Snort, chuckle, gaffaw - 12 months ago we all thought Gordon was hilarious.

Here’s an oldie but a goody: Why do women wear makeup and perfume? Because they are ugly and they stink.

Some would say that joke, like Gordon Ramsay’s behaviour in recent days, is pretty offensive. But that personal favourite differs from the celebrity chef on two important fronts.

The first difference is arguably it’s funny. The second is obviously it’s sexist.

While Ramsay’s behaviour over the weekend in which he insulted Tracy Grimshaw by likening her to a pig - both of the real and Muppet variety - was offensive, uncalled for and perhaps worst of all unfunny it wasn’t sexist.

It was rude, crude and smutty. In other words, it was his usual schtick. It was just the sort of behaviour that anyone who has stuck a microphone under his nose in recent years, including those from Channel Nine, has hoped to bring forth.

Just 12 short months ago Grimshaw’s stablemates Karl Stefanovic and Lisa Wilkinson on the Today Show laughed their way through an interview with Ramsay during which he swore and joked about waking up to Wilkinson on TV with a “6am riser’’.

Hell, Stefanovic even got in on the act imploring Ramsay not to show the viewers his “Yorkshire pudding’’ when the Scot lifted his shirt to display his stomach. This week they tut-tutted away in earnest and completely understandable support of Grimshaw who I have no doubt was deeply upset by the weird sledging by Ramsay.

It would be mortifying for any woman to be compared with a pig and made the butt of vicious jokes in front of 3000 people. But it doesn’t make it sexist. It would be mortifying for any man too.

If anything Ramsay is an equal opportunity abuser. He appears to draw no gender distinction when he offends.

His seven-minute guest spot on Rove McManus was spent trading insults, with Ramsay focussing on the host’s diminutive stature and suggesting that he therefore must have a tiny penis.

He called Jamie Oliver fat and was even more disparaging about the surviving Fat Lady Clarissa Wright. Not an eyelid was bat.

Yet after Ramsay’s efforts on Saturday at the Melbourne Good Food and Wine Show, Women’s Forum Australia’s Melinda Tankard Reist categorised his remarks as sexist and demeaning, remarks I’m assuming she didn’t hear first hand, and offensive to every Australian woman.

“He shouldn’t be making money through the verbal abuse of women,’’ she said. He makes money through the verbal abuse of everyone.

Far more sexist was the comment by David Jones’s boss Mark McInnes when Australia somehow avoided slipping in to a recession that “women can only stop shopping for so long’’.

Yes it was delivered tongue-in-cheek and therefore no harm done. But when you get down to it he essentially stereotyped all women as ditsy shopaholics who still need a new handbag and shoes no matter what that silly old economy thingo is doing.

All Ramsay needed was more secure tongue placement then perhaps he could have avoided Prime Minister Kevin Rudd labeling him a “lowlife’. It is a credit to the busy beaver PM that despite more pressing issues like recession, realised or not, cabinet reshuffles and international claims of racism, he still managed to get suitably across what is essentially a celebrity slanging match to deliver such insightful insights.

At least deputy PM Julia Gillard had the decency to be funny in her criticism of Ramsay suggesting he should get back in the kitchen where he belongs. Humour is another thing Ramsay could have done with. You can get away with almost anything if you’re funny. Just ask those Chaser boys.

If publicly deriding a woman’s looks is sexist then what do we make of the way everyone has treated Susan Boyle. The hook of her story was how a never-been kissed spinster so unattractive - sorry make that frumpy/dowdy/down-to-earth - had such a beautiful voice she captured the heart of a nation. Even A Current Affair described Boyle as a woman “a long way from glamourous … with eyebrows to scare small children’’. No claims of sexism there.

Ramsay could also be forgiven for thinking his antics acceptable at Nine given this is the network that employs Sam Newman and still can’t work out what to do with Matthew Johns.

He deserves most of the criticism that has come his way in recent days but labelling Ramsay’s comments sexist seem like a desperate grab for relevance from the hairy armpit brigade which thankfully has less and less to whinge about these days.

His comments were about as sexist as farewelling outgoing Telstra boss Sol Trujillo with an “adios’’ was racist.

13 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Eric says:

      06:25am | 12/06/09

      Well said! Too many people use the “sexist” or “racist” excuse when criticism of them is merely personal.

