"They're all doing it." Yeah, they're all undercover child molesterers, secret paedophiles, closet rapists, and on and on and on... . Or, alternatively, 'they're all' 'religious fundamentalists', 'right-wing' fanatics and bigots with an utter, insatiable intolerance for anyone and everyone who just so happens to see anything - at all - even remotely differently from themselves and other 'church folk'. Yep, de media really has da church over a barrel or dozen these days, doesn't it? Right where it wants - has ever wanted - it, I imagine, *I do believe... .
Yes, the Western and especially the U.K. media's 'treated' us all to an almost non-stop 'serving' over recent weeks, months and years of scandals reeking of far more than 'mere' sexual deviancy and 'titillation'. Interestingly, I do believe it's the selfsame media who ever found any and every conceivable excuse, pretence, shameless justification, rationalization and mostly prevarication to look distinctly in the opposite direction before, throughout and, so it would seem, also after the two-term tenure of a certain President Clinton. A man, a significant leader on the world stage, let's give him his due, whose bedroom antics in the corridors and parlours of high office from the Governor's residence in Arkansas to the Oval Office have earned him an indelible chapter in the tomes of presidential 'peccadilloes', perversity and prideful privilege for yonks to come. And whose fellow Democrats, with the notable exception of Al Gore's running mate, the Jewish then Democrat, later independent Senator Joe Lieberman - wholly unlike Congressional and Senate Republicans in the early 1970s when President Richard Nixon's own dirty laundry was being spread out for all his fellow Americans to see - also conveniently turned the other way and refused by their inaction to apply the same consistency to their own man in the White House. But partiality and ideological partisanship ever blinds the eyes and closes the mouth, doesn't it, so what's new in the modern-day political history of the human race?
But 'moving on', as they say, we've of course been treated to the spectacle in much more recent times of the likes of generational idols and entertainers from Rolf Harris to Bill Cosby to Jimmy Saville to 'Ken Barlow' through to Sir Cliff Richard being dragged kicking and screaming - except where they've already kicked the bucket - and effectively hauled into the public arena before being summarily hung, drawn and quartered. And, it would appear, for three of them anyhow, well deserving of such ignominy - and then some. The problem as most of us are only too well aware, however, is that the media's blood lust is insatiable, and so once they scent blood and guts and everything gory they're onto their next victim, ready or not, but far more worryingly, guilty or not as well.
And so we had the spectacle awhile back of famous Coronation Street star Ken(?) Roache being hauled before the courts to answer for allegations extending way back to his teenage years, I believe and/or the teenage years of a girl (or two?) he'd been alleged to have interfered with then - or was it actually a consensual thing instead? But truth, if that was in fact the case, has a habit these days of getting lost in all the media hype, hysteria and haste to find the next unsuspecting victim - as I say, not only ready or not, but guilty or innocent - and sit as judge, jury and execution upon them, entirely irrespective of any real or recoverable facts in the particular matter. Or even, dare I surmise, whether they at times even believe the next alleged culprit is in fact guilty of anything at all. No, all's fair in the modern-day drama of truth or consequences.
But unfortunately for these 21st-Century guardians of civilization's morals and purity, they occasionally
confuse fantasy with reality, and reality with fantasy, and so their hard-fought efforts sometimes come unstuck while the wheels fall off their merry carousel on all sides. No, things don't always go as planned or intended for these well-heeled control freaks with knowledge about everything and little true wisdom about anything.
And so we've seen the likes of first a relatively minor - to old Coronation Street buffs, anyhow - male co-star of Ken Roache, and then him, having court cases thrown out due to insufficient or improper or insubstantial 'evidence' or proof of their misdeeds. Which of course doesn't necessarily mean they're innocent, only found not guilty beyond reasonable doubt. But, hard as it is for those in the modern media scrum, in the frenzy to find fresh flesh to feed upon, to accept, that's the bar in the Westminster system of justice. And so 'cease and desist' - for the time being anyway - is the unwelcome message such a situation brings to their restless minds.
And now we have the yet more unedifying spectacle of a - one-time - well-respected pop star, the rock music icon of the 60s, 70s and beyond 'Sir' Cliff Richard, now joining the ranks of the latter - presently exonerated - class of famous fellas. Having endured - at the hands of the British Police, of Scotland Yard I suppose - the latest episode, the most recent instalment in this modern-day blood-lust programme series of 'Hunt the Celebrity'. But barely emerging with his life intact, his nerves and sanity shot, his notable career skewered upon the pedestal of political correctness gone berseck, Having been to hell and back over the past two years after the one-time great, and moreover, dare one add, 'good', BBC itself participated in assisting in so as to get the inside scoop in publicizing the police raid upon his mansion in his absence.But hey, I'm biased, having ever enjoyed a song or two of his, especially the one about the Sally Army. And moreover, I'm a while, middle-aged 'man' - whatever that term means these days - so I would say that, wouldn't I?
But actually, having myself been drawn through the proverbial gutter myself - over an entirely different species of accusation/s, I can well assure my readership, around 26-odd years ago now, half my life away actually - with no-one, far as I can recall, taking let alone on my side, save a younger sister apparently who years later assured me she didn't believe I'd done wrong, perhaps I have a thing or two of worth, of value, to share on such an issue. Something I was reminded of a second time today in fact by spending the entire day in what seemed a fruitless, hopeless errand, perusing - in order to make a serious complaint to New Zealand media - the entrails and innards of what is known as the Broadcasting Standards Authority of our fair land. But though I've thus far wholly failed in that intended undertaking, I did manage to build up just a little even somewhat 'righteous' indignation as to the rather shameless and shameful treatment said NZ media - or rather, one of its manifold component parts or rather local manifestations thereof - meted out to me half a lifetime ago. But again, I won't bore you with the details, suffice to say aforementioned media appear to have themselves done somewhat significant 'damage' themselves to the basic journalistic principles they have ever been entrusted in upholding. Hey, so what's new? But you'll just have to take me word for that, I suppose.
