ever, for everyone.

"We are committed to developing and promoting equality of opportunity and inclusion in all that we do."

 

But its not for people that don't want to wear these badges.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-40825660

NT have backed down and wearing of Rainbow Lanyard is now optional.