I've been forced to have a small hiatus on here as my bloody computer has been playing up all week. But as it is now running OK, I can post a few things that have been going on this last week; but was unable to comment on as my laptop, like all other computers - hates me. Pretty much everyone knows that Wayne Rooney, a sort of northern Mr Potato Head, crossed with a dented mirrors reflection of Shreks face - has been caught paying "wannabee WAG" Jennifer Thompson, as well as other girls too - over a grand for casual sex and threesomes. This has unsurprisingly caused a bit of a stir. Rooney is married to Coleen obviously, and she is of course expecting his child. It has cemented the opinion of many that footballers are overpaid women haters who use their knobs to double up as a brain. Miss Thompson herself has come under the spotlight also. She comes from a privileged background, with a father who is high up in the oil business, as well as attending Lords independent, a small prestigious private school in Bolton. This causes a schizoid response in the press, and is the reason for my post, I actually think the story is more depressing than interesting.
I was interested by a headline from Bel Mooney, the Mails agony aunt, who penned the article with the following rhetorical question:
The article itself is not quite the snobbish class fest it appears. It's pretty depressing that for all the advances in women's rights, girls are succumbing to a world that feeds into some of the basest level of misogyny in our supposedly more enlightened times. There is also the concerns of their physical and psychological welfare. I can't imagine that anyone could be really happy within themselves at this kind of thing. I don't dispute Bels sentiment in that regard. It is the underlying assumptions in the headlines. There is a potent undercurrent in the likes of the Mail with stuff like this, that being middle class; or what is termed being from "a respectable family" (the game often gets given away) means you are automatically morally better off, not just financially. This is bull, and I find it is patronising to the many hard working working class people who want the best for theme selves and their families too. It must be a shock to see that an affluent background doesn't always seem to guarantee a strong moral calibre. There is also no strong negative correlation between family income and lower levels of casual sex / sexual partnerships. Middle class kids can and do go off the rails too, it ain't always a working class game. I'd arguably say that some middle class kids are more vulnerable to having rebellious phases of booze and Skins parties, especially if they have weak parents who can stump up the cash to fund this lifestyle. Working class kids often have less leisure time and have to take up employment earlier than their better off counterparts, denting the time and cash they have to pursue such a lifestyle. She apparently built up her circuit base in Bolton's largest nightclub J2. This requires access to at least some easy cash supply. It's not like stuff like this is new anyway. Many women of all levels of society, and from pretty much any time period you care to mention have found that wealthy men, and ugly men with cash will pay handsomely in lavish places to get their rocks off. It's not all impoverished women in back alleyways having sex for 50 quid a shot to survive. Now I'm certainly not condoning prostitution as a career option, not at all. Prostitution is very risky to the [for the purpose of this argument] women herself. Their is the risk of STD's and STD transmission. Sex work can often put prostitutes in the orbit of criminal circles etc. However Jennifer is not the first women to discover that pussy can translate to poundsigns.
There we are. It's also interesting to see that she appears to be the guiltier party of the two [Rooney and herself] if we take into account of the press coverage. But that is another story.
No comments:
Post a Comment