November 05, 2004
Political Web Poo Fight 2004 Continues
It’s good to see the inter-blog war is continuing at great pace. Quite frankly, I suspect us Filthy Lesbian Communist Tree-Huggers ® have been itching for a good fight ever since the schmozzle that was the Federal Election - Miranda Airey-Branson proved to be a suitable punching bag. And she’s certainly taken a virtual battering in the past few days. Note to Miranda - despite how insightful and sexy and amusing you and your Young Liberal chums might find yourself, if you’re only after positive and affirming feedback from close friends then perhaps sticking your full name and unflattering photos of yourself online isn’t the best idea.
I am hesitant to mock her appearance (although the horse-riding images that have emerged certainly do hammer home that whole “Mumsy and Daddy pay for my pony lessons and vote Liberal, tah-rah!” vibe) but this is mostly because - as a few people have already said - her writing is so hilariously awful, there’s no need to go for other material.
Miranda’s boyfriend Alexander Lew has weighed in on the debate, with a post titled Who Framed Miranda Airey-Branson. I assume this is meant to evoke images of Miranda as a poor, innocent and unfairly targeted Upstanding Young Liberal Lady. Well, either that or Roger Rabbit. In any case, since she admits she handed out the dodgy How To Vote cards (dressed in green, etc) I can’t quite understand how she’s been “framed”. Or is it that the lefty blogging world’s dislike of her website ramblings constitutes “framing”, in which case I’m forced to wonder how? It’s not as though someone else wrote the posts under her name. Perhaps her biggest mistake was thriving on notoriety and creating a long trail of idiocy for any curious blogger with the ability to use Google to uncover.
One quick question - I’m no lawyer (or a Melbourne Law School student) but surely personal opinion doesn’t justify a lawsuit? I mean - hypothetically speaking - if I read Miranda’s now-defunct blog and thought “Wow, what a sad, pathetic, bigoted, wannabe-hip, unfunny young woman” and mentioned it on ausculture.com, surely that wouldn’t warrant legal action? From what I can tell, the comments on Ms Fits’ site (and others, like Ben Butler’s, Darp’s, Alex White’s, Graham’s, SjuSju’s or the delightful Rob Corr’s) appear to be opinion and the odd heckle, but surely that’s free speech? It’s not as though anyone’s accusing her of sexing her horses in bestial porn fashion, or having a drug habit - it’s merely feedback (albeit negative) on many of her banal musings on her (public) website.
Anyhoo, I’m looking forward to see how this continues to unfold. Miranda & Co are talking about contacting Channel 9 regarding Ms Fits’ harsh words (which seems odd, considering that as far as I know - and admittedly, I don’t know much ‘bout much - Ms Fits doesn’t work for Channel 9, let alone as a screenwriter for McLeod’s Daughters), and they’re also trying to make us “moonbats” feel guilty about mocking Miranda’s “humorous quasi-fictional writing”. Again, I find this quite odd - I read all of Miranda’s blog before it was taken down hastily on Wednesday night and can assure you all that I found nothing which appeared even vaguely “humorous” on there. Unless, you know, you’re the type who titters in amusement any time you see a woman with short hair chatting to another girl - HAHAHAHA look at the lesbians! Fat, hairy, man-hating lesbians! Comedy gold!
Later - I feel I should clarify something I said above regarding the humorous content of Airey-Branson’s blog. It actually IS completely hilarious, and quite honestly, every one of my pot-smoking feral hippy ribs were tickled. I busted my own gut, and the gut of several co-workers. Then I realised it wasn’t satire.
Posted by Jess at November 5, 2004 11:17 AM— Filed under Common
Comments / Trackbacks (URI)
i’m starting a hockey/mooting team called the Filthy Lesbian Communist Tree-Huggers (that is if sara can negotiate an intellectual property agreement with jess for use of the name) and we’re gonna go “on tour”!
but from the behaviour of MAB and co, the two cents team will be hiding in the bushes, too scared to play.
onya sara for the legal schpiel - i understand the AEC are pretty weak at enforcing the misleading provisions of the electoral act, but similar publications were ruled misleading in WA in the lead up to the election.
Reply to this
You play hockey? My god, why don’t you just go muff diving! Christ, you’re a flaming lezzo! I bet you don’t shave your legs! Can you even be bothered finding a good Liberal man, or are you too distracted by your lesbionic sporting commitments?! Erm. Not that I’ve been unduly influenced by MAB-Two Cents-Proud To Be Right’s rants.
You may indeed use the name (if the uniform clearly displays the message “Emotionally Sponsored By Ausculture.com”). FACT! I used to play hockey. I never learnt the rules but I quite enjoyed hunting down toffy private school girls and hacking at their ankles with a stick.
