So, now the media is discussing, whether Michael Jackson's children should or should not have attended his funeral (considering their young age and his always having been highly protective of them), should or should not his daughter have spoken, why they did it, who, what, where and so on. And by "media" I mean mostly people who earn their living as "high society experts", i.e. detractors and gossipers who have never accomplished anything on their own. These people, who never were good at anything but turning other people's dirty underwear, are now in the underwear of Michael Jackson's children. Yes, I am making this sound doubly reprobate on purpose.
Children. Kids. As in, sons and daughter. Sons and daughter of a father. A father who died two weeks ago. Do you even know what that means? Do you retarded media-morons even know how much that hurts? At least when you're still human, rather than a social atrocity making a living and cheap fame off sniffing other people's farts? Children, for crying out loud! A little boy who saw his father die while they were playing and thought he's just acting at first. This is, what, the single most terrifying, terrible, painful, shocking, awful thing that can possibly happen to a human being (again, referring to human beings here) in their entire life? Okay, probably second to having it the other way round and losing a child that way (hey everyone, let's make fun of John Travolta! His son died! Isn't that hilarious? Idiots). But a close second. By a wide margin ahead of the third, which would probably be the loss of a spouse, but that's already debatable.
And now you even dare talking about them? Gossiping about them? Sullying their names with your dirty, worthless mouths? I would appeal to your respect and conscience, but you obviously do not possess either. I would call to dignity and humanity, but you probably don't even know what that means. You - all the countless society reports and reporters, star magazines and gossip channels, as well as what became of most newscasts - have been pushing the borders of the tolerable for years now. I can't tell you exactly when you overstepped it, but right now, you're clearly beyond it, by far and wide. Just shut up. Shut the fuck up and go to hell. And leave the children alone!
Trump destroys board games
13 hours ago
Sadly, I don't just blame the media for this.
ReplyDeleteThey crossed that line a long time ago, with Diana, with people before her even, cashing in on the pain of others, blissfully raking in the money with each photo of torn and twisted wreckage etc. But we (that's society we, not us as individuals)lapped it all up and wanted more of the same - if we hadn't, I'm certain they'd have shut up about it soon enough.
Why we do this, I don't know. Perhaps it's because that death of a "celebrity" makes them more real to us, it can happen to them too, you see....or is it that death is such a taboo thing, hidden away, left unspoken, that we want to know more about it, and what "better" way than to experience the pain of others from a distance, to see what it's like before it actually reaches us. It's also easier to discuss with others - I still recall the difficulty people (not those closest to me, thankfully)had when they first saw me, following my own loss.
For those of us who've experienced that pain first hand, who've felt the pain, the helplessness, it's different. We know all too well of the need to hide away and grieve. We can empathise. So the exposure is revolting.
(Incidentally, I don't think that any one case of loss is likely to be more painful than another, depending on the actual biological relationship to the deceased. I'd argue that it would be more based on the love and care that went into the relationship in the first place. So I'd say the loss of a spouse could be just as painful.)
I don't give these as excuses, far from them, I don't agree with the exposure that these children have had to go through, or the years ahead of them, filled with speculation, and hideous headlines. I simply hope that we as a society can grow out of these tendencies - a fairly optomistic hope I know - and perhaps learn to face death with a more mature and thoughtful attitude. Until then, I fear the media will never shut the fuck up and go to hell....
I have to disagree, because "society" is just such a convenient and warm cloak to hide behind, for everyone. It's not John's fault, that he killed (maybe after previously raping) Timmy, the society made him do it. But society is just a sum of individuals, and at some point, you have to blame the individual for the sentient decision to do or not to do something. To serve a trend, or to say "no, that's just not right".
ReplyDeleteJust because there is a demand, doesn't mean supplying it should be justified. There is a certain demand for hard drugs, yet their supply is illegal. You can't just rely on the demanding side to steer the course - there's demand for everything, including child pornography and contract killing. You have to stand up and limit, control the supply where you see a line crossed.
Whenever someone wants to appear fashionable, they'll state information is the future's most valuable good (and the future is now, as we know). How about we, as a "society" start living up to that phrase we like so much, and treat information as something that has real value and real implications? But that would be censorship, and we can't have that. If people want to know the size and weight of the last dump Michael Jackson took before his death, they have the right to know it. Because.
I don't have an answer to this. We, as a "society", just remind me more and more, for the Star Trek versed, of the Ferengi - which shouldn't come as a surprise, since they were supposed to be an allegory for our current time to begin with. We have all these fancy tools and all those awesome possibilities, yet, on a moral level, we're so underdeveloped and retarded, that the only use we can put anything to is personal profit and exploitation.
(The "personal loss ranking" was, of course, rather generalised and across-the-board. In fact, it was more of a pre-emptive reasoning to hold off someone coming in and remarking "no, child loss is harder than parent loss". Not that this blog is read by that many people, but still...!)
"Just because there is a demand, doesn't mean supplying it should be justified."
ReplyDeleteI quite agree. And yes. I do see your point that "society" is a warm and fuzzy cloak to hide behind. And perhaps not quite the right word. Sadly though, the human being is also a herd animal at the end of the day (again, I don't say you or I)and we don't like to be seen bucking the trend - how many of us actually stand up and say "No, that's wrong!" these days? Very few sadly. Because individuals are frightened. Frightened of being ostracized by their peer group, frightened of being made fun of, or in the worst case, frightened of being physically hurt or killed. Or worse than frightened, that people simply don't think for themselves, don't care to think for themselves.
But you know what? You're right about something. Never mind the excuses....I'm quite prepared to take on the task of saying "I think that's bad taste" or "Why don't you work it out for yourself?". And hell. If I can start one person thinking, then who knows....!