Skirting The Issue

Janet Jackson minutes before her unfortunate wardrobe malfunction that made news in 2004 Image credit: bbc.co.uk
Janet Jackson minutes before her unfortunate wardrobe malfunction that made news in 2004
Image credit: bbc.co.uk

My husband wants to become a member of the Jehovah Witness faith. Well he doesn’t really want to be one, but I think he likes the fact that they don’t concern themselves with a lot of the things that the rest of us get hot and bothered about.

Quite a few years ago when I couldn’t avoid being seen, I was detained by a group of proselytes – one of whom I knew. At the time, we were weeks away from an election and my husband asked the person if he was ready for voting day – to which he replied that they didn’t vote.

Now I don’t know if it was because he was with the other members and he was towing the party line, but had every intention of asking for some time off on voting day and making his way to the booth when nobody was looking. Because at the time I couldn’t fathom not casting my vote simply because I might later regret it.

I’ve since come to understand that one can be tempted not to vote, but those are for some entirely different reasons.

I think my husband has grown frustrated with the constant back and forth between opposing sides, and some operatives in the media who facilitate it. Then, when you become resigned to that modus operandi, they decide to change their own rules.

What really made him throw his hands in the air though concerned an incident involving a local “celebrity”, whose pictures were circulating quite heavily on social media. The photos weren’t vulgar, but they were quite embarrassing for the person concerned. It was the fodder for which most news outlets live.

The radio programme host declared however, that while he had seen the pictures (which had probably been sent to him multiple times), he was taking the decision not to discuss the incident at all.

There is at least one other issue surrounding it, so he’ll probably have to wear a skirt to avoid mentioning the one in question; but because the incident could have happened to his [insert relative here], he wasn’t going to address it, much less, take any calls.

I thought it seemed an admirable thing to do, because don’t we all have a [insert relative here] whom we wouldn’t like to see in an embarrassing situation?

But my husband wondered whether we should just look the other way and not talk about an issue because it could involve our father, mother, brother, sister or child. And this is coming from a person who has problems (as we all should), when the people who present the news don’t always get it right.

I’m thinking he has a point, because as far as I’m aware, the person who misused the funds that people invested, that other person who molested that child, and the one who padded his bill before presenting it to the government is somebody’s father, mother, brother, sister or child. Hopefully though, it’s not yours.

It never looks good when there’s an appearance of one rule for me and another for you – whether the issue is something as trivial as a wardrobe malfunction or something a little more serious.

But I guess he thought it was the honourable thing to do…. because nobody wants to be caught with his pants down.

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “Skirting The Issue

  1. In my opinion, whether or not to talk about poor decisions (and I say that to differentiate from illegal activities which are completely different), comes down to asking two questions: 1) did this bad decision affect [person’s name] ability to do their job? 2) are you paying them a\o trusting them with your children\pet\home? If the answer to either is no, than it is no one’s business but their own. If the answer is yes to both, then perhaps it needs to be discussed.

    1. Hi Allie P,
      Unfortunately you will be at a bit of a disadvantage because it’s a local situation.

      It wasn’t a “poor decision” on the person’s part, it was an unfortunate accident that most people saw and a greater number heard about. In other words, it happened in public.

      It wasn’t going to change anybody else’s life or affect their day, but given that our radio hosts discuss everything under the sun, trivial and important alike, the host’s decision went against the grain.

      But he did allude to it in passing, so I guess that’s mention enough. And most people would probably say that he came off looking better for it.

      However, in answer to your first query – the unfortunate accident showed that the person’s ability to perform the job given, could be called into question.

  2. in my opinion, i felt that a lot of people wasted too much unnecessary time on the issue. The incident, though embarrassing, shouldn’t be continuously slapped in the individuals face. You may have your own opinions and feelings about the said individual but that doesn’t make it right. And the continuous publishing of the incident could cause legal ramifications as well. The image and the alterations that some individuals have done to it can constitute defamation and these individuals can be sued. That is also why some people do not like to rehash these incidents which can cause controversy. I also found it very upsetting that the new newspaper “The Guardian’, owned by private individuals (basically UPP) have taken it upon themselves to use this outlet to incite political drama. The day after the incident half of the paper was littered with articles related to the incident, and the photo was on the cover! The Observer newspaper just made mention of the incident in one article and gave a little exposition, but did not pattern the entire paper to highlight the incident and declare their obvious distaste. I find it awful and distasteful that they would stoop to this level, and made the issue more big of a deal than it already is. We also have to take into consideration that he is old and hardly uses the lower part of his body as he sits most of the time. His wardrobe team may not have properly secured his trousers and maybe he wasn’t even expecting to walk, as provisions are usually made for wheelchairs in these instances. It was an unfortunate occurrence, but the way in which it has been presented and attacked is even more unfortunate. He could not control the situation.

    1. Hi Annetta,
      Thanks for your comment. I had heard that there was a newspaper that had published the pictures and I was not aware that this paper had even existed before the incident occurred. How’s that for marketing?

      It’s unfortunate that politics is as dirty as it is, because sometimes it means making your point at someone else’s expense and at the expense of good taste as well.

      However I’ve realized that it helps to be humble on your way up because people can be merciless when you’re coming back down.

Now it's your turn

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s