He is usually the first one to put his hands up if he makes an error of judgement...and I am inclined to believe that he has been misquoted
I really hope he has been misquoted because frankly, it is a bizarre thing for him to have said. It's a shame he couldn't just explain the misquote though instead of getting all bent out of shape about it.
Love how people think they're in a position to determine whether something was said jokingly or not from looking at words on a page. Also love how people can say with confidence that there hasn't been a misquote despite not being present at the interview.
Love how people think they're in a position to determine whether something was said jokingly or not from looking at words on a page. Also love how people can say with confidence that there hasn't been a misquote despite not being present at the interview.
Most people here seem to have read the article. Secondly, why you think people picking up a tone from an article is beyond you is, well, beyond me. They aren't just "words on a page".
Do you believe what he said was right though?
Genuine question.
To be honest I believe in free speech, he says he has been misquoted...until I know exactly what he did say then I can't give an opinion on his opinion.
To be honest I am far more interested in his views on other subjects.....
Stephen Fry is a writer, and knows the difference between writing a thesis and provocatively playing devil's advocate with off-the-cuff in an interview. People are applying too high a standard of analysis to his remarks. All they do is over-express a simple truth that men are more sexually motivated than women and a dynamic ensues. I don't think it represents his hardest philosophising- he's not after women.
Exactly.
What is that silly Graun journalist describing them as "extreme" for? As if no one has ever thought similar things before. :rolleyes:
Christopher Hitchens once claimed he was bisexual up until the point he "developed a body only a woman could love". Can't remember anyone getting worked up over that.
As usual the feminazis are "shocked" about something utterly trivial, while their silence over real harm against women in places like Islamic theocracies remains defeaning.
Love how people think they're in a position to determine whether something was said jokingly or not from looking at words on a page. Also love how people can say with confidence that there hasn't been a misquote despite not being present at the interview.
I think we're all intelligent enough to realise that even the written word has nuances that can be interpreted without smilies.
In what way can the sentence 'I think most straight men feel they disgust women' be interpreted other than negatively? It's all well and good for him to speak about his relationships as a gay man, but as he has no concept of heterosexual ones, he shouldn't pontificate on them at all. As I'm a straight woman, he wouldn't like it if I generalised on gay relationships, so why should he generalise on mine?
I believe he has been completely misquoted by the original article and the subsequent newspaper article.
The article I felt was humourous in a tongue in cheek way.
This is my opinion.............it is how I interpreted it.
You have your opinion but you seem to be saying your opinion is fact
It seems unlikely that he was misquoted because this interview here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A211L382EVI&feature=youtu.be shows him saying almost exactly the same thing..... and that was two years ago! So obviously his opinion hasn't changed.
To be honest I believe in free speech, he says he has been misquoted...until I know exactly what he did say then I can't give an opinion on his opinion.
To be honest I am far more interested in his views on other subjects.....
You gave the impression that you'd read the article, so presumably you know enough of what it says to give an actual opinion on its content?
It's all well and good for him to speak about his relationships as a gay man, but as he has no concept of heterosexual one, he shouldn't pontificate on them at all. As I'm a straight woman, he wouldn't like it if I generalised on gay relationships, so why should he generalise on mine?
If people were only allowed to pontificate on matters on which they had actual experience, the internet and the world would be a much quieter place.
I think we're all intelligent enough to realise that even the written word has nuances that can be interpreted without smilies.
In what way can the sentence 'I think most straight men feel they disgust women' be interpreted other than negatively? It's all well and good for him to speak about his relationships as a gay man, but as he has no concept of heterosexual one, he shouldn't pontificate on them at all. As I'm a straight woman, he wouldn't like it if I generalised on gay relationships, so why should he generalise on mine?
The words I think are important...that is his opinion.
"I think most cyclists ride like lunatics"
I am not saying "It is fact most cyclists ride like lunatics"
As usual the feminazis are "shocked" about something utterly trivial, while their silence over real harm against women in places like Islamic theocracies remains defeaning.
Maybe because that's not the subject of this thread?
