Germaine Greer mocks Steve Irwins Death

[Papewaio]

In her column in The Guardian newspaper, Greer said the wildlife warrior displayed the "sort of self-delusion it takes to be a real Aussie larrikin".

"There was no habitat, no matter how fragile or finely balanced, that Irwin hesitated to barge into," she wrote. "Every creature he brandished at the camera was in distress."

Ms Drear has been parading around on her high horse again thinking that she was doing a Lady Godiva when she is yet again looking like the Emperor with his new clothes. Attacking Steve Irwin after he is dead is cowardly and just shows her true colours. Feeling a spate of the cultural cringe she has gone down the path of serving her own ego.


AS glowing tributes and praise for Steve Irwin filled newspapers and television screens around the world, fellow Australian Germaine Greer launched a distasteful tirade on the much-loved Crocodile Hunter yesterday.

Most London papers carried sympathetic news articles, features, columns and obituaries mirroring the disbelief felt in Australia.

But Greer launched a scathing attack on Irwin, declaring "the animal world has finally taken its revenge".

In her column in The Guardian newspaper, Greer said the wildlife warrior displayed the "sort of self-delusion it takes to be a real Aussie larrikin".

"There was no habitat, no matter how fragile or finely balanced, that Irwin hesitated to barge into," she wrote. "Every creature he brandished at the camera was in distress."

"The animal world has finally taken its revenge, but probably not before a whole generation of kids in shorts seven sizes too small has learned to shout in the ears of animals with hearing 10 times more acute than theirs, determined to become millionaire animal-loving zoo owners in their turn."

London's The Daily Telegraph dubbed Irwin "a bloody good bloke" and likened him to Bob Geldof for pledging his own money to save endangered creatures.

The Sun gave half its front page to a photo of Irwin and quoted British botanist David Bellamy saying: "I had a good cry when I heard the terrible news. Why did it happen to such an important and talented guy?"

Even the staid Financial Times ran an obituary, noting Irwin's "accessible approach marked a distinct break from the more didactic style of earlier generations of nature presenters".

[lancelot]

"There was no habitat, no matter how fragile or finely balanced, that Irwin hesitated to barge into," she wrote. "Every creature he brandished at the camera was in distress."

Perhaps...but also the untold amounts he rescued/cared for etc etc

[Xiahou]

Perhaps...but also the untold amounts he rescued/cared for etc etc
He also regularly went out of his way to avoid physical stress or damage to animals- especially his crocs. I also remember him speaking out against using those "grabber" sticks for trapping/handling snakes as he said they were too stressfull/harmful to them- which was why he used his hands. Others force a snake's head into the ground using the grabber, then squeeze it hard around the head to pick it up- all Steve did was hold their tail. For crocs, he was extremely picky about what tools and containers were used for transport and capture of rescued crocs. It seems to me that the author didn't spend much time watching his show to leap to these conclusions... :book:

[Don Corleone]

And her ever-so-tasteful column was in the Guardian.... shocker.... :dizzy2:

I hate to say it, when it comes to trash and red meat, the Sun's got nothing on the Guardian, except maybe the target hothead they appeal to.

[Slyspy]

Greer is a bitter old stick who is best ignored.

[IrishArmenian]

Proper bich, that woman. Why mock someone in deth? Her dishonour is shocking. She is a terrible person who is adding insult to injury.

[Strike For The South]

Steve Irwin is a hero.

[Mooks]

Only cowards write about what they think of someone just when they die.

[Lemur]

South Park (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBwRE4bo30o) was there way ahead of Miss Greer. And they were funnier about it.

There does seem to be a curse of South Park. A lot of people they've lampooned have gone down hard. Saddam, Tom Cruise, Mel Gibson ...

[Pannonian]

And her ever-so-tasteful column was in the Guardian.... shocker.... :dizzy2:

And the previous day contained a tribute to Irwin.



