Topic RSS | Reply to topic
Author Post

writetowrite


Member

Posted Mon Nov 1st, 2010 12:38pm Post subject: Women and Sex - Stephen's Comments

Things seem to get posted all over the place on these forums, but I thought I'd start a new topic about the unavoidable goings-on of the weekend because I'd like to know how others are feeling about the whole sorry affair.

I have just watched a video on Youtube during which one can 'hear' Stephen's almost identical comments to those printed in Attitude magazine. As a woman, am I offended by what he said? Of course not. Why should I be. I know my own thoughts about sex and the enjoyment of it and I don't need anyone else to validate how I feel.

What I cannot fathom about the human race is how very literally and how very seriously we take everything; how rashly we form opinions from a single comment. I agree with much of what Stephen was trying to say about women and sex and I listened with intrigue and fascination. There WAS an element of humour and light-heartedness in what he said but, I wonder if (on this rarest of occasions), his point wasn't expressed quite as well as it might have been.

I see that Stephen's Twitter account has been closed down. This is very sad, but, I think, the best thing for him. I truly hope he continues to write his blog when he has the time because I love to read his posts, but I also hope he takes some time out from all online activity for a while and concentrates on what he does best; entertaining the people of the world, making us laugh and making us analyse the world around us.

Whatever he's doing, I sincerely hope he isn't hurting too much.

"Rational arguments don't usually work on religious people. Otherwise, there would 'be' no religious people". Dr Gregory House.

thewritetowrite

Back to top

Spots


Member

Posted Mon Nov 1st, 2010 4:00pm Post subject: Women and Sex - Stephen's Comments

That was then & this is now, what's been has been. To be honest, I was a little hot under the collar about it but it would be boring if we all agreed with each other all the time. I ask for Mr Fry's Forgiveness?


Back to top

Wilde Woman


Member

Posted Tue Nov 2nd, 2010 11:58pm Post subject: Women and Sex - Stephen's Comments

"Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone."

Sometimes religion comes up with a pearl of wisdom. And here's another...

"To err is human, to forgive devine."

I'm female and am so used to and bored by criticism of my gender that I let it all float by me. We always have a choice in what we want to waste time getting upset by. Life and death situations for me are about the only thing really worth getting into a battle over.

As for this incident. Sorry. Not interested because I also have a choice in what I want to get embroiled in. We like people who, on balance are more of what we like than dislike. Stephen, to date has done nothing to of note to offend, distress, worry or upset me. Overall, quite the reverse.

My Blogsites:
http://mindwalking-ajournalofdiscovery.blogspot.com/
It's the one who haven't been assessed I'm scared of!

Back to top

TripsOverHisCats


Member

Posted Wed Nov 3rd, 2010 8:08pm Post subject: Women and Sex - Stephen's Comments

I threw hissy fit about that when I first heard it. Now...

Sometimes something you want to say doesn't come out quite right. It happens. So what? Of course it's galling if you find that someone then puts it in a context where it's even further away from what you originally wanted to say. But that happens, too, all the time. It still sucks and makes a lot of people want to strangle the idiot who did it. I'd sure be angry if it happened to me. And for Stephen Fry the scale is a bit larger.

So if in consequence he gets mad, yep, I get it. People cancelling their Twitter account because they're mad? Seen it before. Sometimes they come back after the hurt and the rage have dissipated, sometimes they don't. Whatever he wants to do about it, it's his choice.

As long as he's okay - and I honestly hope he is -, I don't care much about his tweets. (Just to make sure there are no misunderstandings: Stephen okay, no tweets? Fine by me. Stephen not okay, tweets or no? Not good.) Yes, they brighten my day as long as they're there, but if he doesn't feel like it's fun anymore at the moment or at all, it's no use. It's his decision, and if he decides to tweet again? Yay! And if not? I'll live.