    • David Lieberman says:

      07:56am | 12/06/09

      Brilliant ! Totally agree with your views . Shows up the blatant double standards that permeate this world . Kevvie Rudd’s attendance in a strip joint and his now ‘’ Jesus like ‘’ demeanor as a saviour while making blokey remarks is a demonstrable event in this whole debate .

    • jg_rat says:

      09:46am | 12/06/09

      “Hairy armpit brigade” ?  Srsly?

    • Ted Flack says:

      09:58am | 12/06/09

      What happened to being polite? It used to be the mark of a person’s civilisation. Surely foul mouthed egotists are not setting the new fasion.

    • Shelley says:

      11:04am | 12/06/09

      For me Ramsay’s low point was his comment about someone putting up money for someone to pop Susan Boyle’s cherry.

      From memory apart from coming from the same town he has no connection with the woman, so I’m with you about the PM and media being precious over comments made about Grimshaw.

      Ramsay’s true insult was to Boyle and virgin spinsters.

    • Tony Hadley says:

      11:50am | 12/06/09

      Well said Naomi, spot on.

      If it wasn’t for the good grammar and correct spelling I would have sworn I wrote that myself!

    • mediamadman says:

      12:28pm | 12/06/09

      Two things:

      1 - One point still not made clear enough is that Ramsay is a showman - if it wasn’t for all of this PR would people have really ‘remembered’ Ramsay’s trip to the food and wine exhibition? His goal is to make as big an impact as possible - and in the words of some songwriter somewhere out there “love me or hate me - its still an obsession”.

      2 - I think the fact that a channel nine program host having a public stoush with another channel nine program host - especially one who is renowned for his aggressive tone and offensive language looks to me to be just a little too convenient.

    • Charles says:

      03:38pm | 12/06/09

      Naomi:

      You set the scene so well at the outset ‘The first difference is arguably it’s funny. The second is obviously it’s sexist. ‘

      Great article & humorously written - unlike the PM’s rebuke of Chaser telling them to pick on someone their own size (not that I think the Chaser team was right, on the contrary that ‘sketch’ was tacky).

    • Chris says:

      05:13pm | 12/06/09

      “Ramsay is an equal opportunity abuser” - that’s brililant.

      I’m totally with you on the Susan Boyle angle Naomi. The reaction by the judges was so offensive in subtext, they may as well have said straight out “I can’t believe someone so hideously ugly could have a voice so delightfully heavenly”. To me that flies way past sexist and into some other realm of hideous vacuousness that you’d swear Derek Zoolander had said it. Now if you’ll excuse me, I have an after funeral party to attend.

    • Santa says:

      09:51pm | 12/06/09

      I find it a bit hypocritical that a TV channel hounds Mr Ramsey, and pays him to televise his cooking shows, and a newspaper attacks him (quiet rightly)while paying for recipes to run in Tuesday’s edition
      Why not tear up the contracts to really show that this oaf isn’t wanted.

    • JD says:

      08:07am | 13/06/09

      I think you’ll find that the sexist part of Ramsey’s triade was when he referred to Grimshaw as a lesbian, which you forgot to mention above. It is sexist, by definition, to assume an agressive female personality is gay. And that attitude doesn’t extend to males…

    • Brumby says:

      04:08pm | 22/06/09

      I certainly didn’t contribute to making this oaf a celebrity.

    • Mena says:

      07:07am | 21/11/11

      I’m so glad I found my solution oinlne.

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Daniel Piotrowski

@MelanieTait I was thinking the same thing!

Malcolm Farr

@AndrewCatsaras Agreed. Kills more people than AIDS. Yet tolerated. Meanwhile: Good Insiders piece again Andrew.

Daniel Piotrowski

RT @JamieTravers: I'm in Europe and don't care for Eurovision, why is my twitter feed filled with Aussies recounting the bloody thing!?

Anthony Sharwood

Dementor doing a good job for sweden #sbseurovision

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

An email was sent to almost every politician in Australia this week saying that someone should cut off…

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

We admire them, but we’re not entirely sure why. We allow them to operate in the shadows; we rarely…

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

Like a fat full-stop, it lay in my hand. A small orange – not exactly fresh, but purchased anyway…

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter