Hard News by Russell Brown

Read Post

Hard News: Rain on his parade

317 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 6 7 8 9 10 13 Newer→ Last

  • Tom Semmens,

    For some reason, reading all this reminds me of Spike Milligan...

    "When I look back, the fondest memory I have is not really of the Goons. It is of a girl called Julia with enormous breasts."

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 1824 posts Report Reply

  • Dylan Reeve,

    Oh, you were tying to be witty too? Ahhh. :)

    Auckland • Since Aug 2008 • 262 posts Report Reply

  • Dylan Reeve,

    Looking at the photos and stuff, I think I would have been disapointed had I Link-bussed my way to Queen St. All that fuss over what was really only a few tits, and none that were especially fantastic (at least by my measure). Not since the iPhone have I seen something so over-hyped (and before that it was just about any other Apple product, really they are all hype).

    But hey, I've never really been a tit-man. And I hate Macs.

    Auckland • Since Aug 2008 • 262 posts Report Reply

  • Belt,

    Russ: "And anyone who thinks Crow is just a bit of a wag has presumably forgotten his attempt to include the birth of baby in a porn film"

    And when I published my distaste of this at the time on a web site, I had an abusive phone call. I put down the phone. It rang again. I discovered it was Steve Crow, this time using less abusive language to inform me that if I didn't take down my statement, he'd take me to court.

    Hmm. As a family man of modest means, I didn't have the energy, money nor need to be in the public lime light, so I took my statement down.

    Freedom of speech is easily quashed by those who are willing to abuse the legal process with their pocket money.

    Once I took the statement down, I received another call from him. Would I consider working for him?

    Err... no.

    The man has only one guiding principle: profit.

    Good on him.

    Nelson • Since Nov 2006 • 49 posts Report Reply

  • Grant Dexter,

    Morgan:

    You are going to jump on the it's legal bandwagon? I understand that it is not against the law to expose one's breasts in public. All I have suggested is that it must be an impotent and rather redundant city council that must have the backing of the law for any decision it makes. Even one as trivial as granting parade rights. If you really think the ability to deny parade rights regardless of the legality of the march is the start of the slippery slope toward 1984 then .. well .. I guess you could get away with that opinion in some circles ...

    You then go on to suggesting that you would be justified in defying a law if you saw fit. So I guess actively opposing established law is only acceptable if you do it. Interesting set of .. *ahem* .. standards you have there, mate.

    You think banning things has unintended consequences. What might those be?

    You think authority needs to be constantly questioned and watched very carefully indeed. Wouldn't that make the people doing the watching and questioning either:
    A) the real source of authority, or
    B) a bunch of loser, cry-baby wannabes?

    You think you don't need to be told how to live or what to think. And you think that's a reason to have a constitution? What is the constitution going to do? Not tell you how you can act?

    Allow me to clue you in. EVERYBODY, not just you, has the capacity to think just as they please. Why do you have such a problem with people who suggest courses of action that you do not agree with?

    You think you won? All you did was rant without coherency or any semblence of relevance. And your advice was ludicrous:
    Nudity isn't shameful. Gee, duh!
    Some kinds of public nudity are legal. Wow. You're such a profound source of knowledge in a darkened closet.
    Nudity isn't pornography. Whew. I was starting to stink as well...

    You seem to be most interested in supporting the authority of the law. But you most certainly have your own agendas that the law does not currently encompass. You also would like to see current laws adjusted. So I guess, once again, that it only when you are unhappy with the law that anything has to be done or said. How about you step off your pedestal and find a moral standing you can defend without hypocrisy?

    You are also interested in why some people think they have the right to stop others from doing completely legal things. And, like I said, this isn't about the legality of the situation. It's about the right of proper authority to determine simple things like who will and who will not march down Queen Street.

    And your closing rant:

    Lots of stuff offends me, but you know what? I don't have a right to never be offended. The same holds true for mindless wowsers, petty minded wannabe dictators, misguided religionists, and ordinary average every day people on the street.

    Is utterly pointless. People don't like what other people do. Are you trying to make some kind of point? Were you under the impression that people did not know that?

    You haven't done this very much before, have you? Debating someone who understands how utterly bereft of common sense you are, I mean.

    Taipei, Taiwan • Since Mar 2007 • 256 posts Report Reply

  • Dylan Reeve,

    For all Crow's sleaziness he's really just an entrepreneur. He's found a niche and produces a product to suit the market. The birth in the porn thing was motivated by two factors I reckon - willingness and audience. There is an audience for that sort of thing (pregnancy porn) who would probably be keen to get something unique, and the woman involved was keen.

    He provides a product to meet a demand, for money. Same as McDonalds or BMW really. He'll do whatever he thinks is going to make him some money, which is probably true of most of us generally.