If, with the literate, I am
Impelled to try an epigram,
I never seek to take the credit;
We all assume that Oscar said it.
* Dorothy Parker

Back to top

Astrid


Member

Posted Thu Nov 4th, 2010 3:35pm Post subject: Women and Sex - Stephen's Comments

What many people do wrong is to generalize.
One should rarely do that .


Back to top

michael


Member

Posted Thu Nov 4th, 2010 5:46pm Post subject: Women and Sex - Stephen's Comments

Astrid said:
What many people do wrong is to generalize.
One should rarely do that .

.
.

"HELLO I'M TACTILE !" is an anagram of my name

Back to top

Wilde Woman


Member

Posted Fri Nov 5th, 2010 12:38am Post subject: Women and Sex - Stephen's Comments

I love this place!

Like everyone, I'm anxious Stephen's ok too. I figure the best way for us to show our love and support is to let him be himself. After all that's what we all need the most.

And yeah that means accepting people even when they do things that annoy us. If we wanna be forgiven when we do that, then don't we have to dish it out too? That's what turns like into love isn't it and big, deep, lasting, meaningful love at that.

Big love everyone!

My Blogsites:
http://mindwalking-ajournalofdiscovery.blogspot.com/
It's the one who haven't been assessed I'm scared of!

Back to top

Nitro


Member

Posted Fri Nov 5th, 2010 4:32pm Post subject: Women and Sex - Stephen's Comments

"It is perhaps sad to think that they are as pathetically in the grip of a base and humiliating need to get their rocks off as men are, but if that is the case then that is the case and god knows I’m no expert on the subject and have no right either to confirm or deny the proposition"

Why is it ‘sad’? Or ‘base’ or ‘humiliating’? It’s natural. Sex is natural. The drive for sex is natural. And normal. It’s not sad nor base nor humiliating except, perhaps, to someone in the grips of an actually sad Puritan hangover.

Also, there is a video interview with you, it’s on YouTube and I suppose since I reference I should provide the link, but I’m pressed for time. Anyway, in it you plainly make the statement that ‘...women just don’t get it.’ and you were talking about the masucline need for sex. My point is this: Your own words indicate that you don’t believe women need or want sex as much and if you find yourself castigated to some extreme, look to your own statements. There may be validity in the response, and sometimes in the inference, that you may hold some patriarchal ideas in your lovely head about women and sex as any ill-informed or straight man with hangups of some sort might. Or do you think you are entirely immune from this or without your own bigotries?

Wouldn’t it be better to simply admit that you find the idea of women wanting or enjoying sex somehow uncomftorable to your own inner ideal of womanhood? Many men do, straight or gay. The old ‘the vagina should be a one way street and that street points OUT.” ideal. That women should be angelic and pure and without ‘base’ desires. Much of that thinking is tied to ‘Mother’.

If you really are no expert, as you again say, then why do you comment at all? Why do you entertain the ideas if you feel so hopelessly without reference? Why draw the comparison between women and straight or gay male sex drives? Why not leave women and what they want sexually out of your commentary?

I think you want it both ways: You want to opine you’re no expert but be able to toss out ludicrous thoughts about the female sex drive and you also want to be able to do that without criticism coming back at you. Well, which is it? You can’t both climb out on the limb of ideas, knowing it’s creaky and potentially going to result in a fall, and then whine about the limb being creaky. Or blame the journalist for doing their jobs. You’ve been a public figure for decades and then continuously complain and rant and whine about the publicity you get if you find it’s not flattering. You even go on to presume this gentlemen ‘wish you ill’. Come ON Stephen!! You sound a bit like a spoiled toddler not getting his way.

Your justifications and rationalizations for catching yourself up with your own words contrasted against the presumed world of mean, vile, ill-wishing journalists is really very much beneath your own ability to suss a thing out objectively. And also, I am guessing, beneath your true character.

I know, even though I’m a kind of fan of yours, that I will catch heat for giving an honest opinion about any of your remarks and reaction. But maybe I’m not the kind of fan who looks at any talent blindly. I have been an avid reader of your blogs, but quite honestly of late, they have taken a tone of a near whine throughout the entirety of a thing you write.

