Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts

Thursday, 30 July 2020

Can ye believe it?

Once again, The Heggie Zone is kinda embarrassed to present and expanded & explained Twitter rant.
This one is on the linked article, entitled "Kanye West Is Publicly Struggling. We Need To Give Him Grace"
(source: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/elaminabdelmahmoud/kanye-west-mental-health-dangerous-media-narratives?bftwnews&utm_term=4ldqpgc#4ldqpgc)

A quote from Craig Jenkins included within reads
“The lack of context regarding his [bipolar] diagnosis...in coverage...
which questions the viability of the presidential bid
but never entertains the possibility that the man giving all the
outlandish pull quotes might not be doing so well right now,
illuminate our inability to step back and ponder the ethics
of the internet content mill…”
But is this even TRUE? How is there a lack of context?! I'm not American, I have never heard anything he's done BUT I know he's bipolar and super irresponsible about it.
West's struggles with Bipolar Disorder have been widely reported and discussed. It'd be like adding context that Stevie Wonder is blind - it is a really well-known factor. We all KNOW he's 'not doing so well' but he is deliberately putting himself out there to be seen.
He is also putting himself out there to be ELECTED. The press' ethics must be first and foremost concerned with protecting the public more than Kanye West.

My tweets in bold, copied directly from my feed 29/07/2020.

It's a challenging read but I can't say I fully agree with it. Mercy & compassion have their place but Kanye & HIS ENTIRE TEAM are guilty here of some f*ck*d up sh*t that negatively impacts anyone living with mental health issues.
Kanye West is not an individual, he is a person with EXTENSIVE management and a very famous family of in-laws. It seems that not one of them, let alone all in a unified action, is capable of 'controlling' the situation. Not that I blame Kim for example - but she's begging for understanding after the fact each time. I can understand she loves him... okay, I can't but I get her commitment to her marriage, but I don't understand why she is 'letting him do this' to himself, her, and their children. It's ultimatum time, dearie. Get help, step away from the limelight, or I take the kids and leave.
Most of us would be subjected to an intervention - and probably sectioning under the mental health act. If you had a meltdown at work your boss would (hopefully) send you home cos no way can you be doing this sh*t in front of customers / clients / members of the public / co-workers. But more than this, every negative bit of press Kanye-and-team whip up affects EVERY OTHER INDIVIDUAL WITH A MENTAL HEALTH DISORDER. He is perpetuating all the negative stereotypes of mental illness.

I feel it is wrong to blame the media for the media hungry Ye machine. They don't seem to be inaccurately, cruelly, or especially unkindly representing him. And plenty of similar speculation has been applied to Trump's incoherent ramblings. It's par for the presidential course.
The press aren't hunting out these stories - they're attending 'campaign rallies' and interviewing him (probably at invitation) to promote the albums he endlessly fails to deliver.
I have seen lots of articles questioning Trump's sanity, his 'fitness to lead', and speculating as to whether he's had a stroke. Now, whether or not Trump has a diagnosable disorder he is clearly several sandwiches short of a picnic. I am bothered by the stroke speculation as a brain injury does not necessarily make him 'unfit' although if it was covered up in his medical that's a pretty serious business.
Kanye cannot possibly expected to run for POTUS without speculation, analysis and criticism. Saying he should be exempted from such scrutiny on grounds of his well-publicised mental health problems is a really irresponsible stance that could theoretically help him into the White House!
It takes a lot for me to defend the press. But here they are not being intrusive, sensationalist, dishonest, manipulative... which is quite remarkable in and of itself. What they are is standing back and letting West rip himself apart. If you're asking "but should they?" how do you think journalism works?! Reporters don't start or end wars, they write up what is going on. Criticism is fair when they are unfair... but West's rants are his own.
And now he's running (however implausibly) for POTUS his instability becomes a matter of American National Security and needs to be reported as such.