Reply to this
oh yes my wordy indeed! give me a sport where the ladies wear netball skirts and “bloomers” and have to bend over 80% of the time! give me a sport where you have a good reason to hack at prissy girls’ ankles with a stick! and where drooling from your mouth guard might be interpreted as “i think you’re hot”… and then there was that time that i “bumped” into my hockey team mate in the bathrooms in a certain club…
we’d LVOE to be emotionally sponsored by you - now that the ausculture brand is getting out and about we’d be proud to fly your banner!
what? Liberal men? i think i spilt an entire bottle of red wine on one once…
and MAB will be happy to know, my “special lady friend” actually waxed my legs last night! i don’t know WHAT is going on with my sexuality these days…
sjusju
ps muff diving is my second sport - how did you guess? but i won’t be a-flaming unless family fist get their metho-soaked hands on me…
Reply to this
Hockey, eh? I’ll expect you’ll be in Albury around Easter time, then… Reminds me of that bit in Surfer Rosa.
Reply to this
What if you shipped all your Liberals to the Biblebelt-Jesus States and let the American conservatives have a go at them. Due to our egocentric views of the world (along with our insanely high stupidity and ignorance percentages), I’m sure they’ll only be confused about the whole being branded a Liberal on the outside, but having the chewy Conservative-right-winged nougat center on the inside. Watch’em hicks make those Libbys squeal like piggies!
Then they can breed and have web-toed children, and the world will be a beautiful place.
I’d like to add, that I thoroughly enjoy your site. Ohhh, don’t really like the asskissing, but…can’t…seem…to….stop.
Reply to this
Virtual rimjobs do wonderful things for my sensitive Piscean nature, so please - feel free to arse kiss away! At least till I get all coy and humble and shucks-y!
You know, I actually am surprised that George W. has been clever enough to realise our Liberals aren’t the same as his “liberals”. I wish someone could convince him that Johnny actually is a filthy Democrat-sympathising leftie - it’d be thoroughly enjoyable watching Howard get more and more broken hearted as Dubya stopped returning his calls.
“I don’t know if I’ve mentioned this before, but I’m very happy George W. Bush won the election. He’s someone I like very much. Very much. Please, George - just call me and let me know you - and “we” - are okay. I’ll give you whatever you want! You name the terms! Just like the FTA!”
Reply to this
Posted this at “two cents”; wonder when it’ll be deleted.
Oh, c’mon.
You have a slog at MAB’s critics (a highly personal and threatening one) and then don’t even allow comments.
Pathetic and cowardly.
You guys would LOVE Tim Blair’s blog. Same attitude; instead of banning comments, he and his host just delete anything they don’t agree with and ban the poster. So it’s a charming little sycophantic love-nest.
Meanwhile - “Although it takes a degree of hypersensitivity and over-conviction to be truly offended by mere opinions in black and white” from Miranda is stunningly hypocritical. Staggeringly, stunningly, mouth-openingly unbelievably hypocritical.
Hey, Miranda, where’s your blog gone?
Reply to this
“Miranda Airey-Branson is a well known 20 year old Farrago editor at Melbourne University. With a style reminiscent of Sex and the City and Bridget Jones’ Diary, Miranda has a cult following of dedicated readers.”
Haha! (Falls into a fit of giggles for hours) Holy shit this has got to be satire!
Reply to this
You know, honestly - I just re-read a cache of her blog and couldn’t help thinking that it really MUST be satire - she is SURELY taking the piss?
“Dedicated readers” - Five Melbourne-based Young Liberals and a shitload of heckling lefties. And we’re dedicated alright - dedicated to being completely shocked\appalled\amused by her idiocy!
Reply to this
By “framed”, I think she meant “caught”.
Reply to this
I’m “delightful” now? I suppose I can live with that.
By the way, whack Piss’n’Vinegar on your Miranda Panda bookmark list.
Reply to this
The Cooks
Hi Jess, remember me? You missed out on a great episode of The Cooks, Quite a few people, including media critics (three weeks in a row it has received “critics choice”) are starting to be less negative about it. I hate to say I told you so - but, I TOLD YOU SO. I guess it’s pointless going on about it with you when you don’t bother to watch it. Anyone else out there??? Oh Crystal?!?!
Reply to this
Hahahaha you are so obsessed and adorable.
Luckily I have an obsessive personality myself (or at least the kind of personality which enjoys milking jokes thoroughly dry) and I have already written about The Cooks.
Still think it’s poo. Mega poo. If it lived in the time of dinosaurs, it would be the Cooksisshiteosauraus.
Get your fix of heckling for today? C’mon, you know you wanted me to write the above rant. It’s what’s luring you back here after each episode! :P
I gotta admit the truth, Oscar - I actually don’t think about The Cooks all that much. In fact, I prefer watching the trashy-but-somehow-thrilling Murder Trail to even watching the show in order to heckle it. Still, I’m glad to hear that “real” critics (you know, the kind who get paid to give a shit, unlike some poor, unimportant and frankly useless blogger) are giving it the thumbs up. May their support keep you off the dole!
