Minor breakouts of major gripes

I’d long ago realised that part of the reason I post cussy rants about things that seem like just small issues, not a huge deal, isn’t there something more important to worry about – is because those “small issues” just tap into much bigger problems.

Today, two such small issues reared their annoying heads.

The continuing saga of Oh Noes The Brown Man Said A Mean Word broke out on Red Alert, with Hon Trevor insert-duck-to-water-metaphor-here Mallard chipping in to the debate:

If a Pakeha used the term brown mofos it would be racist.  That standard should apply both ways.

Which actually hits several big Pisses Me Right The Fuck Off buttons.  But to summarise:  using the argument of “the same standard” is so close to “one law for all” they couldn’t legally marry in all 50 states of the US.  It’s “special rights”, it’s “level playing field”, and it’s bullshit.

There isn’t a fucking level playing field when one group of people has been historically shat on by another from orbit.  There isn’t a tabula rasa of race relations where such lovely “can’t we all just be equals and ignore skin colour and historical disenfranchisement and oh we tried to destroy your language and culture” ideas can be writ large.

There is a basic reason why a person of Maori descent can refer to “white motherfuckers stealing our land” which does not hold true for a person of European descent saying “brown motherfuckers stealing our car”.  That reason is privilege.  Learn you some.

Second small issue:  in the continuing if-they-wrote-this-for-TV-no-one-would-believe-it tale of Doug Schmuck and some possibly-dodgy legislative drafting, one quote nicely put its thumb directly on my White Middle Class Bastards Who Just Love Law And Order Until It Applies To Them button.

The 15-year fight for the Opua boat ramp had taken “a hell of a lot of time” and cost Mr Schmuck close to $200,000. “A few objectors can run the costs up so high that it makes things like the Resource Management Act untenable,” he said.

Ah, yes.  You can always spot a WMCBWJLL&OUIATT, by the way they seem completely oblivious of the fact that the law still counts even when it might stop them from doing something they want to do.

The classic example is provided every time there’s a Police crackdown on speeding, possibly by, oh the horrors, using hidden speed cameras.  Now, you might think “well if people don’t want to get speeding tickets they could try not speeding”, but such thoughts do not pass through the brains of White Middle-Class Bastards. No no no, this is just a revenue gathering exercise.

It’s not like their own speeding could cause accidents or cost people their lives or anything.  We all know that speed only kills when it’s those bloody Asian homestay students whose rich daddies send them thirty grand a month to buy Ferraris and meth with, obviously.  The laws of physics are very specific on this.

The other classic, of course, is the killing of Pihema Cameron – where the Your Sensible Is Not Like Our Earth Sensible Sentencing Trust decided that actually, that whole “tough punishment for violent crims is the way to save society” line didn’t so much count when the stabber was a rich white guy and the victim was [insert stereotype about Maori teenage boys here].

And so we have (oh Gods it makes me giggle every time) Doug Schmuck.  Who has been nearly bankrupted, dear readers, by busybodies and that bane of the WMCB, the Resource Management Act.  All because he built a private fucking boat ramp on a fucking public reserve.

It’s almost like some people expect Good Hardworking [White Male] Businessmen to obey the law or something.  Don’t they understand the law is for the little people?

An “unbalanced response”

You know it’s a bad fucking day when I have to agree, in part, with fucking WhaleOil.

Point the Zero: I’m actually not going to rehash his situation here, because then I’d feel hypocritical for slagging off Eddie at The Standard for Point One.*

That being said, Point the First:  It’s a bit fucking rich playing the “we kept quiet about this because we are Such Noble Creatures” card as a prelude to:

but seeing as the Sunday Star-Times felt differently, a few comments.

It’s a lovely tactic of some of our Parliamentarians to try a variation on this spin, the “well I might call the member a liar, if it weren’t against Standing Orders” line.  It’s childish bullshit and, in Eddie’s case, serves as a handy warning that things are going to go rapidly downhill.

