David Norris; Another Gaff

Unfortunately, Norris didn't seem to anticipate that his Joycien blending of vulgarity and eloquence would have an unintended consequence; the media would go on a titter/tatter about "offensive language", rather than the issue he was trying to raise, the scrapping of the Seanad. They are three observations that struck me about this latest piece of political theater. 1) The hypocrisy of Irish "liberals" - the Americanism is just about applicable in the Irish context - can be comical at times. Let us imagine for a second a hypothetical abortion debate, a right-wing journalist, in the pro-life corner, tells a female pro-choice politician, while blustering, that she's  "talking through her fanny".  Exactly the same people now defending Norris would be in a frenzy of rage, burning their fingers on enter keys, spreading bile through every blog on the blogsphere.  If a right-wing politician makes a sexist gaff, the liberally inclined would automatically blame latent misogyny, if a lovable senator makes a similar gaffe, (presuming, for argument, that it wasn't premeditated), we blame humoruless political correctness.

Therefore, at the very least, Norris' gaffe can be a worthwhile moral lesson for the politically self-righteous; all men, have at least a tendon of misogyny in their body.  Misogyny is very similar to homicidal impulse - in fact, it is worse, some people deserve to be killed, no woman should be hated simply for being a woman - all men have the inherent potential.  All men have it, if you don't, you're not a man.  In similar measure, if you're not, in your heart, filled with utter devotion and love for women, then you're not human.

The falstaffian senator himself; donning a panama hat, and that wonderful Socratic beard

2) I find it remarkable that some people actually think they should be protected, by law, from "offensive opinion".  For me, this desire to be insulated from offensive opinion - more often than not, the protective shield is dragged out to repel atheists - is symptomatic of an overly pampered culture.  For this generation, accustomed to cars, buses and planes, and never using their feet, whose cough syrups and toothpastes come loaded with artificial sweeteners and saccharine, who grew up accustomed to lazy, pampering sun holidays, it isn't at all surprising they tend to "whine" - and whine in the most self-importantly bourgeois manner - about being offended.  Sometimes, to be truthful and insightful, requires an unflinching harshness, even brutality. Therefore, this over-civility, this over sensitivity to other people's feelings, is anti-intellectual.

3  Where's the Victorians were overly secretive about sex, this culture is overly casual.  Sex has been completely dymystified.  Removing social conventions regarding sex - and with it the sacredness and exclusiveness of the human body - has, without question, had a disastrous cultural affect; it has become cheapened, and - with the growth of the internet and relaxing of censorship - highly abstract and fetishistic.  The Romantic revivalists turned sex into a religion, while this society treats sex like an especially intense "pleasure", the same way recreational drugs are a "pleasure", or, perhaps, the way a fillet steak is a "pleasure".  Therefore, completely separating it from love.