Reply to this
Buy your robosapien in time for Christmas. Don’t miss out.
Reply to this
Hear hear, Jess. And further to the ‘dish-it-out-but-can’t-take-it’… I am also a law student (but don’t take it out on me). Having commented on the witticisms on the Two Cents site about the legality of some of the antics that merry trio get up to, I expected to be showered with love and affection, or at the very least, a grudging thank you. But no. My post is deleted by a blog administrator. The reason why I have created a blog of my own. I’ve copied my comment in full.
And if you ever need any legal advice on what exactly constitutes defamation, I am happy to help out!!!‘Who Framed Miranda Airey-Branson?’, shrills the title of this post. This, I believe, is inaccurate. There was no framing. Your friend Miranda is her own worst enemy, and everything that has been said about her was brought upon by her own conduct.
Before I begin, I’d like to tell you about MY academic credentials (NOT that they mean that my opinion is more valid than that of anyone else. But since you have placed a high emphasis on Miranda’s, I thought I had better let you know). I also received dux of my high school in regional NSW. I came first in the State in English and am currently studying Arts/Law at Sydney. So, academically speaking, I would say that Miranda and I are about on par.
However, I would be ashamed and embarrassed to put my name to some of the misconceived posts on this site and that of Miranda herself (now taken offline, for some mysterious reason).
I will not comment on the posting about how lesbians are simply women who have failed to get a man. This kind of vicious rhetoric will hopefully be eradicated one day through education, and I will simply say that comments such as these hurt more than they help. Ironically, the women Miranda referred to probably view her as an object of pity – a woman who relies on a man in order to feel validated about her existence.
(Incidentally, I also find it interesting that a friend of Miranda’s, Joel, has posted on a blog that I enjoy immensely that “Miranda’s body image and sexuality have nothing to do with this”. If not, I suggest she stops writing about the body image and sexuality of others. She may see herself as a self-styled Carrie from Sex and the City, but I find her simply ignorant and offensive.)
I do not find Miranda’s opinions obnoxious because she waxes her legs, I find them obnoxious because she is bigoted, homophobic, and intolerant. Blinkered views such as these, while unfortunately being common in today’s society, are not acceptable. (Like the horse reference there? Blinkered? But I digress.)
The main focus of my reply is on the report in The Age about your behaviour on election day. Before I begin, I must make it plain that although I live in the seat of Wentworth, I am a staunch Labor supporter. But let us continue.
The facts appear to be: • You thrust green-coloured pamphlets at voters; • While wearing a green t-shirt; and • While braying ‘Voting Green?’ Surely you cannot disagree that doing so constitutes deceptive conduct? You clearly knew that the Greens, as a party, rely heavily on their branding (which, coincidentally, happens to be green!) Alternative remarks could have been ‘Concerned about the environment?’, or ‘Want to know how the Liberals are helping the environment?’ Whether or not anyone relied on the how-to-vote card you handed out is a moot point. The mere fact you did so should make you ashamed. From a moral viewpoint, this kind of behaviour is absolutely unacceptable.
It is also unacceptable from a legal standpoint. I would like to direct your attention to s329 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918, a section that deals with ‘Misleading or deceptive publications’ in an electoral context. Contravention of this section can result in a fine or imprisonment of up to six months. Clearly, the law takes a dim view of this kind of behaviour.
I can only imagine the response if, next election, some ALP supporters in your electorate print how-to-votes that say ‘Want a liberal government? Vote 1 Michael Danby!’ (Note use of ‘small-l’ liberal). Do you think this would be misleading and deceptive? Then I suppose you can imagine how Greens supporters feel about this matter.
I would also like to comment on the website’s defamation of a Member of Parliament, Michael Danby. Under s350 of the Act mentioned above, a person is guilty of an offence if the person makes or publishes any false and defamatory statement in relation to the personal character or conduct of a candidate. This would not apply if the person proves that he or she had a reasonable ground for believing, AND DID BELIEVE, the statement to be true. However, on your website, your disclaimer states clearly that you do not believe that Michael Danby abuses women, thus this defence does not apply to you.
Ultimately, IF a crime has been committed by Michael Danby the appropriate forum is in the judicial system, not your two-bit blog, you sneering churls.
As law students, you should know better.
My email address is ignorantpeopleupsetme@hotmail.com if you have any queries about what I have written.
Have a nice day.
Funnily enough, Sara - I meant to mention your post in the above rant. It was\is very good. Which means, of course, it had to be taken down.
I say that unless you’re willing to engage with readers, unless you’re willing to receive negative feedback rather than just congratulatory praise from friends, then disable comments on your blog. Or at the very least, get a LiveJournal where you can, I understand, grant access to only chums and keep big bad argumentative lefties away.
Beautifully put. It’s a pity they hauled that entry off Two Cents, a response would have made fascinating reading.