Yes, the fine art of tarring one and all with the selfsame brush, as if all males will now be made to pay the debt owed for all the aeons of indisputable ill-treatment so many females - and males, I'd hasten to add (in both similar and quite different ways) - have had to endure during human history. And surely many deserve the rage many now express in their direction, for who will now speak out on behalf or in defence of that once much-adored Rolf Harris, or the equally esteemed TV paragon of our childhoods, Bill Cosby? (Though I knew little of and wasn't especially enamoured of what I did see of the now infamous Jimmy Saville.) And speaking of the now justly notorious Mr Saville, his case - again, involving (I believe) both the BBC and **the UK Police, but perhaps it's just the former - itself shines a rather curious light upon the undefined 'proposition' that's thus far been at the very heart of our discussion: i.e. the deeply-held and constantly perpetuated and assiduously promulgated belief, nay conviction, even religious sacred cow if you will, that wherever there's any smoke whatsoever these days - however diffuse and even at times invisible to the naked eye - there, as if by magic, ipso presto, fire is not too far away.
However, how's this/the following for a different take upon and insight, even eureka moment, upon the subject? Methinks all these allegations and accusations flying so thick and fast and furiously and freely these days - especially in the 'United Kingdom' by the Police - with the aforementioned 'complicity' by the BBC - bespeak a very real and long-established psychological phenomenon known as transference, and/or elsewise as projection; though perhaps the two are really just different names for the essentially same thing. In other words, perhaps this eager and some - such as myself - would claim even evil - haste to rush to premature judgment and find the next trophy victim for the corridors of infamy is motivated far more by a subconscious need to take the spotlight off themselves and place it onto others. As I say, this is a well-known psychological device whenever the heat comes a little too hot in the kitchen, or whenever the light penetrates just a little too closely and is on the verge of exposing secrets some would rather keep hidden, whether ill deeds practiced by such themselves or cover-ups they were themselves complicit in.
Yes, methinks some who make the loudest noises perhaps have the most to hide themselves. And seek to hide, to keep down, a guilty and accusing conscience. A psychological phenomenon, indeed, the Great Master Himself explicated in some detail when telling us not to judge others. He - and later Paul, in His stead - explained that those who accuse others are often guilty of the same misdeeds, compounding those by indulging a spirit of accusation and judgment upon others thus less guilty even than themselves.
The inconsistency of so many now indulging in this 'blood-sport' of guilty till found innocent is shown by the entirely different, wholly inconsistent standards applied to those of a female persuasion found doing unmentionable things of a similar nature. For a kiwis anyhow are only too well aware, whenever any such are convicted of say molesting young boys and oftentimes over a number of years even decades, society tends to take quite a different approach entirely, almost envying them and suspecting they secretly enjoyed what they were coerced into undertaking. And so we're not surprised - however much hollow-sounding outrage we invariably hear - when the selfsame women are then slapped firmly over both wrists with a rather sodden train pass or two.
But hey, it even stands to reason by my own reasoning, I now hear you rejoin, that church folk especially are up to their 'ears' in the foregoing, for aren't so many so often in the very forefront against others they accuse of sexual improprieties and much worse? Perhaps you've a - very good - point there, yes, it does seem to stand to reason when you stop to think about it. And as the film 'Spotlight' and others have all too graphically shown, those in the very highest positions of political and religious power in our world have oftentimes been strangely complicit by either their actions or just as often their inaction in such matters. So yes indeed, there may well be many additional metaphorical bodies buried in the secret recesses of many a monastery, priory, vestry or sanctuary.
But maybe before you get a little too trigger- or rather accusation-happy, the Aforementioned Teacher through some of his earliest prophets also taught of a day and age in which people would call evil good and good evil. And surely it isn't an altogether great stretch from there to calling the evil good - and there's more than a few in our extremely screwed-up era who do - and likewise from that vantage-point moving on if all so imperceptibly to calling (all) the good evil. But all such who find themselves doing so better take heed to what they do, for the Great One has also declared all such who do so an abomination in His sight. But nonetheless who can possibly deny that we live in an extremely complex, complicated, mixed-up era? And who knows what'll happen next?
*Used with appreciation from one of Paul Simon's (and Art Garfunkel's) many and great, ever memorable hits (off their Greatest Hits album, though for the life of me which one it is presently eludes me).
**Which, I must hasten to add - and in a spirit of commendation, despite my other remarks - has been assembling a case going back decades involving some, perhaps many, former politicians and other high-profile figures in the U.K. 'establishment', which is due to be released to public view once the judicial body charged with investigating and reporting back, headed by a New Zealand justice of some standing, does so. So they cannot or rather should not - by me or anyone - be accused of necessarily finding potent needles under every innocent-looking haystack. Yet again, the seemingly similarly-unsubstantiated and probably unsubstantiable - however valid - recent allegations against former Conservative Party Prime Minister Edward Heath seem themselves - to my mind anyhow - of a similar character to those levelled against Cliff Richards et al; relying as they seem to not only upon decades-old allegations, but by one or two folk who've left it for so very long till Mr Heath had no chance to rebut or refute them, and again rather shadowy, catch-all, spray-and-flee, type ones. Which these days attach themselves ever so easily to a man with a rather pretentious, upper echelon and moreover effeminate-sounding accent and voice and at times somewhat eccentric character or disposition.
No comments:
Post a Comment