IMHO Kanye risks making people believe that all bipolar people are... wildly unstable, incapable of holding responsibility etc. and that is TERRIBLE. The stigma of mental illness is bad enough without him taking it back DECADES.
The article keeps going on about Kanye's pain and trauma. We all have pain, we all have trauma, not all of us are bipolar but even those who are don't all act out so badly.
Mental health has long been taboo but headway has been made in recent years - so why is Kanye being encouraged / enabled / excused from f*ck*ng over every other person battling their demons?!
I am 'only' struggling with 30 years of depression but this angers me so much. People are mistreated, outcast, shunned, denied housing, denied work - and West, a bloody billionaire, is making their lives harder and causing people to be afraid of people with mental health problems.

What I think Kanye / his team *should* have done is take him down a Kate Bush style path - all the creativity, minimal public appearances. Let him have dignity in mystique. Especially after the first few meltdowns. NOT about hiding but saving him from himself.
At a time when Black Lives Matter is a major headline West is accusing Harriet Tubman of selling out black people, he has previously called slavery a choice. If he were anything but a Black person himself he would have been 'cancelled' by now! He says the most appalling things and is given a pass, time and time again, because of his diagnosis... but is it right to do so? Oddly enough you can be an asshole AND bipolar; the one does not necessarily stem from the other.
Being a creator does not mean you have to be constantly on stage, giving interviews, etc. You can release albums, even play concerts, but you don't need to keep talking shit. If this was his first major incident I would be more forgiving but at this point there have been MANY. You would think that the prior experiences would keep him on his medications and off his soap-box...

How can you treat Kanye as multiple people? Even if he had multiple personality disorder the 'man who knows what he's doing' is the same being who is saying these outrageous things. The same person who admits not taking his meds is running for POTUS. That CANNOT BE IGNORED.
This comment is particularly aimed at the following quote:
"The truth is you have to be rather callous to laugh at the unwell person
in front of you. But you don’t need that callousness
when you imagine it’s the West who knows what he’s doing,
the West who is immensely capable of processing his pain."
Can you actually run for POTUS without knowing what you are doing?! He knows he needs his meds, he knows what happens when he is off them, he knows he has embarrassed himself, humiliated his wife and offended his entire race several times before now... More to the point his extensive support team - managers, agents, assistants of every kind - know what he's doing and they are LETTING HIM. It is the moral equivalent of watching someone neck a bottle of vodka and then take their truck for a drive. THAT IS NOT ON THE PRESS.

Should the media be *accountable* in the articles they write about a misician [sic] having a spectacular and uninhibited public brain fart or should they be responsible and accurately represent a man who is running for the ultimate public office? Literally can't be both.
IF West was JUST promoting another undelivered album... no, even then - cos he's consciously, deliberately seeking promotion. This is not press intruding into Harvey Price's hospital room, unresearched speculation on royal doings, or any other number of invasive examples of sensationalist journalism.

If Kanye was a private individual, or an involuntary public figure like a royal or a WAG, I would totally agree that the media needs to step back... but there's a world of difference when the person you're writing about is actively courting publicity.
As I put a moment ago - royalty never asked for publicity, children and spouses (or other relatives) of celebrities shouldn't be hounded, used or abused for the sake of a story. But Kanye isn't an involuntary celebrity, he's not even a private celebrity - he is a courting publicity, letting it all hang out as publicly as possible celebrity. Even then, if he was a recording artist having a mental breakdown there'd be an argument that they should back off* but he's RUNNING FOR OFFICE.

*In the UK right now Johnny Depp is suing the press for calling him a wife-beater and Prince Harry & Meghan, Duchess of Sussex are also suing the press for unwarranted breaches of privacy. The press, as a whole, are SHIT. They don't back off, they hound people until they break. Then they make a big deal out of the obituaries. Kanye West is not being hounded - he is feeding them.

How exactly is the press supposed to address the negative depiction of someone battling mental illness when this is what they're handed on a plate? I dare say there are lots of positive stories they could write for balance but a lot of people don't want their diagnosis 'outted' [sic].
Again, as I said before, this negatively impacts a lot of people. Lots of people with bipolar disorder and other mental health diagnoses are out there, doing good, being responsible, getting on with their lives but they shouldn't have to put their stories out there JUST to counterbalance West's breakdowns so the public can get a more nuanced view of mental health issues.