Protip:  if it weren’t okay to comment on it before, it ain’t okay now that one of the trashiest newsrags in NZ has decided it’s a good time to rake through their Most Unflattering Photos file.

Brief thought: “Labour did it too”

One of the reasons we haven’t colonized Mars yet is almost certainly the tendency of both sides of the political spectrum in NZ to scream “WELL HE DID IT TOO, TEACHER!!!” whenever their folk are in trouble.

The current “Bill English getting paid to live at home with his wife and children” rort is a classic example.

Apparently leftwing bloggers have No Right [Turn?] to think this is a fucking disgrace, because oooh, well, Labour did totes the same things when they were in Government, and at least it’s in the open, so, um, National should totes get cookies for going along with something organised and promoted by the Greens and which really only occurred because of the UK MPs’ expense scandal.

You know what?  If Labour Ministers also got paid to live in their own homes, that’s also a fucking disgrace.  But that’s a smokescreen for the actual issue, which is tragically bigger than being-paid-to-live-in-your-own-home: that the people who are doing it are the ones who are cutting funding to physical therapy for children with disabilities.  The people who are doing it are cutting ACE classes because they’re “hobby courses”.  The people who are doing it are preaching the same old tighten-your-belts, bootstraps-bootstraps-bootstraps bullshit they always do and helping themselves to the lolly jar at the same time.

This is revolting no matter who’s doing it.  It’s the added cherry of hypocrisy that pushes this shit sundae to the top of the class.

The silence of the hypocritical bigoted lambs

So MPs’ expenses are out, and while nobody’s getting slaughtered for charging the taxpayer for lemons or porn, there was always going to be some drama generated.

There was a wee bubble of angst caused by the fact that a lot of people simply didn’t realise that, once you’ve been an MP for long enough, almost all of your air travel – private, business or otherwise – can be subsidized.  And that Roger Douglas is exactly a big enough hypocrite to use that for all it’s worth. [And oh, Sir Rog, "entitled" is exactly the word you wanted to use.]

But then someone noticed that Bill English appeared to be claiming an “I’m from outside Wellington” allowance … for the house occupied by himself, his wife, and his children.  In Wellington.

The most fascinating thing?  I recall that only a matter of days ago, you couldn’t move for certain bloggers and commenters screaming “$700 A WEEK! THAT’S MORE MONEY THAN I’VE EVER SEEN! BLUDGERS! THIEVES! SLAPPERS BREEDING FOR A BUSINESS!”

$1000 extra, on top of a shiny Ministerial salary, to compensate Mr English for living in his own home?

Not a fucking whimper.

You know the rules, people:  if writers at The Standard and Cactus Kate are agreeing you’re a dodgy bastard?  They’re probably right.

H/T:  The Standard and Poneke.

Fat hate, Deborah Coddington, and The Herald: a match made in troll heaven

This is a first, people.  Today we award someone not merely the distinction of being Officially Scum; we have our inaugural Official Scum and Bar.

Not content with merely using gang-rape as a metaphor for being asked tricky questions, everyone’s favourite former-ACT-MP-and-hater-of-AZIAN-CRYME Deborah Coddington has outdone herself.

And she hasn’t even had the fucking guts to own her bullshit.

As seen at The F-Word, and also covered at Life on Fats, she’s penned regurgitated this little bit of bollocks in the Granny Herald:

Finally, an expert on human nutrition brave enough to tell us what we don’t want to hear – it’s our fault if we’re fat.

…

[A]long came John Birkbeck of Massey University, adjunct professor in human nutrition, who told journalist Geraldine Johns in this newspaper: “You can’t get over-fat without eating more calories than you expend.”

And this: “You do not see fat people in concentration camps. Why? Because they get hardly anything to eat and they have to do a lot of work.“

National MP Maurice Williamson must be muttering into his whiskers. Two years ago he was pilloried for saying virtually the same thing: “If some people can’t lose weight no matter what, how come there were no fat people in Nazi concentration camps?“

Williamson was correct then, and Birkbeck’s correct now, but of course he’s already angered the Eating Difficulties Education Network.

