Hello, is this Lost and Found? I'd like to report some shit lost. Oh no, not mine! I'm still in possession of some comparative common sense, or so I'd like to believe. No, it's everyone else who appears to have lost their collective shit. Let me tell you what happened: a few days ago a female co-host of a breakfast program likened her new shoes to 'stripper heels'. As a joke, the male co-host got out a 'stripper pole' (which was not actually a 'stripper pole' but a piece of equipment used by floor crew). The female appears to have wrapped her leg around it. There is footage of this tomfoolery, but it didn't actually air on the television show and was uploaded onto the website. Nonetheless, one of the regular contributors of a popular female-centric blog latched onto it like a vicious stray dog with a scrap of discarded KFC between its teeth, and wrote an article titled something like 'It Is Not Okay To Humiliate Your Co-Host'. Apparently it was very important to note the ages of the co-hosts: the woman is 36 and the man is 57. It must really be relevant, hey? I did read this article, and to be honest, I thought it was the most spurious, fatuous lot of dung I have read since 'Fifty Shades Of Grey' (don't get me started!). If the author of the article is reading this, I really do believe that article was crud, and you must have had to trot off to the first aid box to get the tweezers so somebody could pull the splinters out from under your nails after you had scraped the bottom of the barrel. For the record, I too believe there is no place for bullying sexism in the workplace, and have indeed been subjected to same, to wit, when an idiotic fellow clerk showed me a centrefold in a girl magazine he was reading and said, 'Why can't you look like this, Simone?' I looked the prat up and down and replied, 'Why can't you be taller, with a better body, and a less stupid haircut?' But back to the point. This article went ON and ON about how humiliated the female co-host would have been. Oh hell, I'll just call her Sam from here on in. The article implied the male host (yeah, it's Kochie), looked at her legs, which must just make him the biggest lech in the history of the world since the Big Bang occurred. The article implied poor, put-upon Sam can't take care of herself, and can't stick up for herself. The article was toned in the same militant, Fembot Death-To-All-Men-And-Sneer-At-Women-Who-Don't-Agree-With-Us manner as most of the stuff on that blog has been of late. Yeah, I do read the blog. And yeah, am getting increasingly dissatisfied with the continuous search for Something To Be Outraged At Where There Is Nothing To Be Outraged At, At All, Really.
Oh, don't get me wrong. I thought the idea of a 'pole' was infantile, too. What I do not see the need to do is think for someone else because she is female, and grind someone else to powder because he is male. And the comments that appeared in the ensuing thread just got me wondering had Australia just gone 'Bonfire Of The Vanities' (brilliant satirical novel by Tom Wolfe, but avoid the movie like a rabid Doberman). The 2013 word of the year, 'misogyny' appeared numerous times. I actually posted a comment saying I thought we were over the misuse of that word, and that the little girl who was shot by the Taliban was probably in complete agreement with that site's concept of a misogynist (this is my idea of sarcasm).
And then, the hosts responded. Sam pointed out she is more offended at people presuming to think for her than she is an idiotic pole. Kochie pointed out he did not appreciate being the subject of their character assassination, and that he does not need Sam for titillation as inferred (and found the inference particularly offensive because he is shortly to celebrate his 35th wedding anniversary). I enjoyed their responses. More than I enjoy the show 'Sunrise', normally, which is my choice of morning television viewing.
But the blog-site wasn't happy Nobody appeared to believe that just because Sam was emphatic in her lack of offence at the prank, she was right. Oh no. She HAD to be offended because, well, everyone else was. People said Kochie had no right to speak. Now, I think Kochie can be a buffoon at times, too, but if he has been taken to task surely he has a right to answer his critics. And I posted a comment to this effect.
The whole lamentably overblown affair has become known as 'Strippergate'. Why must the word 'gate' be suffixed to every scandal? To me, the 'gate' was something I was always told to shut lest the horse get out.
And now, like the cherry on top of the whipped cream, on top of the chocolate sauce atop the banana split: the author of the original article and the site's creator have received death threats. WTF is the go with this? I daresay it's because some people are just dicks with no sense of purpose in life but to hid behind their computers, tapping on the keyboard with jizz-encrusted fingernails (if they are male), issuing threats they would never have the balls to issue in a face-to-face scenario. People who are issuing threats like this, when the new edition of the dictionary is issued, next to 'chickenshit' will be a picture of you, okay?
If the author of that original dumb-arse article is reading this, I'm almost 48, okay? Clearly people's ages are very important which it comes to griping about them. There are no doubt things about me that make it apparent to some twisted logic that I don't support the sisterhood. I do support the sisterhood. What I don't support is a load of bullshit. I'm not too bad a person, but I do listen to Gary Glitter music sometimes, which I'm sure would make some people angry.
In summation, Lost and Found, do you see what I mean when I say everyone's lots their shit? Perhaps even I've lost mine in the process of writing this post.
No comments:
Post a Comment