What is that silly Graun journalist describing them as "extreme" for? As if no one has ever thought similar things before. :rolleyes:
Christopher Hitchens once claimed he was bisexual up until the point he "developed a body only a woman could love". Can't remember anyone getting worked up over that.
As usual the feminazis are "shocked" about something utterly trivial, while their silence over real harm against women in places like Islamic theocracies remains defeaning.
Personally I'm not 'shocked' at all. It's just a case of me thinking that a silly gay man has the nerve to pontificate on something he knows naff all about. It's more a case of :rolleyes: with me.
And if we wanted to talk about women in places like Islamic theocracies we wouldn't be in a Showbiz forum would we?
This is either some sort of joke or has been misinterpreted, surely? It doesn't sound at all like something SF would say.
It sounds a lot like something Stephen Fry would say and somebody posted a link in the General Discussion thread on this to a video of him saying something quite similar.
The words I think are important...that is his opinion.
"I think most cyclists ride like lunatics"
I am not saying "It is fact most cyclists ride like lunatics"
Therefore people have the right to challenge his 'thinking', especially as it's relating to something he has no experience of.
You gave the impression that you'd read the article, so presumably you know enough of what it says to give an actual opinion on its content?
I have SAID I have read the article......I have SAID that Mr Fry feels he has been originally misquoted.
You were not at the interview
I believe that he was originally misquoted
Therefore the original article was not infact what he originally said.
You are asking me to give an opinion on the content of what I believe to be inaccurate quotes from Mr Fry.
I have SAID I have read the article......I have SAID that Mr Fry feels he has been originally misquoted.
You were not at the interview
I believe that he was originally misquoted
Therefore the original article was not infact what he originally said.
You are asking me to give an opinion on the content of what I believe to be inaccurate quotes from Mr Fry.
Why did he do a big immature flounce off Twitter today then? If he had any sense he'd have quantified his argument and stayed. It's not the first time he's made comments on various things and apologised later. He knows nothing about heterosexual relationships, why is he qualified to comment?
I think we're all intelligent enough to realise that even the written word has nuances that can be interpreted without smilies.
In what way can the sentence 'I think most straight men feel they disgust women' be interpreted other than negatively? It's all well and good for him to speak about his relationships as a gay man, but as he has no concept of heterosexual ones, he shouldn't pontificate on them at all. As I'm a straight woman, he wouldn't like it if I generalised on gay relationships, so why should he generalise on mine?
Please, people can easily get themselves into trouble through saying things they didn't mean and not conveying their sarcastic/joking/ironic tone, and it's much harder to put this across in written form I'm sure you'd agree.
It's most probably just an exaggerated, tongue in cheek explanation of how he thinks men view and enjoy sex compared to women. Nothing to get worked up about love.
Please, people can easily get themselves into trouble through saying things they didn't mean and not conveying their sarcastic/joking/ironic tone, and it's much harder to put this across in written form I'm sure you'd agree.
It's most probably just an exaggerated, tongue in cheek explanation of how he thinks men view and enjoy sex compared to women. Nothing to get worked up about love.
But he's revealed this same view on YouTube as quoted above.
He sounds perfectly serious to me there, and these are views he seems to have held for quite some time.
I used to like Stephen Fry, but recently he has been up his own arse, his comments get more ludicrous by the minute. How would he know if women don't like sex? Unless he was a woman in his previous life.
They don't actually, they just get more apparent with the uptake of twitter and the more he becomes thought of as an infallible national treasure. He's said silly things about women before.
And I haven't said you said people didn't read the article. So I'll take your and raise you an . I was confused as to why you think there's no way anyone could pick up a tone from an article.
I was confused as to why you're first sentence in your reply to me was that most people had read the article - when I hadn't said anything to refute that.
So you 'picked up' a serious tone in the article - and chose to run with this rather than believe the person who actually gave the interview when he says it was just a light hearted joke :rolleyes:
Comments
I really hope he has been misquoted because frankly, it is a bizarre thing for him to have said. It's a shame he couldn't just explain the misquote though instead of getting all bent out of shape about it.