I just think it’s really courageous for someone to not only tell fat people “hey, those Jews were all skinny and shit after forced labour in concentration camps under a fascist regime trying to exterminate their entire culture”, but to use quotes from other people to do it.

Coddington is of course full of shit:

Spokeswoman Maree Burns called Birkbeck’s comments “flagrant, inappropriate, intolerant and offensive”, adding “shaming and blaming people has never been effective”.

But actually it has. Look what we do to smokers. We treat them like lepers, forcing them out into the street, away from bars and restaurants. Two decades ago it was acceptable to smoke on planes, in offices and pubs. Now everywhere is proudly a smokefree environment.

And no one smokes any more, which would have been the conclusion if her argument were anywhere in the vicinity of Consistenttown.

But Coddington’s from a special school of thought, the kind that says “we need to get the homeless off our streets” not out of compassion but because they make the place look untidy.  I don’t actually think she cares about health, or nutrition, she just doesn’t want to have to look at fat people because she thinks they’re icky.

Sidebar: Due to my strange obsession with Next Top Model in all its variations, this I found actually funny:

These days, it’s the skinny, flat-chested girls who are shamed on television modelling competitions. She must be anorexic, we gasp, if we see a hip bone or a rib.

Which is why NZNTM was won by a size 14 girl and Ruby, constantly pilloried for being a chub, was informed by Nigel Barker that she was 20 pounds too light for plus-size modelling.

Anyway, Coddington is clearly well-prepped for the assertion that she hates fat people, so like the real-life concern troll she is she’s quick to mention (on page 2):

I don’t mind if people are overweight. I don’t judge their personality by their size, but I care if they’re unhappy. I feel sorry for fat children if they’re bullied at school – they’ll feel miserable, be reluctant to do sport, eat more to compensate and so the vicious cycle begins until they become obese adults.

But molly-coddling won’t help. Tough love works with treating other addictions – we should use it on food addictions.

We’ve got a real “judging” meme going on this week.  Coddington doesn’t judge you for being fat, she just knows (crystal ball? Power of Three?) that you must be unhappy about being fat, and you’re only fat because no one’s made you put down the Snickers and Coke.

I would direct Ms Coddington to the stellar works of Kate Harding or Marianne Kirby, but I don’t think she’d actually care to learn that being fat is not the end of the world and there is life after “normal”-size clothes.

And just to round things off, a few classics (I swear, Coddington’s been attending how-to-bingo-fat-people seminars or something):

So how about some incentives for losing weight? If you’re a smoker you pay more for life insurance because you’re a greater risk. But I don’t get any discount on my ACC levies or my medical insurance despite my BMI being 22.

If I fly with excess baggage I’m charged extra, yet the gut from the guy next to me could be rolling over the armrest into my seat, so why shouldn’t he pay extra for his 130kg of bodyweight?

Death camps, BMI and airline seats (which are, we all know, totally designed to be spacious and comfortable) all in one go.  It’s how you spot the most-practised trolls, they produce such brilliant, perfect examples of hateful crap – but can’t resist nasty little shots right at the end:

Yes, I know why, because it would hurt his feelings. He has every right to be a big, fat slob. And people like me who don’t eat more than we need should just shut up and pay.

Yep, no judging fat people here, Coddington!

And if anyone’s gearing up to say “but she totally has a point!” I leave you with this excellent comment by Rachel at The F-Word:

If weight loss were as easy as controlling one’s environment and food intake, then why do people like her have to resort to using Jewish Holocaust death camps to “prove” their points. I mean, how much more ridiculously extreme can you get?

And just on that BMI thing?

Peyton Manning, quarterback for the Indianapolis Colts? 27.3 – overweight
Batista, current WWE champion? 33.5 – obese
Beatrice Faumuina, New Zealand Olympian? 36.5 – obese
Stacey Jones, Warriors halfback? 28.0 – overweight
Dan Carter, All Black and underwear model? 28.7 – overweight

Definitely people who should be paying higher health insurance premiums.