I hate to say it, when it comes to trash and red meat, the Sun's got nothing on the Guardian, except maybe the target hothead they appeal to.
The Guardian's noted for fielding the widest range in opinion pieces of any UK daily.

[Ja'chyra]

Attacking Steve Irwin after he is dead is cowardly and just shows her true colours.


Only cowards write about what they think of someone just when they die.



Well, that depends, did she air the same or similar views before he died, if not then it is indeed cowardly.

[ezrider]

Thats feminists for you. Steve Irwin was a mans man, and an Australian. Basically a perfect hate figure for Greer and her ilk.

[Mooks]

Let me rephrase my earlier post

Only cowards insult a person only after they die.

[yesdachi]

To wait for someone to die then badmouth them is pretty lame.

[Big King Sanctaphrax]

I would much rather Germaine Greer had been killed by a Stingray than Steve Irwin.

[Don Corleone]

The Guardian's noted for fielding the widest range in opinion pieces of any UK daily.

:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4::laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4::laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4::laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4::laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4::laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4::laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4::laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4::laugh4: :laugh4:

[Pannonian]

:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4::laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4::laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4::laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4::laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4::laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4::laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4::laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4::laugh4: :laugh4:
Explain?

[yesdachi]

I would much rather Germaine Greer had been killed by a Stingray than Steve Irwin.
Steve Irwin would probably say the same thing. :beam:

[GoreBag]

Whatever. Let her say what she wants. Is it any less cowardly to speak well of a man after he's died?

[Mooks]

Whatever. Let her say what she wants. Is it any less cowardly to speak well of a man after he's died?

No. Insulting a dead man is like argueing with a dead person, you cant. Irwin cant defend himself, and she knows that. Thats why she is doing it while he's dead and not a few months ago.

[GoreBag]

No. Insulting a dead man is like argueing with a dead person, you cant. Irwin cant defend himself, and she knows that. Thats why she is doing it while he's dead and not a few months ago.

Germaine can't make much of a defence, either, while you bash away electronically.

[Tribesman]

Explain?
Don't be silly pannonian , it doesn't matter if they have opinion pieces from a very wide range of people with completely opposing viewpoints .
If they publish an opinion piece that you don't agree with then it means ....... when it comes to trash and red meat, the Sun's got nothing on the Guardian, except maybe the target hothead they appeal to....OK, simple isn't it .

[naut]

Thats why Germaine Greer is Australia's best export, we never wanted the ditch and kicked her out. She is such a old bag of hot wind.

Also.

"There was no habitat, no matter how fragile or finely balanced, that Irwin hesitated to barge into," she wrote. "Every creature he brandished at the camera was in distress."
Was Steve Irwin the wildlife expert or was she? I think it was Irwin was it not ... so she can stick a flippin' mumble mumble ...

[Idaho]

Explain?
Don't be silly pannonian , it doesn't matter if they have opinion pieces from a very wide range of people with completely opposing viewpoints .
You know full well Tirbesman that having a range of opinions is very scary to right-wingers. They might see nasty things written that they don't aggree with. Better for them to look at sources they know they will agree with before they even start reading :idea2:

[Ja'chyra]

Whatever. Let her say what she wants. Is it any less cowardly to speak well of a man after he's died?

Good point, I thought exactly the same thing when Dianna died.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Explain?
Don't be silly pannonian , it doesn't matter if they have opinion pieces from a very wide range of people with completely opposing viewpoints .
If they publish an opinion piece that you don't agree with then it means ....... when it comes to trash and red meat, the Sun's got nothing on the Guardian, except maybe the target hothead they appeal to....OK, simple isn't it .

Or it means they are even-handed an fair journalists, I mean, that is a posibility.

Regardless attacking someone once they're dead is just:

Stupid

Cowardly

In bad taste.

[Pannonian]

Or it means they are even-handed an fair journalists, I mean, that is a posibility.