“For some reason they singled me out as the figure most responsible for it and before long I was Fry the anti-catholic, Fry the Pope-basher, Fry the atheistic hate-monger. Weird, worrying and barely sane.”

Stephen, they singled you out because you ARE a public figure and one of more, perhaps, popular culture reference. Your name is more recognizable, as well as your face, to a greater populace. Common sense would indicate this to be true. But your statement, again, rings of an overly self-defensive posture.

“Bloody luvvie, who does he think he is? Well, then, why publicise and bring my worthless opinions so sharply front and centre?”

No, no, no. Wrong! Use the same logic on yourself: If YOU believe you’re so unimportant, then don’t comment on socially important issues such as the continued hostility of men towards women. Women are under continual attack on many levels and feel it very deeply. If you are so certain that’s a topic where you are out of your element, then don’t comment if your commentary, as you say, is so unimportant. And if you do, EXPECT that people are going to listen. I mean, WTF? How could you believe it would be any other way?

But it gets even worse...here you are trying to COMPLETELY absolve yourself of ANY responsibility for the repurcussions of your own participation in ‘conversations’ or what you say before, during, or after an interview.

“Well they are the ones who make me prevalent.”

Who are you trying to kid? YOU pursue a public life. YOU are the first one in the process making yourself ‘prevalent’. Or are you being unwillingly forced by gunpoint into a public career such as film, TV, and authoring books? If so, you should call the police and let them know you have been a victim of this coersion for decades. Or whichever point you started pursuing acting as a career.

“I soon enough slink back and before long it’s as if nothing happened. Clears the air. Does good on all sides.”
And here it’s as if you are saying you hide from the fallout of your own words and actions. Wow. I don’t even know what to say to that. ‘Cowardice’ would be too strong a word and too unkind, which is nothing I mean towards you. But it slightly smacks of dropping a verbal bomb on a group of folks and then skittering out of the room before you hear any protests to what you have said.

This portion of what I write is meant slightly tongue in cheek as I couldn’t resist a Freudian interlude.
“...you can’t be trusted not to say something that will make you look a tit...”

Not a twit, but a tit. Hmm...’tit’ is slang for the female breast and you use it in a negative conotation here. So, is the female breast a bad thing? You do have a reputation for avoiding them and being horrified by the idea of seeing them. You winced and seemed quite revolted when your actress freind on QI threatened to break them out once. So...maybe you DO have a pyschological problem of some kind with women and sex. {Dr.Freud exits, stage right}

Finally, the sincerity of your blog ends rather insincerely, if not totally self-referential...

“No one can say my life isn’t unpredictable, interesting and … well, Fryish…”.

It makes one think you really could’ve cared less about anything you wrote. As someone spent the time to read it, I just want to say,”Thanks for that.”. You make it very apparant you value your time and your time is precious and your time is filled etc etc. Guess what?

This is so for some of your fans as well.

Really? Wow.

Back to top

ysabella


Member

Posted Fri Nov 5th, 2010 11:34pm Post subject: Women and Sex - Stephen's Comments

When I read the kerfuffle - I haven't gone and read the actual interview in Attitude or anything - I figured that the central idea came down to something like

In a limited way, it appears that most women don't go cruising/cottaging
therefore
All women like sex less than all men

The faulty logic there is obvious to me, and I've seen enough of Stephen's speech and debate to know it'd be even more obvious to him.

I thought the blog entry seemed really dark and negative. It must suck immensely to have this kind of storm erupt out of nowhere. I hope that Stephen felt better after getting that written and the sunshine is coming back.

All our Western thought is founded on this repulsive pretence that pain is the proper price of any good thing. -Rebecca West

Back to top

Wilde Woman


Member

Posted Sat Nov 6th, 2010 2:14am Post subject: Women and Sex - Stephen's Comments

Wow! Thought provoking stuff... but here a thought Nitro... why are you surprised that Stephen is fallible?

