I've been thinking about why the men (i.e. John, Lobeck, and hazyshadeof) are uncomfortable or uncomprehending of the female gush/passion for Clay and I think I've come up with an analogy they'll understand.
I am a huge baseball fan, and have rooted for the Yankees all my life. What frequently happens in NY is that if you root for one local team, you root against the other. So when the Mets are doing badly, I listen to the NYC sports station WFAN to hear the Mets fans rant and rave. When a Mets player (or management) screws up, the fans call the FAN and with a passion equal to that we feel for Clay, but with a negative rather than positive force, express just what they think should happen to whoever has most recently failed (and thus brought them the anguish a fan feels when his team loses).
This kind of negative energy is encouraged in the sports media. The most popular personalities on WFAN are known as Mike and the Mad Dog. Mad Dog (real name Chris Russo) spends a fair amount of the show screaming. So does Tony Kornheiser on Pardon the Interuption on ESPN. The format is one guy screams about the failures of an athlete or a team and the other guy responds in a less fervent manner.
Now I doubt that Messers. John, lobeck, or of, indulge in this sort of sports fanaticism, but they're probably all familiar with it, and hardly give it a thought. "Kill the umpire" has no emotional punch for them because it's a form of hyperbole that they've grown up with. It's perfectly normal and acceptable boy talk.
I'm comfortable with Vinnie From Queens calling from his car phone (and thus putting all our lives in jeopardy) to rant about Armando Benitez's most recent blown save, and with Victoria From Queens taking time away from her job to gush about how adorable Clay's giggle is. Vinnie is never going to rid the Mets of Armando and Victoria is never going to make Clay giggle. The former is a violent fantasy and the latter a sexual one, but the amount of energy expended is equivalent.
I hope that helps.