Hmmm

[ciderclaus]

Just read an interesting article in I by Julie Burchill, will have been originally in the Independant. Its about the who superinjunction thing and in essence discusses how bad the men are request them, women don't request them and it's mysoginist judges that issue them. That they are used to bully the often (Andrew Marr was excused this charge)

Comments

[ciderclaus]

I agree that society does treat women as a comodity, the examples listed are accurate. Likewise that in the above sceanario it is the guilty man here who does deserve to be villified but is hiding behind his children. My point I supose here is that the woman that cheats with a married man is as bad as the man. He abuses his position of advantage, she in all intents and purposes is fucking around, as she is having casual sex with that man. The real test in all this is will there be a reduction in 'sleep with someone famous and sell the story' type escapades.

In the past the woman had little too lose and all to gain. Will Imogen's experiance be an example of how it can all go wrong. The pain evidenced by her is I suspect mostly crocodile tears. It annoys me slightly when you have individuals who say all's fair in love and war, and then commit some amourous attrocity and complain about the consequences when it goes wrong.

Ultimately, the ways things are currently progressing it suggests that if you want to conduct extra-marital make sure that you have children who's privacy will need to be protected. The other thing that amuses me is how quickly the media have turned on her. Those that would have gladly paid for her story are now feeding her into the mincing machine. I think that the mainstream print media bears a lot more to blame about how all this works.

[ribenademon]

(Allegedly) Ryan Giggs won't escape without his share of judgement...

Thinking about this, I am more and more convinced its the papers who are the biggest hypocrites, in both shaming Imogen as a slag (whilst selling papers on the basis of her scantily clad body) whilst also giving her a place to whine about the injunction from -for their own ends of pushing the poor press being denied a story.

I think I think the woman in the above scenarios has definitely behaved badly, but I don't think as badly as the man, and neither as bad as the papers. I totally agree with you if the super injunction taker outer was some kind of family values politico/religious type its in the public interest to hear about it though.

It will have no influence on his footballing career or her modelling career (if in doubt -John Terry is back as England captain and Jordan continues to sell copy -despite being reviled as a total slapper) and nor will it massively shake any part of the world, its not as if celebrity (or regular) infidelity is a rare thing and as such the press are taking the piss in claiming denial of free speech.

Changing the situation a bit and if the press were non-consensually outing a publically unknown homosexual celebrity over his/her same sex tendencies/relationship, these days I think it would generally be accepted as pretty dismal behaviour of the press to push and hound the individual(s) and sell papers off the back of it.

Basically I hate the press.

[ciderclaus]

Ryan Giggs eh?

I totally agree with you about the national tabloid print media. They really are hypocritical lying scum and completely self serving. The only way to do someting about it is to stop buying newspapers but I don't think that will ever happen.

[glenatron]

On the contrary, it's happening a whole lot right now, and it will increase as time goes by. Printed news media is a dead form, it's just twitching a little.

Not that I think that is a good thing by any means, but I think it is, by now, unavoidable.