| Member of the Internet Link Exchange | Free Home Pages at GeoCities |
| Member of the Internet Link Exchange | Free Home Pages at GeoCities |
With an eye on more specific criticisms of my bigotry
Continuing the debate on:
|
The Original Rant on: |
Thanks to Caron Rohsler for this addition to the argument, and some more eye-witness comments.
What a relief is to find other people who think the Diana story was just a tad overdone. The event was fascinating from a media and sociological point of view and could probably have fuelled a good few of my boyfriend's Media Studies lessons had he been able to bear the thought of being mistaken for a Diana-holic when buying the newspapers for cuttings. The Star newspaper (Communist), incidentally, was exemplary in its unbiased reporting of the incident.
We rushed along to the Mall that Sunday morning to see the weeping hordes for ourselves, but all we found was the usual bunch of tourists, a few people looking like rent-a-crowd clustered around each TV reporter/camera, and the (increasingly usual) care-in-the-community types who must have thought the world had joined them and gone sane for the day. We, like a good proportion of the onlookers, were there to see everyone else and to see how the media reacted. There were plenty of dry eyes. And probably plently of pick pockets for whom it was business-as-usual.
The Friday before the funeral we had a look at Buck and Kensington Palaces. It was amazing: all those flowers, all those blue rinses tucked up in sleeping bags and tents borrowed from their student grandchildren... probably brought back memories of Woodstock for them. It was Dunkirk all over again, and people were forming support groups in anticipation of Di-Tab withdrawl (Diana in Tabloids, that is: "one last binge" [no pun unintended] before it all went dark).
After damning the paparazzi for snapping at Diana's stillettos, the 'mourners' lining London's streets didn't seem to care about seeing Diana do her lap of honour - they were holding their cameras above the crowds and clicking away with their Box Brownies, trainee paparazzi waiting in the wings. Diana photos will be dragged out one more time in the New Year, I guess, when everyone does the review of 1997, but no-one will remember the fact that only weeks after Di's death, the Yanks have weasled out of the landmines issue. And the Press, like the child whose boisterous game has ended in tears, soon found a nice big scab forming on its knee ripe for the picking.
Anyway, joking is a natural way for society to deal with anything to do with Love, Death and the Universe; as well as being good for healing, jokes exercise the facial muscles, release endorphins into the bloodstream and are useful icebreakers at social gatherings.
Dooog sez - Well, still no argument raging yet, just more support for my point of view. Come on you royalists where's your bottle - justify your stupidity.
And it would seem that it's not all support. Hooray - come on keep the abuse flowing. A little explanation here. My old school has a web site and a page for alumni (known as OSs). As I'm entitled, and also 'cos I think people may be interested in my opinion, I requested a link to Chineapple Palace under my listing, and soon after received this anonymously (didn't fill in the abuse form properly). It's a goodie.
As parents of an OS we were interested to see what you had to say. You appear to assume that overseas residents are not aware of what is happening with the media in UK. You couldn't be more wrong.
We are not Royalists, but you must know that the two sons on Princess Diana have access to the net ... can you imagine how they will feel if they happen to stumble across your contribution? Please have a little more consideration in future. Another thing - was it really necessary to air your views on the OS page?
I don't think parents of prospective pupils will be overly impressed and the school needs all the pupils it can get - as do so many other schools.
forget the 'insult me' box - this is intended to admonish - nothing more or less.
Dooog sez - A number of points to answer here. Firstly I didn't say that overseas residents would be unaware, just that the scale of the reaction in the media was overpowering, and they may not be aware of that.
Secondly, I find it hard to believe that anyone, nevermind the two princes could just stumble on the joke page. It's called the Diana Joke Page - it's quite descriptive. If it had been called the Diana Tribute Page and had then contained the jokes, I would agree you have a point. But even in that case, I don't think it's an issue. That's the whole point of the net - you can express an opinion, your proposed censorship of the freedom of speech is far too Orwellian. Also there's explanations of why the page is there, and my feelings about the whole thing before you get to those notorious jokes. Also it's on an anarcho punk site, hardly the place where the princes are going to be surfing (they're probably more interested in the porn sites!). If you don't want to watch it - turn it off, if you don't want to surf it - don't click it. Just because they have access to the net should not mean that I can't express my opinion.
And surely the most important thing is that I do not say 'I am glad Diana is dead', I say 'I am pissed off with the disproportionate amoun tof coverage one woman's death is getting, and mysified by the (inter)national mass hysteria which has accompanied it (which your admonition is obviously part of).
