The ice cream thing just keeps going around and around, doesn’t it? Ok, I admit; we’re partly to blame because we keep writing about it, but I have something here that might put this issue to bed once and for all. Let this be a lesson to those who jump to conclusions and make a BIG FRIGGIN DEAL over something that they don’t 100% understand to next time maybe understand the facts before you crucify someone.
Last week, Richard Hammond was slammed for making a joke about how eating ice cream was not for straight men. I want to point out before I go any further that Hammond did not actually ever say in those words, that eating ice cream is for homosexuals only, or that straight men didn’t eat it. But as thing usually go with such things, the internet went wild and basically wanted Hammond’s head on a spike.
“Hammond says eating ice cream is for gays only!”
“Hammond says straight men don’t eat ice cream!”
“Hammond hate gays!”
“Hammond hates ice cream!”
Well, now it seems that the joke, which as about as vague as vague gets, had nothing to do with Hammond thinking ice cream is a gay thing. According to a piece by The Sun, the joke was actually a play at a popular and controversial Finnish commercial. The crew that week was, if you remember, in Finland:
A source revealed the comment referred to the Finnish TV commercial which saw a hunky guy making an epic journey to deliver a Kingis ice cream bar to a girlfriend – only to end up going off with her straight boyfriend.
The source added “This advert is one of the most famous and controversial in Finland – it’s like Peter Kay’s John Smiths advert in the UK. Everyone knows it.
Writers like to insert local jokes in the script to amuse the audience – they did the same in Holland and South Africa – and they put this ice cream reference for them.
Sadly it backfired badly because while the Finns in the audience laughed and cheered the British viewers were baffled and upset by it.”
Well there you go. The source admitted that the joke probably wasn’t the best idea, but either way, it was meant to be innocent. Yeah, Mr. Source, it “wasn’t a good idea” because people online like to jump to conclusions before knowing the facts. Look no further than the year 2016 for proof of that.