What goes around, comes around
Crikey. The newspapers and TV have been full of Steve 'I jump on animals' Irwin. All of us Down Under are apparently in shock about his death, but really, it comes as very little surprise. It was only a matter of time. How many dangerous animals could you piss off before one of them finally retaliated? Irwin always claimed to have a deep love for animals, but his bullying actions showed otherwise. Germaine Greer wrote a very good article about his death, no doubt for which she will be labelled as an unpatriotic harridan. 'Every creature he brandished at the camera was in distress,' she writes. 'The animal world has finally taken its revenge.'
Rest in peace, wildlife of the world.
Rest in peace, wildlife of the world.
5 Comments:
what happened to irwin reminds me of timothy treadwill and his argued abuse of grizzley bears. he too was eventually killed by them. do you really believe in 'what goes around, comes around' kate?
Yeah, I think so. Sounds like you don't, though! Am I right?
Hey Kate,
I actually feel really sad about Steve Irwin. I use to be the first to change the channel when his show came on but I have been absolutely amazed by the work he has done here in Australia and the world in the name of conservation. I also never knew of his incredible dedication to his family.
I'm disgusted by GG's comments - I can't help but think that her comments were more spurred more by her hatred of the Aussie larrikin figure and Irwin's purported friendship with John Howard. At the very least she could have waited for the family to at least grieve and bury the man before she staers decalring that he got what he deserved. Personally I think that Steve Irwin did more for the cause of conservation than GG has ever done for feminism.
I dunno about what goes around comes around - i do think that there are repercussions for all your actions and you should be prepared to take responsibilty for them.
I agree that GG's comments were not very kind and probably not what the family wanted to read in the morning papers. However, I don't agree that she was motivated by hatred for the Aussie larrikin (does she?) or his relationship with John Howard (her mentioning Howard was more about why Steve didn't get his dues for what he did in Antartica). I have always found Irwin's remarkable mistreatment of animals, not to mention his own offspring, on camera pretty shocking. It's true that he has contributed millions of dollars to conservation and for that he should be applauded. I guess in the end it's whether the end justifies the means. Is it OK to mistreat animals in order to raise money/people's interest? Or is there another way we can do it?
It's interesting to me too that we tend to glorify people after they die even if they weren't angels in real life. Maybe it's human nature to want to only remember the good things, while we go through the grieving process, which is completely understandable. Death is painful enough.
you ask a good question kate "Is it OK to mistreat animals in order to raise money/people's interest? Or is there another way we can do it?" if we didn't test on animals for example, we may not have all of the medical advances that we do today. does that mean its right? i'm not sure but i know that when i've been ill or someone close to me has, i sure am happy for the sacrifices those animals made. however animals (ducks in this example) used for foie gras is not ok to me. is this a double standard? and what about steve....he did teach millions of viewers things about wildlife. he did do some good things.
is it ok to hurt/kill a few living things in order to save thousands? when, if ever, is it necessary to put the majority over a minority?
oh and to answer your question, i don't think i believe in 'what goes around comes around'
コメントを投稿
<< Home