And another thing that is interesting is how you saw the joke page in the first place. The link from the site you came from points to Chineapple Palace NOT TO THE JOKES. Therefore YOU CLICKED the Diana Joke link. What the flipidy did you expect to find. The text of the link you clicked reads
It came to our attention that an ex-resident of a certain palace (certainly not Chineapple Palace) passed away in rather suspicious circumstances recently and some people made a lot of fuss over it. If you're not mourning the passing of a certain parasite, be sure to visit the Diana Joke Pageand that's completely unequivocal as to what you'd find i.e. Jokes about Diana. Or perhaps you wanted to see it, and then felt guilty about laughing. Either way YOU made that choice, so don't blame me for your curiosity.
Consideration - bollox - I am allowed to air my views on my own site, it's not on the OS site, it's not even on the same server, or probably the same continent. This is part of geocities and not part of a site for some northern military prison pretending to be a school. Once again, it's clear what the purpose and content of the site is - don't go there if you don't want to see it.
And why should I give a toss about the school admissions. If people are closed minded enough to not send their chilren to a school which produces a mix of opinions, then I say that the school would be better off without them anyway. It is ridiculous to expect a school to produce a series of clones with the same opinions. I don't care whether or not you agree with what I say, but I should be allowed to say it. Would you be less offended if I had gone to a different school? If so that's just a ridiculous Not In My Back Yard syndrome rearing it's head.
The investigation in to child pornography which was carried out at the school has revealed nothing illegal. However, people are prejudiced, and I'm afraid that the admissions are going to suffer far more because of those incidents, than they are because of my opinions.
As an aside - if I were ever to consider a private education for any children that I may have in the future - I would insist that they went to a school where people emerged with opinions that jolted the status quo.
As for admonishing me - well I don't think I've done anything wrong, but I am VERY glad you do because you're reaction is part of the reason why I started the joke page in the first place. Next time, you can admonish me, insult me AND reveal your identity !
I dont disagree with the jokes, so they may be funny to some distorted indivituals(sic), but I dont believe that you should hoard the jokes and present them to the public, for what seems the soal(sic) purpose of getting attention and hatemail... for this my friend... you are sick.
Dooog sez - I may well be sick, but I am impressed that you don't disagree with the jokes. The site is an antidote to the generally accepted belief that we should all be tearing our hair out, rending our clothes and wearing sackcloth over Di's death.
OK it's a bit of a cheat this, because I know who sent this and they support the existence of the page. But this is such a great slagging off that I wanted to share it with the world, and show you all that abuse can be creative. The third paragraph is just inspired
You are an imperfectly formed and evil man, Mr 'Dog' or whatever childish epithet it is with which you choose to crown that noxious mind of yours. Festering as you no doubt do in some diseased dole-pit in Amersham or wherever you hail from, how can you possibly conceive, as you concoct your disgusting 'joke page', what that woman, that beautiful, porcelain, tragic woman - meant to the more credible, worthwhile and constructive members of society; the kind of citizens, Mr Daaog, who in a just world would be able to metaphorically scrape you once and for all from the sole of humanities' boot like the foul moral excrement you so resemble. Perhaps if you and your spike-haired compatriots would have the humility to recognise superior morals and behaviour and try to learn from these instead of your highly dubious aping of Sid Nasty or whatever he called himself, then perhaps this country would not be in the advanced state of social degradation which you seem hell bent on exarcebating.
Our leaders are our leaders for a very good reason, Mr Doog, and that is because they are the best people for the job. It's not an easy life being a royal: centuries of fine breeding has however genetically prepared them for their tasks, living embodiments of the rigid backbone - a veritable moral rod of iron - which has made our nation a world-leader.
Of course, Lady Di was certainly no angel - she fornicated with Egyptians and touched homosexuals - but despite these perversions, decent people were able to forgive her, because she made it possible, through the unrivalled respect accorded her as a young and beautiful member of the British royal Family, for us to leave our Righteous Crusades to be fought by her in our name. We had Di to speak for us; we didn't need rainbow-haired tree-dwelling hooligans running amok with protest banners and balaclava helmets. The British public knew that Di - beautiful, tragic Di - with one flutter of gossamer lashes above those limpid doe-pools, could charm any influential world-leader, could win our wars for us.
This is how change should be affected, Mr Doog: by those best qualified to lead, not by the likes of you and your disrespectful, sneering peer group of ragged- trousered misanthropists hurling your bricks and molotov cocktails at policemen. The 'revolution' so laughably called for by your sordid ilk will never happen; you expect to have us believe you can change the world when, from the evidence of the tawdry photographs which accompany your website,it would seem you would have difficulty changing your socks.
People don't want your naked orgies, communal vegetable burgers and organic soap. People in this country believe in hard work and certain moral standards - standards which you seem to hold in contempt. The Royal Family may mean nothing to you in your infantile, arrogant ignorance but to your elders and - yes I do dare say it - betters, there is inherent in this tradition a certain national identity which has seen this country survive against immeasurable odds on several occasions.
