8 May 2010, Comments (8)

Who would Jesus Bone?

Author: Helen

By sheer coincidence, just before Catherine Deveny was sacked from her AGE gig for tasteless twitters about iconic Orstralians, I clicked onto a masterpiece by Lawrence Money in a spirit of WTF-is-he-saying now. Deveny’s twitters were, to put it mildly, a bit ordinary, but look at what Fairfax publishes on its “blog” section: Could Pauline Hanson be right?. (Previously: “Three Cheers for Pauline Hanson!“)

Money has been around forever on the “social” pages, drip, drip, dripping a kind of slow poison against anyone he sees as being leftyscum, but evidently in Modern Times his previously thinly concealed xenophobia, sexism and homophobia has kicked up a notch. Here’s another one: Enoch Speaks from the Grave!. That is, Enoch “Rivers of Blood” Powell. But obviously Money’s on first name terms.
A graphic representation of a Charlie Chaplinesque face with bowler hat and a rather Hitlerish moustache.

 
I’m starting to see that little guy’s moustache in quite a different way.

I don’t know that if I were in Fairfax management’s shoes – a strange place to be, I agree – I would necessarily find Deveny the worst trollumnist on the payroll. A writer who, in her own time, although in a public forum (her “passing notes in class” defence was unbelievably silly), made a couple of rather horrible bad taste jokes about a two very successful people; versus someone who, in the Fairfax online space, contributes to the ongoing drip, drip, drip of polemic against asylum seekers and people of other races and religions?

If I were Rove or Bindi, I’d be hurt by the Deveny tweets. They would be like a little savage kick to the gut, those jokes. I wouldn’t wish that on anyone. (And of course they are not me, and possibly they weren’t offended at all…)

But more importantly, Rove and Tasma and Bindi aren’t threatened. “Offended” doesn’t cover how an immigrant or asylum seeker might feel, perhaps traumatised already by war and suffering and then subjected to “opinion” articles like this. Many of them, of course, won’t see the article, but they’ll certainly be aware of the zeitgeist which it feeds. “Offended” doesn’t cover physical personal injury at the hands of people who are given courage and targets identified by this stuff. People have died and they are still dying, some just around the corner from me, so perhaps this is a little close to home… literally.

And Money keeps drip-drip-dripping out his poison in the pages, social and online, of the AGE. I don’t know that I’d bone either of them. But I know which one “offends” me more.

Comments (8)

  • […] This post was mentioned on Twitter by ShinyPenguin and Faith Hunter, Helen Smart. Helen Smart said: New post: Who would Jesus bone? http://castironbalcony.media2.org/2010/05/08/who-would-jesus-bone/ […]

  • Shaun says:

    The problem is that celebrities with their right of reply and power via their status are extremely fragile and must be protected at all costs or they may withdraw their favours from us normal folk.

    Asylum seekers, who have no power of reply and are evil because they are different (and probably have no idea who Irwin and Rove are) must be attacked.

    Let’s hope that Jesus is not Tony Abbott’s version.

  • genevieve says:

    Thanks for drawing attention to this blog, Helen. His posts are rubbish, aren’t they. As is Fairfax’s idea of what an online audience deserves to read. (Gnashing of teeth).

  • Helen says:

    The whole Liberal party needs boning. http://twitpic.com/1mcf5e Via Flop eared Mule.

  • Kath Lockett says:

    Helen, I’ve got to admit that I only read your blog article. I just *could not force myself* to click on the links to read Mr Money’s mean-spirited mutterings.

    I’m with Genevieve – I’ve felt continually frustrated at the type of writing (and writers!) that Fairfax thinks are worthy of an online presence..

  • Bernice says:

    “Golly, I don’t suppose she, er, could be RIGHT??”
    Probably not as RIGHT as you, unpleasant little man. Money’s notable absence of logic in the piece can’t of course be criticised as that would be elitist.
    This bookends nicely with a piece from a couple of weeks ago by a young tech turk advising us all that facts and objectivity is old-fashioned, unnecessary in this new age where we are all our own fact checkers and makers of our own truth. Intellectual liberatarianism – the grandchildren of Ayn Rand. [insert deity] help us.

  • Helen says:

    For the social pages gig, he has a female partner called Suzanne Carbone. She’s not quite as toxic, but getting there; I reckon there should be a special place in hell for people who think cruel remarks (hurh hurh hurh) about Susan Boyle’s failure to look like a Barbie doll are still hilarious and edgy.

  • Ann O'Dyne says:

    Good post as always dear Helen. I am not going to start reading Mr.Money, I will just believe you thanks, but re Ms Deveny: I was surprised to never see in any of the reports of her tweeting, the defence of “I was home in my own living room well into a cask of wine” (as she probably was in order to watch the Loggies which I did not).
    We are allowed to be .05 or .09 in our own homes, are we not? Plenty of bloggers have gone online with a glass or two next to the keyboard, and the Comments are funnier for it.

    I think we should all wear chadors in solidarity with the women who have to.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.