Market forces say what?

Linked via a comment thread over on The Standard:

Private schools await $10m boost

Private schools are poised for a big funding boost from the Government.

…

Some private schools have said they will be forced to integrate in the state system as the recession hits rolls.

…

Independent Schools of New Zealand executive director Deborah James said the “crippling” capped funding regime of the former Labour government, combined with the recession, had put “real pressure” on the financial sustainability of independent schools.

… Riiiiiiiiiight.  So what you’re saying, private schools, is that it’s totally unfair that the Labour government expected you to, you know, cope on your own, what with being private schools charging thousands per pupil per term?

What you’re saying is it’s really unfair how you’re susceptible to market forces when you choose to operately privately?

What’s you’re saying is that just because you’ve rejected the state-school umbrella in great economic times doesn’t mean you’re so principled as to take the bad with the good?

Give me a fucking break.  And the hilarity of the line about “no, honestly, some of this will go to scholarships for kids who can’t afford private schooling” is unlikely to be surpassed any time soon.  Let me guess: said kids will also be surprisingly good at rugby?

This is not the big bank bail-out of the US.  The economy is not dependent on private schools and their precious rich kids.  The only issue here is that some people’s kids might have to go to *shudder* public schools with the underclasses (and until they scrap zoning, those public schools are still much more likely going to be in “better” areas anyway).

Smart kids will always do well.  Rich kids will always have privilege and advantage in society.  Private schools, which are going to turn around and scream “WE’RE AUTONOMOUS, LEAVE US ALONE” as soon as governmental funding comes with any actual strings attached, need to grow some spine and fuck off away from public money.

Seriously, Garth, can you HEAR yourself?

Bruce Emery, noted child-killer businessman has been sentenced for the manslaughter of young vandal Pihema Cameron, a child dope-fuelled tagging machine.

How much is the life of a brown kid worth these days? Four years, three months.

The starting point for sentencing was five and a half to six years jail because it was a homicide with the use of a knife, the judge said. But Emery received the benefit of mitigating factors, including his “family standing” in the community.

… So you can see that this post is going to get swear-y, right?

The “oh, not scum like YOU” rule

It’s a sure sign of someone talking out their ass: they make generalised statement after generalised statement, [group] are scum, [group] make no contribution to society, [group] don’t deserve human rights like real people do.

And then someone turns around and says, “Actually, I’m a [member of group].”

And then the ass-talker says, “Oh, but you’re different, I didn’t mean [group] like you, just [group] like those scum.”

It’s been brilliantly illustrated in the comments of two recent posts at the Standard.

You get what you vote for …

Or didn’t vote for, in the case of 600,000 Kiwis. Thanks, guys, I’ll be thinking of you when our government preaches individual responsibility and cutting expenditure while directly funding the ACT Party.

More:  No Right Turn.

It may go without saying …

Yet more headline shenanigans:

Abortion laws threaten Catholic hospitals

I personally would have gone with

Catholic hospitals threaten to let women die to make a bullshit moral point

… but maybe that’s just me.

The Victorian Parliament is considering a Bill which would require medical practitioners, against their “conscientious objection” to abortion, to perform an abortion if necessary to save a woman’s life.

Obviously this kind of thing is not on.

THE Catholic Church’s extensive network of hospitals in Victoria faces a “real threat” from planned new abortion laws, Archbishop Denis Hart says.

He warned parishioners that Catholic-run hospitals might have to stop running conventional maternity and emergency services if Parliament passed the laws.

He warned in a pastoral letter that Catholic staff would face having to break the law if they wanted to maintain anti-abortion beliefs.

Bonus points for use of my personal favourite antichoicer slogan, “culture of death”.

More over at the Hoydens‘, but suffice it to say:

Archbishop Denis Hart, On the Charge of Taking “Prolife” Hypocrisy To Staggering New Levels of Stupid, you are Officially Scum.