The problem, however, is finding a group whose membership criteria I satisfy. A recent data entry error at my university has seen me become indigenous which could be an in. I've even been invited to participate in the Indigenous Games in Perth. The ruse wouldn't last long, though. Partly because the idea of me participating in any kind of competitive sporting activity is laughable and party because I'm about as indigenous as Helen Demidenko.
Maybe I could become female? There are pills and operations these days and surprises are what keep a marriage fresh! Then, after a few moments' thought, I have to rule that out because they don't make high heels in a US14.
Well, if I can't buy an estranged and enraged group off the shelf, I shall just have to make one of my own: carve out my own shoulder chip, as it were.
I'm tossing up two of them:
Firstly, people who think. We appear to be in something of a minority as evinced by the number of people expressing outrage over this shooting of a wild animal by Stephen Spielberg
We also have a history of being persecuted. Various regimes that built legitimacy based on populist slogans and handy scapegoats and whose arguments didn't stand up to too much scrutiny made sure that such scrutineers never stood up by sending them on sabbatical to the salt mines or saving themselves the train fare and just shooting all those geeks right where they lived - in the head.
Good, I've got myself into a minority.
What then would such a group be insulted and offended by?
Where do you want me to start?
I think I'll start with talkback radio. Every day there is a never ending stream of candidates for this year's Grand Prix des Idiots Blithering who, despite being battlers who know all about hard work, seem to have all the time in the world to wait on hold to deliver their thirty seconds' worth. And they know nothing!
I am offended by you taking up my time with opinions that you haven't even thought about, let alone done any fact checking on or road tested by running them past someone that might not agree with you. I am insulted that my tax dollars and those of many others in my minority were spent providing you with thirteen years of free education and this kind of pig-ignorant, small-minded idiocy is what we got for it.
I'm also a person with a constitutional preference for calling a spade a spade, rather than a "delightfully bucolic colonial winner, facing north and offering a unique opportunity for the handyman". I have a charmingly naive view that people should state a position and their honest reasons for it, rather than trying to pull the wool over my eyes and those of my fellow citizens. Of course, such a preference has gotten me into real trouble in the past with people to whom unvarnished honesty is a fair bit like kryptonite to Superman - really ruins the fantasy that they can fly - but we, none of us, can help the way we're born.
Gay marriage is my current favourite. I think the real arguments against come down to:
1. God said he doesn't like poofs;
2. Gay sex is just way too icky to think about let alone officially sanction; or
3. I've had to stick with my shitty marriage for thirty years for the sake of the kids and, if gay guys get married and don't get kids, they won't have to suffer like I have for the social prestige of a thirty year anniversary.
For the record, I think none of those arguments stack up but they're at least better than the incomprehensible gibberish coming out of the mouths of the conservative right who are spending their time trying to pretend to be flexible, compassionate, rational people. I hear things like "Marriage is primarily a religious tradition and we shouldn't interfere with it.", "The purpose of marriage is to provide a stable home for children that obviously gay people can't have" and "Society just isn't ready for such a move". I am offended and insulted. The runners up in the year 9 regional debating tournament could put paid to those before the second speaker had even heaved himself to his hind legs to address the audience.
If you don't like homosexuality, just say so. I will be checking, however, to see what you've been looking at on the internet. If more than one woman is involved, I think I'm within my rights to question the moral basis of your stance.
I am also insulted that you, our national leaders, would think that I would accept that the review you've commissioned into the state of the economy / school sector / trades unions or whatever is actually honest, unbiased and at arms length. Every government since I can remember has had a face like the amazed housewife in the detergent ads when they get into office and see the state of the books.They then hold an inquiry with all the judicial credibility of the Salem Witch Trials and announce, reluctantly, that they won't be able to afford any of the things they promised because of the parlous state the other guys left the finances in.
The fact that you go on TV and pretend you knew nothing about it and that your inquiry was anything but the purest show is offensive.
In fact, I think I'll join both groups. I'm looking forward to bathing in the warm glow of self-righteousness - and suing talkback radio hosts.
Sound and Fury is published every Monday and Thursday mornings, Australian Eastern Standard Time.
Notes
Helen Demidenko (aka Helen Darville) caused a minor scandal in Australia when she published a book called "The Hand That Signed the Paper" and won some awards for it. At the time she claimed she came from a Ukrainian family - Ukrainian people being the subject of the novel. It turned out that she was about as Ukrainian as Mao Tse Tung.
The line about the spade comes from John Clarke's piece on real estate agents. View here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbFlstJ4u8E
Loved this one!! :)
ReplyDelete