I have nothing against Kanye West as a human being. I hope he gets the help he needs. I just have a problem with blaming others for the harm he is doing.

Friday, 11 March 2016

Racism and Immigration

All over the news today is the report that Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby has said that fearing Europe's 'migrant crisis' is a legitimate concern and not racism as others would prefer to state:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/10/reasonable-fear-colossal-migration-crisis-justin-welby-archbishop-canterbury

Well, my dictionary defines racism as "hatred, rivalry or bad feeling between races; belief in the inherent superiority of some races over others". It's hard to see how that applies. We Britons generally don't feel we're better than say Syrian refugees unless it's to consider that when our country was last at war we didn't abandon ship en masse so to speak... Most of us don't hate, compete or resent migrants, more the overall situation of population growth and the consequent strain on our nation's resources.

One of my views on the issue is centred around our closest neighbours and one of my least favourite subjects - numbers. Figures from Wikipedia as follows:
Great Britain
Area: 80,823 square miles
Population: 60,800,000 (2011 census)
France
Area: 248,600 square miles
Population: 66,644,000 (2016 estimate)
That's UK 752.3 people per square mile; France 268.1. The UK has a population proportional to its area 2.8 times greater than that of France. 
Meanwhile asylum applicant figures run as follows (from: http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/migrant-crisis-how-many-refugees-are-countries-actually-taking-1519100):
Great Britain
4th Quarter 2014 - 8,155
1st Quarter 2015 - 7,335
France
4th Quarter 2014 - 15,515
1st Quarter 2015 - 14,770
So yes, applications are considerably up in France but that is ONLY first time asylum claims. That does not include subsequent claims and appeals or economic migrants or illegal immigrants or any other classification of migration. And yes, I will use the term illegal; the migration of people without all relevant permissions and paperwork IS criminal. 
WHY are there massive camps of migrants at Calais? Why is France not housing them? Are the anti-immigration posts I see about refugees refusing accommodation in France in the hope of coming to Britain actually true?

Now I admit I know next to nothing about France or the state of things there but as a Briton I know that the UK is under pressure - a struggling health service, a struggling education system, a lack of affordable housing, too few jobs...and yet to criticise a further influx of people is RACIST? Sorry, no. I don't care what race / nationality / religion / whatever people have the population is getting to be a problem. If it were a home-grown problem so to speak I would expect the government to promote smaller families, boost birth control etc, although hopefully not to the extremes China went to. But the problem is multi-faceted - although it is commonly cited, from what data I am unsure, that migrant mothers bear considerably more children than the 1.9 UK average and that 25.5% of all births in 2011 were to 'foreign born women' - which of course doesn't tell us a thing about how they came to be here or whether they are ever intending to return to their country of origin - it doesn't change the fact that 53% of the population increase 1991-2014 was "due to the direct contribution of net migration"
(source: http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/briefings/impact-migration-uk-population-growth). 

Claiming that being resistant to immigration is racist is somewhere between over simplification of complex issues and being entirely off base. Concerns about migration aren't about the specific PEOPLE involved, it's about LOGISTICS. It's about resources and money; considering that aspect may seem vulgar but it is necessary. For anyone who says people's lives are more important than money...well, yes but lets see how you fare without money. Housing, fuel, clothing, food, transport. The day-to-day essentials cost money. Then there's education, training, medical care...all the long term costs of resettlement and a person's long term residence. That's not racism; that's practicality. That's costs regardless of a person's origins. Sooner or later we, as a society, are going to have to take a long hard and practical look at how we're going to address the rapidly increasing population of our country, and, indeed, of the whole planet. We can't just ignore those issues because it's not considered politically correct.

What will almost inevitably happen as population increases is an increase in racism as, due to resources being squeezed ever harder, people will not entirely unreasonably feel resentment toward the 'newcomers' - for this reason these issues need to be addressed both sensitively and soon. Before it turns into something really ugly...

PS Anyone who wants to criticise my cited figures / sources etc...please bear in mind I am an ordinary mum who works part time as a cleaner - not a journalist, politician or an authority on migration or whatever.