    Auckland • Since Aug 2008 • 262 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    Dylan, not trying and not wanting to seem so. :)

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16996 posts Report Reply

  • steven crawford,

    (pregnancy porn)

    oow, there was some creepy looking guy standing outside the hospital with some of that the other day, making people look at it!

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 2802 posts Report Reply

  • Dylan Reeve,

    Grant I can't be bothered quoting, but let's take a real-world example. I found Destiny's 'Enough is Enough' marches a couple of years ago to be very offensive - along with the whole opposition of Civil Union legislation. I would have had no objection to the council banning Destiny from their march (well, actually I would have, in what that ban represents, but I'd have been happy to see Tamaki's idiots stay at home).

    The sentiment behind 'Enough is Enough' was not in the majority of society I don't believe. Would you have been happy for the council to just say no to them? I certainly don't think it was appropriate for a bunch of dicks in black t-shirts to block the country's busiest business district with their hateful shouting.

    I also find the guy who stands on Queen Street on Friday nights yelling at the top of his lungs that people are going to hell (not 'people' generally, but actually directed at individuals walking past) to be incredibly offensive. Should the council be able to order him to piss off?

    As for breaking laws you see fit to break - yeah, that's probably a good thing really. We all have the right to break whatever laws we want, but have to be aware that there may be consequences. Civil disobedience often involves systematically flouting laws which are being protested. Or other laws which may impact the ability to protest.

    Auckland • Since Aug 2008 • 262 posts Report Reply

  • Idiot Savant,

    Let me guess: You agree with Family Fist that the judge's ruling was the Bill of Rights trampling all over societal decency? And in your utopia there would be no guaranteed freedom of expression, only that which was judged to be "morally acceptable" by the Office of Public Decency or some-such?

    Please. Ministry for the Prevention of Vice and Promotion of Virtue.

    Palmerston North • Since Nov 2006 • 1668 posts Report Reply

  • Paul Campbell,

    I disagree - IMHO the response to speech you don't like is not to ban it but to make more speech - tell Destiny (and the rest of the country) that they're full of it - the counter protest was exactly the right way to handle it

    Mind you if you really want to get rid of something like BoB that thrives on the publicity it gets probably the best thing to do is not to fan the flames but to starve it of oxygen - ignore it

    Dunedin • Since Nov 2006 • 2200 posts Report Reply

  • Geoff Lealand,

    Or Hamilton.

    [somwhat belatedly..] eh???

    Screen & Media Studies, U… • Since Oct 2007 • 2342 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia,

    No, Craig. The city council is completely justified in attempting to block pornography. If you do not think a porn producer organising porn stars to ride topless down the main street in Auckland is pornography then you're ... well .. you're just lost.

    Grant: I'm really trying to resist joining the pile on here, but you're making it damn hard. What I really get lost with -- being one of these cranks for whom words actually have meanings -- is the idea that "pornography" can be dumbed down into your morass of po-mo Puritanism. (Still, if the sight of a bare tit is pornography, then someone should tell Pope Benedict XVI that the Vatican Museums and Art Collections are crawling with filth.) I'm not going to resort to a childish "grow up", but I'm really unwilling to engage with someone whose idea of discussion is an unpleasant cocktail of self-righteous hectoring and utter incoherence.

    And as a sidebar Russell, can I draft the press release that Public Address is recruiting 'normal' women into a lifestyle of Sapphic perversion with free coffee. Your toaster oven is in the mail, Agent Brown.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12073 posts Report Reply

  • Grant Dexter,

    Dylan. I think your questions are irrelevant. Had the council acted to try and stop Destiny or the street preacher then it seems they would have to go through the same channels and would have met the same ruling. So my disapproval of council action is not the issue. The point I entered this thread on is that a council should be able to rule on such trivial matters as they see fit. If they cannot then there seems little point in having a council. Do you have a comment on that?

    As to civil disobedience .. I disagree with your use of the term 'right'. I would have said 'ability'. There does come a time when the law of the land is perverted and it is time to stand up and say, "Enough!" In a democracy, of course, such action will only ever likely be taken by minority groups (If the majority disapproves of the law they simply vote in someone who says they will change it enough times till it gets changed enough to satiate the masses ;). So unless they (civil dis-obey-ers) are extremely well funded or extremely dedicated there is little chance that anything will happen other than a few arrests...

    Taipei, Taiwan • Since Mar 2007 • 256 posts Report Reply

  • Grant Dexter,

    Craig, you're entitled to your opinion, I guess, as ludicrous as it is...

    When porn stars, employed by a porn maker, ride down a street topless I consider it pornographic. Unless you have some definition of what pornography is that excludes this example then my opinion is perfectly valid.

    Taipei, Taiwan • Since Mar 2007 • 256 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    There is an audience for that sort of thing (pregnancy porn) who would probably be keen to get something unique, and the woman involved was keen.

