clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Of Internet Blogging, Misguided Satirical Anger, and Annonymous Commenting ( Or Take Yourself By The Hand Buddy - You have Little To Add!)

Back by popular demand, and slightly altered given the perspective time allows!

Late last Tuesday evening I posted a satirical blog based around Tie Domi's unfortunate descent from former NHLer to current fodder for gossip mongers. If you've gone over it, you likely got that it was hardly meant to be taken seriously, or taken for truth in any way shape or form. If you missed that, consider this a disclaimer.

Regular readers of EOTP (yes, all six of you) have without a doubt seen my twisted takes on the unbeleivable before the Domi crank. Recently, I've perused such tangents, sounding off on the likes of Charles Wang and Bobby Clarke, just to name two.

When I composed the Domi rant, with late night, speedstream maliciousness, I put little thought into what was behind it. In short, I was motivated by a well of anger. Earlier in the week, I had praised Domi for neatly ending his career with class and dignity in a manner respectful of the game and it's fans. Little did I suspect he would so soon make me want to eat my words. I did make small mention at the end of my piece about a certain blonde political bimbo of the worst sort who had been linked to him romantically. I offhandedly treated it as a mere rumour, plain and simple.

Within days of that post came news of the whole sordid affair. It has littered newspapers going on days now, frequently hitting the jackpot frontpage in a sad testament to what many (sometimes myself included) consider entertainment or news.

The mocked up front page Citizen joke I used atop of the blog was something that sat in my files for six months. It alluded to Domi's sexual preferences, in a spoof of his macho image. Hey, I thought it was a hoot!
With the recent news very much in mind, an idea peactically unleashed itself.

Combined with the anger inside me, it led to the page you all read. There were many reasons for that anger. I'll get to them soon.

I am guilty of not including the above disclaimer prior to launching the bomb that was my rant.

The point of the posting was in questioning the necessity of such news. Did we really need to read every ounce of dirty laundry involving these celebrity's private lives. I admit that to many, it makes for some compelling dialogue and discourse. There seemed to be an overwhelming curiosity and thirst for these alleged accusations and way too personal details. Though the acts and deeds mentioned were Tie Domi's doings, they seemed to be media fed, sadly, by his scorned ex-Mrs. in retaliation for a number of personal atrocities and attacks. I will not be getting into them.

Do I think it is any of our business? Surely not! Why the details, and the he done's - she said's, of a marriage can find their way into the public record is incomprehensible. Aren't separation agreements and divorce settlements not a private sealed document. Should they not be, in an attempt to protect the integrity of all involved parties not to mention the integrity surrounding the procedure itself. It amazes me that all this dirt is not simply leaked, but forcefed in spoonfuls and launched outward at all media outlets slobbering for the sordid details.

My biggest concern in all this, is for the children of the couple. Obviously these two partners have come to deserve each other, but shouldn't the legal process spare them the public embarrassment of having idiots for parents. Their three kids will now forever be marked by all this. It's bad enough when your parents fight and argue in front of you. It's another depth of scar altogether when the entire country gets to sit in and watch!

Of course the zeal of media does not pause to ponder these querries - it's just not their job. These two airheaded parents, with lines marked in the ground and heels dug in for the battle, never stopped to consider their offspring either. It's difficult to pinpoint who blew off the greater of responsabilities when all parties here are guilty as hell of simply thinking of themselves, money, and winning whatever petty battleground was leftover in the shambles of the relationship. It's all one big crying shame. Trouble is, it happens daily, everywhere.

Now to reconsider the "twist" post, in this light, I am positive that none of what I've just mentionned was reflected in it's content. My sarcasm, unfortunately brought it down to a much lower level. Don't confuse my clarification as an outright apology for it. As a writer who often goes on instinct, I'll be hellbent to impose reigns on what I often confuse as creativity. I'll live with my mistakes. As long as I allow myself the opportunity to keep making more.

Like I said before, I've learnt something about disclaimers. Next time I get horizontal on my psychiatrist's couch, I'll be sure to ask why I resort to sarcastic mode when dealing with the onslaught of left field suckerpunches the world delivers to itself on a daily basis. We all have our ways of coping.

The prime reason I am going to these lengths to explain the Domi disaster and the merit of my muse behind it, is that I was litterally taken to task on it by a reader in the name of an annonymous commenter. As I was still fuming from the post, I shot off an equally thoughtless F-bomb of a response to the comment - which I had deleted upon receipt. I later deleted my own inadequate reply. I do regret both actions. I should have read the comment more than twice before ditching it and adding mine. In short, I stupidly attacked it's annonimity rather than it's point. Not that annonymous commenting has any worth, mind you. It's gutless as hell and reeks of insecurity.

To put it mildly though, the reader attempted to K.O. me in about 3 short, pointless sentences. My integrity was rightfully questioned. I was not only drilled for my POV, or lack of one, the reader masterfully used my own words to nail me - namely, the quote from my profile that says: "I speak from the point of view of facts moreso than opinion...". I'll give him that attempt. Nice try!

The reader began the rag on me with something akin to "I'll put in down to not having been laid in a while", as an excuse for my being so pent up and pissed. How weak of him! He must be familiar with that circumstance to drop it on me. Just for the record, my annonymous friend, if my sex life were any more complete, I'd need to be twins. I've no complaints being called "God" now and again, and I won't trade the juice on my tongue for your mechanical masturbation anytime soon.

Most jerkoffs never identify themselves. So I'll get reported based on content. Big woop! Been there, still here!

The reader then went on to slamming my hometown before alluding that a writer who professes the things I claim to stand for, should be above such low brow musings. The reader made reference to dead brain cells of late night thoughts being better left to the meanderings of staggering bar patrons after a few too many.

Hey bug off! That's when I do my most pointed, uninhibited, and observational thinking, I think!

Interestingly, the reader made mention of two locals bars here in town (none of which I'd ever frequented). I originally assumed it identified the reader as a local who very likely knows me personally. From the gist of the comment, to it's well executed prose, it eliminated all but possibly three people who I know that could write it with any measure of literate composure.

After much reconsideration, I deduced that it would hardly be who I thought. They would never ram my hometown in that manner.

Unwittingly, I imagine I made the "I've been called an idiot" part of my profile into fact now also.

I'm not sure that the explanation I've offered here clears up the difference between fact and my opinion. If I've only managed to uncloud the motivation, however misguided one annonymous blogger feels it may be, behind the piece, that's half the battle I guess.

The shrink with the straightjacket and the 6 pack shares no responsability for this one. It was all mine. You learn. You fight back.