Not being at all up to speed with what all the fuss has been about, as I've studiously avoided it, your posting has certainly been enlightening.

Unfortunately, you'll never convince me of anyone not having hypocritical, contradictory behaviours and thoughts. Everyone does it with alarming regularity, myself included. It's how we learn and grow isn't it?

You make some good points though, and IF (and I stress IF) he wants to learn or is in the right frame of mind to do so I expect he will. If not, nowt we can do about it. I think he is very confused, sometimes scared, sometimes in awe of women... what man isn't? Since when has it become so rare that Stephen is the only one left to display it? He is the product of centuries of patriachal conditioning, as much as anyone else and has a complex life besides. Why do you expect perfection from him? Why him?

Ranting about how offensive things are has never been the best way to change fear and prejudice, or educate any group of people about how another section of society really is. Jew, blacks, Muslims, disability groups have all tried and so have women. We're in the 21st century now not the 19th, and I for one prefer to fight my corner by studying and using my intelligence and sensitivity to better effect than to resort to blatant criticism. I find it far more effective a method of persuasion that we're not all bad. We women, are not all good either, but then neither are men.

As to the comments about Stephen's relationship with the media... well, as someone who works in the Arts myself I know that in order to become popular, successful and famous it's not often a fair two way street for those so loftily placed on pedestals - the cost to you as an individual can be very high indeed. Why else do you think so many celebrities end up in the Priory; becoming alcoholics, drug addicts, turn abusive and display all manner of self-centred behaviour?

The expectations of fans/admirers can lead them not being able to trust or care about anything at all as 'normality' takes on a whole new meaning. The adulation can become an addictive drug, the ability to 'get away' can become nigh on impossible as they are supposedly duty bound to devote their entire life to whatever it is the public demands of them and all that it expects. They are to be forever 'responsible' in every word they utter and every deed they do. If they fart or belch in the wrong place at the wrong time then suddenly they can find themselves ridiculed and vilified. Is it fair to treat another human being like that?

If they are lucky they have good agents and advisors to enable them to keep a balance, but not all are lucky. Even the lucky ones change as they adjust to the new lifestyle they find themselves in, and not all change in ways they are happy with.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying 'have pity' on the poor celebrity, merely that it is not quite so simplistically idyllic as you paint it.
The dynamic of the relationship between celebrity, media and followers is far more complex than you've suggested. Did no one else pick up on that when Princess Diana died? Or was I the only one?

My Blogsites:
http://mindwalking-ajournalofdiscovery.blogspot.com/
It's the one who haven't been assessed I'm scared of!

Back to top

Nitro


Member

Posted Sat Nov 6th, 2010 7:03pm Post subject: Women and Sex - Stephen's Comments

wildewoman, what in the world are you talking about when you say I 'expect perfection of him'?? Please point out WHERE I wrote that in my reply to the blog. Can you? No, I don't think so. So, I really don't know where that's coming from.

I simply wrote a response to the blog. It's not a critique of the mans character, but rather what was written. If you cannot deduce the important difference between the two, that's not something I can teach nor control.

As for 'costs' for a public life...*sigh*...no one with an IQ at or above room temperature can say with any sincerity that I would actually believe, that they couldn't or didn't know that with such a life comes various 'costs'. Costs to privacy is the very first 'cost' of a public life. If one wishes to pursue that life, then one must accept the cost of it or not pursue it at all. If some uber-fans insist on a perfection, again, that is not something anyone can control. If some mentally unhinged person stalks a celebrity, that is, hopefully, something the police can control or assist with. But I doubt the vast *majority* of people who like Stephens work or career actually have expectations of perfection. And if they do, I'm not part of that majority and never will be. But claiming some sort of victimization for speaking through a public vehicle, wether that's TV or magazines or the internet, is somewhat of a contrived posture from my perspective.