    Pregnancy porn only involves the consenting grown-ups, though. And I don't see any real difference between a woman posing nude pregnant or not, although you could say there's a particular sexuality to pregnancy.

    Childbirth porn -- and to be honest I have no idea whether it's really even a genre or just something Crow tried to do once -- crosses a line for me though, big time.

    I just don't like Crow at all, in part because he teamed up with one of my other least favourite people, the corrosive conspiracy nut Jonathan Eisen, to make the stupid Uncensored magazine. Whose launch Crow used to try and make an issue of the fact that the chief censor and his deputy happened to be gay.

    Just your standard fucking wanker, basically.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 19116 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia,

    Craig, you're entitled to your opinion, I guess, as ludicrous as it is...

    Oh, Grant... You're really not getting the whole
    "discussion" thing, are you? You're right, everyone else is wrong and acting in bad faith. Not really any point in taking this any further.

    Thanks for playing, I guess.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12073 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia,

    Pregnancy porn only involves the consenting grown-ups, though. And I don't see any real difference between a woman posing nude pregnant or not, although you could say there's a particular sexuality to pregnancy.

    I don't if it's a 'sexuality' per se, but there was a very good reason why that Vanity Fair cover featuring a heavily pregnant Demi Moore pushed a hell of a lot of buttons. Sorry if this sounds wanky, but we place pregnancy and childbirth in a really complex and emotionally fraught matrix of cultural and social associations. And to be blunt, I really think it was a wee bit disingenuous of all concerned to pretend that there were people who felt squicky about a naked, heavily pregnant woman being presented on the cover of a magazine famous for glitzy celebrity portrait covers.

    Images of the Madonna suckling the Infant Jesus was not exactly uncommon imagery in Renaissance art, and perhaps it's all the bloody Art History courses I've done but anyone who'd find that a sexual turn on is just perverse.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12073 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    I'm pissed (and the reason I've been staying out of this is that I get very, very pissy) that nobody, on either side, appears to be interested in what the women on the bikes think. We've legalised prostitution, but not done a lot about, y'know, respecting sex workers. Treating them like individual human beings, and not extensions of Steve Crow.

    Fair point. Although the original post was about the principle of the judge's decision, rather than what the performers think. And Crow is the one talking about that.

    The more I examine my thoughts on this, the more I think I'm making aesthetic judgements. BoB = tacky and predictable commercial dodge by a known jerk. Hero Parade = grand community naughtiness after dark, with way better costumes.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 19116 posts Report Reply

  • Michael Savidge,

    I think there's a couple of points being missed here. Firstly, Grant is obviously exhibiting the signs of a primitive education. Where do you highly educated folk get off calling him names like dick and grunt. Y'all been spending too much time over on the dark side.

    Secondly, I'm surprised (or a bit sheepish if it's already been mentioned) that no-one's spotted Grant as an obvious plant to enliven__somebody's__ hit-rate.

    Somewhere near Wellington… • Since Nov 2006 • 319 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia,

    The more I examine my thoughts on this, the more I think I'm making aesthetic judgements. BoB = tacky and predictable commercial dodge by a known jerk. Hero Parade = grand community naughtiness after dark, with way better costumes.

    Hey, you're probably right -- and I really should lighten up or Mr Dexter, because isn't he doing the same thing but not being honest about it?

    BTW, I just got a lovely e-mail from a (female) friend who caught sight of the filthy Jezabels while walking to a meeting. She said that the pair of breasts she caught sight of were so "gross and obviously fake" (her words not mine) she felt like thanking Steve Crow for reminding her why she loves her body, loves her life, and loves the sweetie-pie (my words not hers) that she's engaged to. Which is about the right 'tude to take, as far as I can see.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12073 posts Report Reply

  • giovanni tiso,

    She said that the pair of breasts she caught sight of were so "gross and obviously fake" (her words not mine) she felt like thanking Steve Crow for reminding her why she loves her body, loves her life, and loves the sweetie-pie (my words not hers) that she's engaged to.

    Fake tits: is there anything they cannot do?

    Wellington • Since Jun 2007 • 7412 posts Report Reply

  • giovanni tiso,

    I'm resisting a temptation to link to the Italian coverage of the event, but I shall point out the delicious alliteration and rhyming of "Tette su motociclette". Chapeu, unsigned press agency person.

    Wellington • Since Jun 2007 • 7412 posts Report Reply

  • Grant Dexter,

    Craig, lighten up, mate. :)

    We both have opinions. We disagree. Shall we talk about something else now?

    Michael, did you just call me a hit man? :rotfl:

    Taipei, Taiwan • Since Mar 2007 • 256 posts Report Reply

  • Grant Dexter,

    Wait .. whose hit rate are you referring to? :noid:

    Taipei, Taiwan • Since Mar 2007 • 256 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 6 7 8 9 10 13 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.