UKC

I've posted this before, no replies, a few dislikes. Surprising lack of reaction.

In light of her "Sadiq Khan't" tweet yesterday, I post this without comment.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/jul/18/katie-hopkins-jon-ronson-inte...

In reply to Blue Straggler:

Good grief. Make it stop.

In reply to Blue Straggler:

The obsession continues...

In reply to Blue Straggler:

Until yesterday's post on the same subject, I had no idea who or what she was or did. Briefly skimming through your link I can see I've not been missing anything.

But for some strange reason the word 'celeb' seems to come to mind and i wonder why a huge amount of the public hangs on to almost anything anyone tagged with the word 'celeb', says or does, slurping up the 'celeb's' thought offerings as though its sent from heaven and not from some fluff headed women tweeting their way to even more celeb status.

In reply to Blue Straggler:
I think people miss the point here; it is effective marketing, people want to read what she says and get offended and indigent.
She has identified a gap in the market of loud obnoxious pub bore in the best traditions of Mr J Clarkson.

If you are a pantomime villain you want boos and hisses to prove your success. That's the whole idea, silence equals failure.

In reply to Blue Straggler:

Her psychopathic behaviour seems to be proportionate to the amount of money she can earn from being an over-publicised personification of it. Hence Ronson's observation, one to one: "I’m finding her more charming than I’d anticipated" and her response of “I might. I know.” to his question: “Maybe you’ll start to get a bit more liberal?”. If being 'more liberal' is a good earner for her, then that's what she will become. I don't think The Guardian will be headhunting her from The Sun anytime soon though.

In reply to Blue Straggler:
I've said this once before and I'm going to say it again.

Stop posting stupid clickbaity shit. Either comment and tell us what the article is about or don't post it. Alll you are doing is lining the pockets of a professional contrarian by driving traffic to articles about her.

In reply to Blue Straggler:


Why on earth do you feel the need to post this?

In reply to Blue Straggler:

What was her Sadiq Khan tweet? I'm aware of the Trump Jnr tweet about Khan. I appreciate I could google, but don't really want to.

In reply to The New NickB:

https://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?n=660621&v=1#x8522992

Summary: professionally unpleasant, hate-peddling sh!thead uses murderous attack by second sh!thead of currently unknown motivations as excuse to publicise personal antagonism against democratically elected representative* who espouses dignity, humanity and unity.

* who succeeded in the face of his main opponent's unpleasant, hate-peddling election campaign

In reply to FreshSlate:


Which bit of "2015 Jon Ronson interview with Katie Hopkins" wasn't clear to you?

The article is an interview Jon Ronson conducted with Katie Hopkins. It's from 2015.

Sorry I don't recall you having told me to "stop posting stupid clickbaity shit" in the past. I don't deny that you may well have done, I simply can't think of any instances of this and to be honest I don't feel that I have ever posted much "clickbaity shit" without comment or explanation.

I've hardly posted at all in the past 24 months.

In reply to AllanMac:

You're the only respondee thus far to have shown evidence of having read the interview!

I have posted the link to this interview because when I first read it in 2015, and when I read it again last night, I found it interesting to contrast it with the comments of pure hatred levelled against the woman so frequently on forums on UKC.
Yes she posts odious and offensive comments all designed to attract attention and essentially to sell advertising space in newspapers and on websites. Yet the continuing market demand for her kind of column does fascinate me, as does her willingness to be interviewed by Ronson and to be quite open with him.
She warrants a more mature response than the typical knee jerk "behead the boot-faced old sow" type of comment that I see so often on here.

In reply to Dorchester:

A very good summing up of this vile and irrelevant person.

In reply to Blue Straggler:

I never said I said it to you, only that I've said it before. There's a recent thread in the pub with my exact same comment verbatim.

We must have gone a good 12 months with little mention of Katie Hopkins and now we've had three threads discussing her in the last week. Lets please go back to ignoring the stupid bint.

In reply to AllanMac:



She knows she has a ready market in the hand-wringing middle-class guilt brigade, those who readily disseminate her deliberately provocative and hateful crap in order to virtue signal.

The London atrocity thread is a prime example, not even ten posts in and her name is being bandied about. (Not that anyone here supports her, yet still we see her name constantly, guess who posts it.)

She must wet herself every time there's an atrocity as, sure as eggs is eggs, the Guardianistas will be shoveling her shite all over twitter, facebook and forums like this, the money must come rolling in..

In reply to FreshSlate:


Context implied that you'd said it to me, but I'll be gracious and apologise for making that leap.


Well done, have a biscuit


We haven't


Probably more!


You are doing a poor job of that. I don't think that that ignoring her is useful. This was sort of my point in posting this thread - she is a bit more than "just an odious leech". She is a media phenomenon warranting serious discussion beyond the "stupid bint", "hang her high" etc. pablum that I repeatedly see wheeled out on here, which is as useful and insightful as saying "dog pooh is dirty".

In reply to Blue Straggler:

Very interesting. I agree with the psychopath analyisis thing, although I do think that it is a bit over simplified and just a way to add another label in the way it is put. But I do know people like that. Where something terrible happens and they think "what's all the fuss? It's just a dead body."
I did pick up on this comment though which i found equally interesting.
“I have yet to see a serious act of violence that was not provoked by the experience of feeling shamed or humiliated, disrespected and ridiculed,” he said. His conclusion: “All violence is an attempt to replace shame with self-esteem.”

In reply to Blue Straggler:

Equally interesting are all the comments from people who either haven't read the article in your link, but still feel they can critise it, and those who can't see past the "loathesome" persona she portrays.
One thing I'll say in favour of Katie Hopkins she says vile stuff but she is consistant and doesn't go "oh I didn't mean that i am just a fluffy bunny really".
That is the thing with cartoon villians people hate them but they are the ones people want to watch. As Alan Rickman said "Cancel Christmas and stop all the mercy killings"

In reply to Duncan Bourne:


Now I don't actually agree with this. His definition of violence is, I believe, a sub-set of violence. One could add violence of aquisition (theft with menaces, invasion of country etc.), frustration (of ambition, of inability to get someone to understand etc.), response to threat, revenge/punishment (tricky this one I am not sure if it doesn't come under response to threat or frustration.) threat of loss of status/weakness

In reply to Blue Straggler:

That's a much more interesting post than the one you began the thread with. I don't think an ability to be more thoughtful and adopt a different persona in an interview makes me like her any more or even see her differently though. I don't think many of the people who disagree with her ever thought she genuinely believed half the dross that comes out of her mouth. The fact remains that she has chosen to use the stirring up of division and hatred as her means of making a living. This article's confirmation that she's perfectly capable of being more thoughtful if she chooses to only makes her choice to be hateful worse.

In reply to Blue Straggler:

Notable number of Katie Hopkins quotes and links in my facebook feed this morning.

In reply to Big Ger:


You know what, Big, I agree with you. Anybody can say anything, but once they are found to be unworthy of response, stop responding. Her publishers, however, deserve the utmost condemnation. We both write better than her, how come the Mail isn't paying us enough to settle £100K+ libel case costs without batting a heavy eyelid.