I like Stephen Fry, I believe what he said.
You don't
These are both our own opinions...neither of us were there.
There is little point in continuing our discussion as we are never going to agree and will keep going round in circles.
Shall we agree to disagree
Yet another disappointingly shallow gay man.
So now you're saying you believe he said it, or am I misreading you? Are you saying you believe that what he said was right?
I believe he said it, but the essence and context of what he said was completely wrong.
This is what I am saying I believe.
.
I believe he has been completely misquoted by the original article and the subsequent newspaper article.
The article I felt was humourous in a tongue in cheek way.
This is my opinion.............it is how I interpreted it.
You have your opinion but you seem to be saying your opinion is fact
Do you believe what he said was right though?
Genuine question.
Most people here seem to have read the article. Secondly, why you think people picking up a tone from an article is beyond you is, well, beyond me. They aren't just "words on a page".
To be honest I believe in free speech, he says he has been misquoted...until I know exactly what he did say then I can't give an opinion on his opinion.
To be honest I am far more interested in his views on other subjects.....
Exactly.
What is that silly Graun journalist describing them as "extreme" for? As if no one has ever thought similar things before. :rolleyes:
Christopher Hitchens once claimed he was bisexual up until the point he "developed a body only a woman could love". Can't remember anyone getting worked up over that.
As usual the feminazis are "shocked" about something utterly trivial, while their silence over real harm against women in places like Islamic theocracies remains defeaning.
I think we're all intelligent enough to realise that even the written word has nuances that can be interpreted without smilies.
In what way can the sentence 'I think most straight men feel they disgust women' be interpreted other than negatively? It's all well and good for him to speak about his relationships as a gay man, but as he has no concept of heterosexual ones, he shouldn't pontificate on them at all. As I'm a straight woman, he wouldn't like it if I generalised on gay relationships, so why should he generalise on mine?
It seems unlikely that he was misquoted because this interview here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A211L382EVI&feature=youtu.be shows him saying almost exactly the same thing..... and that was two years ago! So obviously his opinion hasn't changed.
You gave the impression that you'd read the article, so presumably you know enough of what it says to give an actual opinion on its content?
If people were only allowed to pontificate on matters on which they had actual experience, the internet and the world would be a much quieter place.
The words I think are important...that is his opinion.
"I think most cyclists ride like lunatics"
I am not saying "It is fact most cyclists ride like lunatics"
Maybe because that's not the subject of this thread?
Personally I'm not 'shocked' at all. It's just a case of me thinking that a silly gay man has the nerve to pontificate on something he knows naff all about. It's more a case of :rolleyes: with me.
And if we wanted to talk about women in places like Islamic theocracies we wouldn't be in a Showbiz forum would we?
It sounds a lot like something Stephen Fry would say and somebody posted a link in the General Discussion thread on this to a video of him saying something quite similar.
Therefore people have the right to challenge his 'thinking', especially as it's relating to something he has no experience of.
I have SAID I have read the article......I have SAID that Mr Fry feels he has been originally misquoted.
You were not at the interview
I believe that he was originally misquoted
Therefore the original article was not infact what he originally said.
You are asking me to give an opinion on the content of what I believe to be inaccurate quotes from Mr Fry.
Why did he do a big immature flounce off Twitter today then? If he had any sense he'd have quantified his argument and stayed. It's not the first time he's made comments on various things and apologised later. He knows nothing about heterosexual relationships, why is he qualified to comment?
It's most probably just an exaggerated, tongue in cheek explanation of how he thinks men view and enjoy sex compared to women. Nothing to get worked up about love.
But he's revealed this same view on YouTube as quoted above.
He sounds perfectly serious to me there, and these are views he seems to have held for quite some time.
And don't call me love, please.
They don't actually, they just get more apparent with the uptake of twitter and the more he becomes thought of as an infallible national treasure. He's said silly things about women before.
So you 'picked up' a serious tone in the article - and chose to run with this rather than believe the person who actually gave the interview when he says it was just a light hearted joke :rolleyes: