Something’s in the Air

I’ve noticed Liberal hacks are fine tuning and revising their blogs following Kinsella’s sexist gaffe. Yesterday Kinsella himself on his blog entry had a link to an article which read something very close to “More on my cookies cock-up“. It’s been edited out so I can’t reproduce it exactly. But I remember it because I thought to myself a “cock-up”? Probably not the best choice of words given his recent antics. Today Kinsella’s entry has been revised to read “More on dumb cookies joke.”

I’m guessing Warren thought better than to use phallocentric language to help this mess go away. Either that or he has received enough edification from all those who’ve attempted to attenuate his comments that he now feels it’s ok to make a joke about it. If Kinsella wants to single out Randy Hillier’s regressive social views, he should just do so plainly. But he should be under no illusion that his recent unwitting manifestation of sexism is any less insidious and detrimental to women.

At the same time Derek Raymaker, Warren’s sycophantic band mate, removed from his blog all references to women (and on occasion a man) as “douchebags”, and was kind enough to replace each reference with the word “psychopath”. Seems he’s now partial to calling women he doesn’t like a “heinous cow”. Seems he’s also no longer on Kinsella’s blogroll. Way to have your pal’s back Warren. Raymaker, still voting Liberal?

Hmm, interesting trains of thought. With friends like these women don’t need enemies.

I’m also wondering about the netiquette around this kind of thing. As journalism, and other forms of articulation, become less hard copy and more transient, ubiquitous, easily edited and revised forms of human expression, what accommodations must the term “publish” make? Once a post is published what are the ethics around editing and revising that entry? As someone who’s not wholly innocent of this either, I think this a very important question.


It would appear these guys are really mired in “damage control” mode. First Kinsella cleans up his blog. Next, Raymaker, whose metier is hurling insolent and puerile (thanks for the word of the week Warren) attacks, has, in a delicious irony, suddenly begun moderatingthe comments on his own blog.

Update 2:
In the old days it was the shredder that went into overdrive in these situations, now it seems all it takes is the click of a button. Derek Raymaker went from referring to Parkdale High Park MPP, Cheri DiNovo, as a “douchebag”, which he attenuated with the much more edifying term “psychopath”. And now, the blog entry has been deleted altogether. I’ve kept a record for any out there curious to read it.

Posted on July 31, 2007, in Derek Raymaker, Liberal sexism, Warren Kinsella. Bookmark the permalink. 8 Comments.

  1. “…Randy Hillier’s regressive social views…”

    Is that what you call shooting an animal and displaying its carcass with the name of a woman (Leona Dombrowsky) hung around its neck. I call it an act of hate targetting someone for their gender that should have been prosecuted as such.

    Please advise why you think Hillier’s actions are acceptable, or merely just “regressive”. Your four loyal readers want to know.

  2. I have a hunch that’s you lurking behind anonymity there Raymaker. Apologies if not. It’s just that the wording and the tautological nature of the question sound eerily familiar. Besides I have a one in four chance of being right and it looks like Raymaker’s looking for new blogging friends since being kicked off Kinsella’s blogroll.

    No matter, I’ve previously labelled Hillier’s actions as “twisted” “indecent” “flagrant” “sexist”. I don’t see “regressive” as complimentary but I’ll add some more. Hillier’s actions were perverse, atavistic, incendiary, reprehensible.

    And to Raymaker, if you’d like to become my blogging buddy, I’d be happy to oblige. This anonymous commenter greatly exagerrates. Truth is, I have no loyal readers, so you could be the first.


  3. Wrong…again. I post under my own name. I’m not afraid of you…or your Churley-style NDP smear machine.

    Which brings me to my next subject. Who is the great mind behind “spurs” or “derrida” or “acts of citizenship.”

    I love how you attack people changing their blog posts without context. You actually have something of a point there. But by far the worst netiquette offence you’re guilty of is publishing smears and attacks and refusing to come clean with your identity. That is quite cowardly. You want to attack, using lies, fair enough I suppose. But the least you can do is stand publicly by your opinions.

    What are you afraid of?

  4. Goodwin Ginger

    «Cock-up» is a great English expression and has nothing to do with a man’s penis. Cock, as in petal cock or shuttle cock. Cock-up: to make a mess of or to jam a something full of debris.

    We are sure Kinsella did not know that but that is because his cock is up his ass which is very different from making a cock-up of something:)

    Goodwin Ginger

  5. My goodness. The hateful homophophia on this blog is appalling.

  6. Goodwin,
    Actually I think Kinsella did know the meaning of cock-up. It’s not that archaic an expression, and similar to “screw up” (technically not phallic but it’s not a huge stretch metonymically). But my point was that he clearly saw, even if belatedly, that the phallic resonances of the term, made it unwise to post.

    As for your reference to badminton and donkeys, I’m not sure what you mean.

  7. ray,

    may I call you ray?
    You gotta chill man. Someone pushes back and refuses to be intimidated by your sophomoric (thanks Warren for another ten dollar world)insolence and you get all bent out of shape. Next you’ll be calling me out and challenging me to a duel on Roncesvalles Ave.

    “I love how you attack people changing their blog posts without context.”

    If you had read my post, I admitted that I too have edited posts (typically to correct a grammar or spelling mistake). So I wasn’t attacking you for revising your published blog. I was commenting on the specific changes you made.

    My concern around a protocol for such changes and the ethics of revision remains, and this obviously applies to me also.

    “You want to attack, using lies, fair enough I suppose.”

    Er, I’m not sure what rules you play by, but no it’s not fair enough. If I’ve used lies then please point them out and I’ll address or retract any deceitful statements. As far as complaining about being smeared. You can’t author a blog that runs like one big smear, full of offensive, sexist, and incendiary entries and then not expect be attacked back.

  8. Liar, liar

    Both Raymaker and Kinsella post comments on blogs using various silly names.

    I track their IP addresses, so I always know when they’re posting under a false name (Liberals are so ethical, arent’t they?).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: