Yours sincerely, Outraged of South Wales
Yesterday whilst I was eating my lunch at work, I went for a little browse on the internet to catch up on the day's news and found this article.
I liked Kevin Greening. He was a great radio presenter and was robbed of the Breakfast Show on Radio 1 by the talent vacuum that is Zoe Ball because she's a bigger name. Or at least she was at the time. I was annoyed enough to send a comment through to the BBC commentbot because this kind of unnecessary pidgeon-holing of people to in some way justify what has happened to them (i.e. "aaaaah! He was a deviant, therefore it's not as bad as if it had happened to a normal person. He almost had it coming really..." ) really gets my goat. Like when they kept referring to those women who were murdered by that freak down in the South West of England last year kept getting referred to as "murdered prostitutes" rather than "murdered women" as if to imply that by being prostitutes they'd somehow brought it on themselves.
So I've just sent them this.
"I am puzzled by the coverage of the verdict in the Coroner's inquest into the death of Kevin Greening. It is stated that he died "after taking part in a gay bondage session". I am baffled as to the material difference it makes whether it was a homosexual bondage session or a heterosexual bondage session. I would argue that if he'd been found to have "indulged in unorthodox sexual practices" with a female partner, the nature of his presumed sexuality would not have been mentioned.
I would be grateful if you could let me know, from an editorial perspective, what difference in perspective is perceived to be brought to the story by the reporting the gender of Mr Greening's partner."
Since I first submitted the comment, they have updated the story with further information, including a statement from Kevin's partner. However, I still stand by my objection to the "gay bondage" rather than just plain "bondage". I would imagine that for anyone who is interested enough, Kevin's sexuality is now more than patently obvious, thus negating the requirement to throw in the extra "gay" at the start.
*Sits back and imagines BBC comment monkey branding her as a lesbian fundamentalist*
I liked Kevin Greening. He was a great radio presenter and was robbed of the Breakfast Show on Radio 1 by the talent vacuum that is Zoe Ball because she's a bigger name. Or at least she was at the time. I was annoyed enough to send a comment through to the BBC commentbot because this kind of unnecessary pidgeon-holing of people to in some way justify what has happened to them (i.e. "aaaaah! He was a deviant, therefore it's not as bad as if it had happened to a normal person. He almost had it coming really..." ) really gets my goat. Like when they kept referring to those women who were murdered by that freak down in the South West of England last year kept getting referred to as "murdered prostitutes" rather than "murdered women" as if to imply that by being prostitutes they'd somehow brought it on themselves.
So I've just sent them this.
"I am puzzled by the coverage of the verdict in the Coroner's inquest into the death of Kevin Greening. It is stated that he died "after taking part in a gay bondage session". I am baffled as to the material difference it makes whether it was a homosexual bondage session or a heterosexual bondage session. I would argue that if he'd been found to have "indulged in unorthodox sexual practices" with a female partner, the nature of his presumed sexuality would not have been mentioned.
I would be grateful if you could let me know, from an editorial perspective, what difference in perspective is perceived to be brought to the story by the reporting the gender of Mr Greening's partner."
Since I first submitted the comment, they have updated the story with further information, including a statement from Kevin's partner. However, I still stand by my objection to the "gay bondage" rather than just plain "bondage". I would imagine that for anyone who is interested enough, Kevin's sexuality is now more than patently obvious, thus negating the requirement to throw in the extra "gay" at the start.
*Sits back and imagines BBC comment monkey branding her as a lesbian fundamentalist*