That might be why the Grauniad keeps winning awards which are voted for by other journalists.



Regardless attacking someone once they're dead is just:

Stupid

Cowardly

In bad taste.
Nonetheless, the Guardian's noted for airing opinions from every corner of the political mainstream, and it can't be denied that dislike of Irwin is part of the Australian mainstream. Eg. the editorial line for the Iraq invasion was that it might be a good idea but there were quibbles with the reasoning, but opinion pieces came from Neocon notables as well as anti-war protestors. As long as it's not too far out, one should be able to find stuff in the Guardian to enjoy or outrage in isolation, if one looks hard enough.

It should also be noted that the piece appeared in the G2 supplement, which is notorious for being, well, less sober than the main section. While the main section wins journalism awards every year, it's safe to say that the other qualities won't be imitating the style and tone of G2 anytime soon.

[Silver Rusher]

I'm not sure I agree with all this stuff about her attacking Irwin in death is cowardly. Come on, think of the reaction she would have had had she done it when he was alive compared to when he is dead? It's shocking. It's twisted. It's wrong. Showing no sympathy for such a great person etc. If she did it when he was alive, people would just read it, say 'pff what a silly woman' then move on. There would be no uproar at all about it. I'm not saying I agree with anything she says but I can tell you it must take a hell of a lot of guts to write and publish something like that.

[master of the puppets]

pfft, shes a bitch, steve irwin was great, he turned a generation of young kids onto learning of the enviroment, (had a lot of appeal laking in mutual omahas) pesonally, in life i laughed and yes mocked, how he would some day be eaten by a croc. yet now in death we have to realise what a good guy he was. and how he never intentionally harmed a animal as bad as the bitch has tried to harm the self asteem of the world.

[Don Corleone]

I've read the Independent and the Times. I've read my personal favorites (big surprise) the Daily Telegraph and honestly, even though it's a bit lefty for me, I find the Financial Times to be high quality. Plenty of Left leaning opinions in the above papers, but I find them to be of quality. Why? They know how to keep the editorials to the editorial page. Now, here's my opinion of a condensed summary of the Guardian:


Today, 4 Asian gentlemen were harassed and emotionally brutalized by police when they were asked for their passports. Their civil rights were violated when the fascist police actually asked them why their visas were expired. Calls from The Guardian Staff to the local police station over whether the officers involved were terminated immediately went unanswered.

Highs will be a full 2 degrees C over the norm for today, proving once again that global warming is here, irreversible and that it is all the fault of American industry.

Later today, the detestable war criminal, Generalissimo Bush will give a speech in which he will announce plans to terminate puppies and schoolchildren, though he'll most likely cloak it in some language about a Health and Human Services spending increase. But as usual, his diatribe of lies is pathetically transparent, and the real story is the death of thousands of poor and immigrant children and pets.

Now, for today's editorials: "Why America sucks", "How America sucks", "America sucks so bad, it needs another 9/11", and finally "Our friend, Osama and the important work he has left to do in the land of suckiness". Please note, the Guardian is editorially neutral and takes no credit for the views of it's writers, though we have to agree, America sucks.

Heck, the Daily Worker comes off as bit shy and reticent in comparison. I don't have an issue with opinions different than my own. I have a problem with 1) the lack of ability to keep the editorializing out of the stories and 2) the anger and vitriol the Guaridan seems to expresse constantly.

[Big King Sanctaphrax]

I've read my personal favorites (big surprise) the Daily Telegraph

You're going to need some natty tweeds and a sizeable estate if you want to fit in with the rest of its readership. ~;)

[Tribesman]

I've read my personal favorites (big surprise) the Daily Telegraph
Do you find that the telegraph has declined in quality quite a bit over the past couple of years , even before all that takeover trouble ?

You're going to need some natty tweeds and a sizeable estate if you want to fit in with the rest of its readership.
Damn, time I updated the wardrobe then .