When you grow up (and, perhaps,adopt a more adult name) you will come to realise just how important a national identity is as a means of defining us all in our similarities against a common foe. The British identity has a lineage dating back from Di through Richard the Lionheart all the way to Arthur. Without such a strong and time-tried value system we'd be little better than the jungle-bunnies you anti-civilisationists presumably seek to emulate. You would destroy all this, you foolish little boy, but the Britsh have resisted far greater enemies than a few unwashed, drugged-up anarchist workaphobes. When Diana died, a nation mourned. When your risible little existence grinds to a (hopefully) premature end, I doubt you could expect little more than for your 'punk-rocker' friends to urinate and defecate on your place of interrment- as I understand it, a common ritual within your chosen subculture. I am appalled that the establishment my son used to attend could possibly have spewed forth such lamentable human detritus as yourself.
Dooog sez - You sir, are a star of the highest magnitude, rekindling the flame of creative, witty and immeasurably hilarious abuse.
This is Alice Nutter's reply to whether they've sold out and become self centered rock stars, turning their back on veganism and using huge contracts before agreeing to do a gig.
We don't counter accusations of being self-centred rock stars, because they're almost too ridiculous to be taken seriously. I don't jump up and down shouting "Hey, I'm a nice ordinary person really!" because if I thought I WAS a nice, ordinary person then shouting it out loud reeks of guilt and insecurity. Say it enough times and someone might believe you. I live in a white, working class community and I'm very much part of it. I like my nieghbours, we see each other daily and we help each other out. I don't have to go round shouting "I'm not a rockstar" because most of the people I'm surrounded by don't know I'm in a band and the ones that do don't actually care. We have very few friends within the music industry; that's a conscious choice.
If you want guilt you're not going to get it. I'm a revolutionary not a popstar. I want a revolution to happen in the real world; I don't think the vegan ghetto is the real world... it's just a safe little corner where anybody who's not in the fanzine club is mistrusted. Almost the whole world population stands outside the fanzine club, and that's why we do. That isn't a criticism of fanzines or fanzine writers/readers - just that a culture of self-protection too often leads to self-imposed rules and regulations...
People were criticising us when we first moved from making cassettes to selling 7" singles. We betrayed the ethics of the ghetto by daring to step outside - musically, politically, in the clothes we wore, the language we used. But real rebel culture changes, adapts to different times. That's where we want Chumbawamba to be - different things to different people. Changing. One of our biggest fears has always been stagnating, repeating yourself, getting stuck saying the same things to a dwindling group of people.
As for self-centred... what does that mean? I'm proud of the fact that we're not motivated by the urge to be seen as martyrs to a cause, but I don't think that makes us self-centred. As a class struggle anarchist I hate the politics of denial... the 'if we all become perfect people with no vices the world will learn from our example and miraculously change to be like us'. It's been tried before, it's the missionary form of christianity.
I don't think that doing all your own shit work, paying your crew - the people who work with us - the same (or more) than you pay yourself, and putting all your efforts into being the best and most truthful propagandist you can be is particularly self-centred. True, I enjoy my work - does that make me self-centred? I think it means I'm lucky - most people end up with jobs which they hate and believe have no social value. I want everybody to have a better life (and that includes me). I think that's common sense.
Dooog sez - very eloquent but did you answer the question ?
Got this through 30/5/97 from Martin from Blossom - not a defence of fox hunting in any way but some very sound thought on another reasoning on how hunting should be stopped - also a very good answer to those pillocks that go around saying "No Hunting, No Foxes". Nice one Martin.
With the sudden depletion of frogs and songbirds and other key points of the fox (Vulpes vulpes) (Well it makes it look like I know what I'm talking about) diet. The British fox population has declined. Foxes have been forced into cities and to farms because of their depleted natural food suply. This results in farmers coming into a higher rate of contact with the fox population. As a result farmers encourage hunters to come onto their land to tend to this sudden rise in fox related incidences. If the farmers increased security for their livestock then another food source would become unavailable to the foxes. As a direct result of this the fox population would fall. (Foxes regulate their own population according to the availability of food, by preventing breeding.) Their prey population would rise and consequently the fox population would recover.
So how can matters improve...? Farmers could increase security which would stop the foxes being a problem. This would give the hunters no reason to call the foxes pests and thwart their main argument.
The prevention of the construction of golf courses etc. maintains the environment in which the foxes prey lives. This would increase the fox population and prevent the foxes from being forced into contact with farms and farmers at the same time.
It's time for hunters to realise that it's all wanton blood lust.
Bastards.
I'm nothing to do with hunt sabs and stuff ('cos I'm lazy) but I do try to change things on a personal level.
Dooog sez - well you can't argue with that.
Thanx are due to
Infinite
Fish
for providing the background
E-mail Dooog
Comments gratefully received
Get your own Free Home Page