Exceptions taken are not with the persons humanity. I tried very hard to make that clear and if I failed, then I'm making it clear and known NOW. My response was far from trying to make the point of any 'simplistic idyllic painting' as you claim. My motivation had nothing to do with some Utopian ideal of celebrity. It was nothing more than a response to *my* reading of what was written. And, in my humble opinion, the focus of any response should be to that blog piece, not myself. You are replying to my reply, in other words, rather than the article Mr.Fry shared via his blog. And I am now replying to your reply to my reply LOL So, let's stop this pattern and maybe return focus to what Mr.Fry wrote?

Really? Wow.

Back to top

Astrid


Member

Posted Sat Nov 6th, 2010 10:44pm Post subject: Women and Sex - Stephen's Comments

michael said:
.
.

Yes, I know. It is good that no one takes me too seriously


Back to top

Wilde Woman


Member

Posted Sun Nov 7th, 2010 7:42pm Post subject: Women and Sex - Stephen's Comments

I didn't say I was perfect either!

All getting rather silly here. Just goes to show how easily anything and everything can be mis-interpreted. Soz Nitro if I interpreted things the wrong way! Er... friends? or a least reciprocal respect?

Thanks for the clarification!

My Blogsites:
http://mindwalking-ajournalofdiscovery.blogspot.com/
It's the one who haven't been assessed I'm scared of!

Back to top

SherryDee


Member

Posted Mon Nov 8th, 2010 2:14pm Post subject: Women and Sex - Stephen's Comments

When one has a brain that works differently sometimes you say things that are meant as just a funny comment or throw away quip. However these words can sometimes hurt and cause distress without that ever being the intent. It's not done deliberately or out of spite and there is often very little meaning behind them just a quick flash of witty inspiration. When you do it you feel awful and vow to hold back and think before you speak next time. This is possible if you are in a situation where you know to be on your guard but when you are more relaxed you forget yourself and the words tumble out again. Then the recriminations and questions start all over. Why did you say that? What did that mean? That really upset so and so etc... It makes you want to just hold your head in your hands and give up being yourself.
So what do you do? Do you shut up and never speak to anyone again, never try to be witty or amusing or just accept you have an amazing capacity to hack people off when you least mean to and try to ride the storm when it inevitably rises up again.

It's hard when you often have a brain that whizzes along faster that you can keep control of it.

Life goes up and down. The secret is learning just to enjoy the ride.

Back to top

Wilde Woman


Member

Posted Mon Nov 8th, 2010 8:50pm Post subject: Women and Sex - Stephen's Comments

SherryDee said:
When one has a brain that works differently sometimes you say things that are meant as just a funny comment or throw away quip. However these words can sometimes hurt and cause distress without that ever being the intent. It's not done deliberately or out of spite and there is often very little meaning behind them just a quick flash of witty inspiration. When you do it you feel awful and vow to hold back and think before you speak next time. This is possible if you are in a situation where you know to be on your guard but when you are more relaxed you forget yourself and the words tumble out again. Then the recriminations and questions start all over. Why did you say that? What did that mean? That really upset so and so etc... It makes you want to just hold your head in your hands and give up being yourself.
So what do you do? Do you shut up and never speak to anyone again, never try to be witty or amusing or just accept you have an amazing capacity to hack people off when you least mean to and try to ride the storm when it inevitably rises up again.

It's hard when you often have a brain that whizzes along faster that you can keep control of it.

By and large I let other worry about how they react as I have enough on my plate worrying about how I react. That said I always make a point of apologizing if I upset anyone, sometimes it's accepted, sometimes not. Forgiveness is a choice.

If I was perfect I figure I'd be far more irritating than by making mistooks! To err is human but I strive to be devine! Loooong way to go on that though!

My Blogsites:
http://mindwalking-ajournalofdiscovery.blogspot.com/
It's the one who haven't been assessed I'm scared of!

Back to top