(Brief) Thoughts on Max Mosley and the superiority of the internet as a medium
We’ve been rather behind on this one. Originally, I’d ignored the whole fuss as another tabloid celebrity sales-orgy - until this excellent post by Jim Jepps. So, time to rectify my silence, I think.
It’s not a matter of free speech, as the News of the World claims. Very few claim that the paper shouldn’t be allowed to publish the story - if it’s true. What’s at stake here is privacy; which, as usual, the paper has very little respect for. To infiltrate someone’s house (or £35,000 dungeon, as the case may be…) and film them without permission represents a blatant invasion of that individual’s private space.
Nor does the story fall in the category of public interest usually used to justify such invasions. What an individual does behind closed doors, in private, is just that - a private activity. If that private activity happens to involve whips, chains and dangling pricks, then who else can judge? There’s little evidence to suggest that Mosley’s particular private predeliction affected his performance in public. And so, little evidence to suggest either the public or his employers had a desperate need to know of it.
Indeed, the fact Mosley can afford his £35,000 private spanking parlour perhaps suggests he’s doing perfectly well in his job, thankyouverymuch. (And, of course, that income tax isn’t progressive enough yet…)
So it’s not a matter of free speech or public interest - which is what’s concerning. The direction of media coverage throughout the case has been a tad depressing. As Hari asks - hadn’t we got over this sort of thing? Most people manage a, “none-of-my-business” shrug for an increasing number of sexual preferences. Why not BDSM? And, likewise, the very possible (and probably more relevant) discussion that could be had on prostitution has been conspicuously absent.
A very interesting discussion (which, unfortunately, I don’t have time to engage in tonight. Should do at some point though…) could be had on the ethics of power exchange in sex. I imagine the very phrase would have as a divisive an effect on a crowd of feminists as pornography. Is it a simple projection of patriarchal power structures, or a matter of sexual freedom? Or, indeed, possibly both at different times, in different circumstances…
But, of course, the real world finds itself stuck with a tabloid induced celebrity sales-orgy. Could there be an apter demonstration of the internet’s superiority that the contrast between the wood-pulp mush and Jim’s post?
Posted in: Evil Rich BASTARDS, Sexuality, The Internet, Wood-pulp
Spot on. I care if a politician is doing a lousy job, or if individuals in a company whose services I employ are acting irresponsibly. I care not what people like Mosley do behind closed doors (and, frankly, don’t thank the NotW for the mental image they gave the world).
It really is time we judged public figures on the merit of their performance in the public sphere, not on their sexual antics, however bizarre they may be.
Thanks for the kind words Douglas - they’re much appreciated