Beware of reckless bias

January 27th, 2007

Remark 27 01 07

I have a language warning for homosexuals and holidaymakers. Beware the words ‘biased’ and ‘recklessly’ for you run the risk of benefiting from one and behaving as the other.Last week, in one of those fits of strategic madness with which Hong Kong democrats squander advantage so brilliantly, CE election candidate Alan Leong Kah-kit accused the Chief Executive of malfeasance for having popped into his election office during the working day out of his official motor. To compound the silliness, Leong went on to demand that Sir Donald should drop all the responsibilities of office and take leave to campaign. At this point the Constitutional Affairs Bureau popped up with the only worthwhile remark ever to come out of that particular government sandpit. The Chief Executive ‘cannot take a holiday recklessly’ said a spokesman.

I have taken a holiday early, I have taken a holiday with friends and I have taken a holiday on the Norfolk Broads but I have never taken a holiday recklessly. There have been moments of recklessness whilst on holiday- the sneaked second complimentary welcome drink, slipping away from the tour guide, paddling out of my depth- but that is not what the Constitutional people mean. They’re talking about a spontaneous, heedless decision to slam the office door behind you, toss the keys into a pot plant and clear off.scan0021.jpg

Of course no one could imagine this Chief Executive doing that, though I am toying lovingly with the notion, which is why the word is so deliciously over keen for the purpose. ‘Recklessly’ has about it the admiring admonishment by schoolmasters and team captains of the boy who broke the rules with his bravery, saved the day and went on to roll Spitfires over the Channel in the summer of 1940. It is the word for the dashing young, philandering racing driver who does impossible things in the chicane yet always crosses the line first. No matter what qualities of courage Sir Donald holds, he is unlikely to display them this way, even in the planning of his leave dates.

‘Recklessly’ is not a redundant word. It’s not even antique. It just has that smack of the old fashioned to it, the sort of word that is a bit yesterday among the native born but is carefully maintained by meticulous second language users who prefer to handle their adverbs very properly and by the book. This why, probably, in a couple of decades or so, the use of English words of three consonants will be found only in places like Hong Kong, The Straits, India and parts of the Caribbean.  And what of ‘biased’?  

This is a word that appears repeatedly among native and second language speakers who follow the popular 21st century fashion of harbouring   resentments. On this occasion, it has been used by none less than the Broadcasting Authority in a way that is not so much misplaced as completely lost in the woods.The Authority last week overturned the earlier ruling of the Television and Entertainment Licensing Authority  (TELA) that a complaint against RTHK’s documentary ‘Gay Love’ by a bunch of bellicose Christians had no merit or  was  , to use a term very occasionally found in House of Lords’ judgements, ‘bollocks’.  

n appeal, the Authority concluded that the programme about the legal recognition of gay marriages had been ‘unfair, partial and biased towards homosexuality’ How can you be biased towards homosexuality?  It must be like being biased towards photosynthesis or the migration of wildebeest. There is no point to it. It is a manifest fact of existence not even confined to human beings. Apparently, even sheep have read Kinsey and 10 per cent of rams are gay. You might as well propose or oppose perspiration.  

 

Unfortunately this basic manifestation of human sexuality is regarded by members of the Authority’s complaints sub committee as still some sort of a contest in which this essential instinct might win or lose the right to be in the SAR. Hence the levels of accusation you might hear against a panel of bent judges at a “Miss Hong Kong” contest such as ‘partial’ and ‘unfair’. The alleged unfairness was, according to the complaint, against Christians for whom the show as also ‘misleading’.

Why in Hong Kong one needs be particularly fair to Christians above others is difficult to fathom and anyway Christians, clad as they are in the armour of God, do not need the protection of anything as footling as fairness. Likewise, if they are steadfast in the Lord, they are not going to be misled by a screenful of queers flashing wedding bands at them.  

LA, being more streetwise than the Authority, must know that the complainant, effectively the Society of Truth and Light, is a rag tag collection of Christian fundamentalists who root out their own truths, cast  short and nasty shadows and spend their waking hours with the Bible still  without catching on to why Jesus bothered in the first place.

 As a communicant member of the Anglican Church, which is probably as close to a state of grace as is possible for one who goes about in the world and has access to the internet, I can assure the members of the Authority’s complaints committee that the Society does not represent a cross section of the Christian establishment in this city, probably not even the fluff from the bottom of its pocket. I suspect though that the members bring to their table some instinctive Confucianism, ill digested Buddhism 101, a culture of Protestant prohibition and fearful mental images of what homosexuals do together when they shag.

The result will likely be that when their moral compass finds true North, it reads ‘forbid’. If its web site is still to be believed, of the five full time Broadcasting Authority members who sit on that committee, one is a  commercial solicitor, one  an accountant, one an investment banker, one a social worker and one a headmistress. Three of them are women so, no fag-hags there, boys. That line up is not encouraging for the fragile spirit of free broadcasting under an unelected government. It would be just dandy for a prison parole board.

Now, by its lights, we have been forced to look at it, it seems that the Broadcasting Authority membership needs a kick up its antennae as urgently as its Antiquities Board cousin needed a boot in its relics.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                

                                                                                                                                                                                 

                                                                                       

                                         

                                                            

                            

             

      

   

 

Posted in All, Remark

One Response to “Beware of reckless bias”

  1. 1 Gogle stuartwolfendalecom
    July 11th, 2007 at 8:33 pm

    Gogle…

    Eye of stuartwolfendalecom…