[Don Corleone]

Declined in quality? No. Please understand, I don't read all of the above papers on a regular basis. With a typical 60 hour workweek, this would be impossible. But I find the Daily Telegraph has become more limited in the time that I've been occasionally reading it, about 6 years. Now granted, they might have jumped on the post 9/11 hyper news bandwagon and slowly drifted back to normal, but I find that the Daily Telegraph is very focused and for a finanical paper, does not always do the greatest job of inquiring as to the 'why' of the financial trends they're detailing. I guess you could call that more limited quality, but to me, quality is a broad term that begins with the ability to 1) keep your stories and your editorial page separate 2) at least try to maintain a semblance of neutrality and 3) limit the number of 'unnamed sources', or 'high placed sources', etc.... Anonymous leaks turn newspapers into nothing more than a "Psst, Heloise" gossip column. If a paper can pull the first 3 off, I can forgive a lot, including a limited sphere of inquiry.

[Tribesman]

Nice reply Don , however .....With a typical 60 hour workweek, this would be impossible....you want to get yourself a decent job .

[Pannonian]

Declined in quality? No. Please understand, I don't read all of the above papers on a regular basis. With a typical 60 hour workweek, this would be impossible. But I find the Daily Telegraph has become more limited in the time that I've been occasionally reading it, about 6 years. Now granted, they might have jumped on the post 9/11 hyper news bandwagon and slowly drifted back to normal, but I find that the Daily Telegraph is very focused and for a finanical paper, does not always do the greatest job of inquiring as to the 'why' of the financial trends they're detailing. I guess you could call that more limited quality, but to me, quality is a broad term that begins with the ability to 1) keep your stories and your editorial page separate 2) at least try to maintain a semblance of neutrality and 3) limit the number of 'unnamed sources', or 'high placed sources', etc.... Anonymous leaks turn newspapers into nothing more than a "Psst, Heloise" gossip column. If a paper can pull the first 3 off, I can forgive a lot, including a limited sphere of inquiry.
The Telegraph is notorious for focusing its stories on a narrow editorial line, hence its nickname th "Torygraph". There was a story last year in the main section about how Germany was forcing the unemployed to work in brothels or have their benefits cut off. As it turned out, the story was almost entirely made up, being debunked by Snopes itself, about as truthful as the Amir Taheri piece about badges for Jews. While that was an extreme example of taking a rumour, building layers of supposition onto it and reporting it as fact in the main section, the Telegraph is known for its pervasive Tory (not Conservative) bias, which leads to sloppiness when it comes to reporting current affairs. One of the plusses which even journalists from other newspapers acknowledge about the Guardian is its promptness in responding to complaints, with an editor specifically assigned for that and a regular column covering the failings of the newspaper. They've even published a collection of the most unfortunate errors.

Among the dailies, the Financial Times is indeed by some distance the best quality. However, it's not regarded as a mainstream paper, perhaps because its price is about twice that of the next quality.

[Scurvy]

2) at least try to maintain a semblance of neutrality and 3

alot of papers relly on their political byass to attract a readership, the rest i agree with entirely though

[Don Corleone]

When I'm overseas for business, the foreign editions of the WSJ and the Financial Times are typically all I read (or have time to, for that matter). Between the two, you draw a nice line down the middle and both papers do an excellent job of examining the interdynamics between economic and politcal causes/conditions in world events. My personal reading habits are really way off topic, however. My only point was that I find the Guardian trashy not because of their editorial slant, but because of how they allow it to imbue every page of their paper.

Scurvy, you're absolutely right a lot of papers have a slant to gain a following. I'd argue ALL papers do at some level. WHat bothers me is when papers claim they don't and also when they don't do a good job separating the news and the opinion. The Guardian is so bad in this one regard, I'd argue they no longer need an editorial page.

And, for the record, finding one hundred people that hate the West and sympathize with Al-Queda for fifty different reasons is not breadth of opinion in my book.