The below image of the priest with his lips sewn shut may be very disturbing for some, so I've spoilerd it. Chilling, yes indeed.

A priest has sewn his lips together to protest against the “suppression” of climate science in Rupert Murdoch's media outlets.

Reverend Tim Hewes, 71, carried out the symbolic act outside News UK’s office in Central London yesterday. It's home to the UK arm of Murdoch’s global news empire, News Corps.

In a video released on YouTube, Hewes calls Murdoch a “climate change denier, dissembler and delayer” and says the media mogul has influence over governments which has led to a lack of meaningful action on the climate crisis.

https://www.euronews.com/green/2021/08/03/priest-sews-his-mouth-shut-over-muting-of-climate-science-by-mainstream-media

I'm personally torn between expressing admiration for the man's...courageous...actions, and heaping disapproval on them due to the barbaric and ostensibly insane nature of the action. Probably leaning on the side of the former, but, well, undecided fully. Thoughts?

Delete

Now for the rest of them.

None of the national newspapers reported it. Struck dumb, as it were...likely an editorial decision not to massage into existence further "self harm protest actions." They also have not reported on any of the climate change inaction hunger strikers AFAIK, presumably for similar reasons.

FWIW I'm of the opinion that "self harm protest actions" fall well within the category of "now look what you have gone and made me do" as is so frequently used by abusers of various stripes. Consequently they should be ignored.

Protest is fine. Public self-flagellation is more a weird form of exhibitionism.

Lady Godiva had the right idea, media will definitely report on that.

Keep It Real wrote:None of the national newspapers reported it.

It got bumped in favour of 'Man does poo in field'

https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/15785569/ ... poo-field/

Gotta love The Sun.

BlackBart wrote:It got bumped in favour of 'Man does poo in field'

https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/15785569/ ... poo-field/

Gotta love The Sun.

But man that does poo in field raises so many questions! Why does he poo in field? Whose field did he doo poo in? Was there toilet paper at the scene? Surely that's more important than a media conglomerate spreading disinformation about the planet's climate changing to become less habitable?

Tortured_Genius wrote:FWIW I'm of the opinion that "self harm protest actions" fall well within the category of "now look what you have gone and made me do" as is so frequently used by abusers of various stripes. Consequently they should be ignored.

Protest is fine. Public self-flagellation is more a weird form of exhibitionism.

I was going to post preemptively (and jokingly) that we should resist kink-shaming... though we don't actually know (at least not from the photo or the article) what's going on in his head, or how much suffering this involves. Some ppl are resistant to pain, or derive pleasure from it.

But the generalization is invalid. Public self-harm can be an effective way to bring awareness to a public threat. For example, almost everyone in my generation or older recognizes this photo:


...Thích Quảng Đức burning himself alive to call attention to government violence in S.Vietnam. Climate catastrophe has a much larger radius of future victims than did a footnote-vassal like Diệm in 1963 Vietnam... It's at least arguable whether or not attention brought to it should be dismissed out of hand just because our gutter minds can find ways to do so.

Tortured_Genius wrote:FWIW I'm of the opinion that "self harm protest actions" fall well within the category of "now look what you have gone and made me do" as is so frequently used by abusers of various stripes. Consequently they should be ignored.

Protest is fine. Public self-flagellation is more a weird form of exhibitionism.

Hmmmmmm. Not really. To describe the hunger striking of (unjustly?) imprisoned people, the self immolation of the monk pictured above and, for example, the actions of Emily Davison in throwing herself under the king's horse at the races in protest at the lack of universal suffrage...."they're just showing off and being narcissistic come virtue signalling" - which is the vibe of what you wrote.....wrong. Shit, too....to dismiss such actions out of hand like that.

If I were to be harsh (and using my imagination) I might suggest that you feel ashamed that you yourself have not endured any large sacrificial acts recently "for the greater good" and so are just slagging off the (relatively, seemingly) "selfless" out of bitter player hating. Like I said, just my imagination, I'm sure.

I'd regard "self harm protest actions" as something entirely different to "suicidal protest actions".

By retroactively expanding the issue, the ground has been massively shifted so taking my comment entirely out of context, generalising, grotesquely over-inflating and projecting sentiments way beyond what those actually intended.

Tortured_Genius wrote:I'd regard "self harm protest actions" as something entirely different to "suicidal protest actions".

By retroactively expanding the issue, the ground has been massively shifted so taking my comment entirely out of context, generalising, grotesquely over-inflating and projecting sentiments way beyond what those actually intended.

And hunger striking? That a self-harm action need be fatal in order to qualify for "approval" seems unrealistically...blunt?

Keep It Real wrote:

Tortured_Genius wrote:I'd regard "self harm protest actions" as something entirely different to "suicidal protest actions".

By retroactively expanding the issue, the ground has been massively shifted so taking my comment entirely out of context, generalising, grotesquely over-inflating and projecting sentiments way beyond what those actually intended.

And hunger striking? That a self-harm action need be fatal in order to qualify for "approval" seems unrealistically...blunt?

And now you've expanded the projection to imply that I somehow give "approval" to "suicidal protest actions"...

You're clearly squirming, backtracking and refusing to/being unable to give a straight answer to a straightforward question. I'll repeat: hunger striking:

Tortured_Genius wrote:FWIW I'm of the opinion that "self harm protest actions" fall well within the category of "now look what you have gone and made me do" as is so frequently used by abusers of various stripes. Consequently they should be ignored.

Protest is fine. Public self-flagellation is more a weird form of exhibitionism.

Exhibitionism to be ignored, or what?!

Ah screw it. I'll be blunt then.

I think it is highly likely you are deliberately trolling me with the intention of twisting whatever reply I make into a personal insult or attack designed to evoke an emotional response.

I've kept is civil on the basis that I wasn't sure you were trolling, but now I'm personally convinced that you are trolling unless you can persuade me otherwise.

This statement:

Keep It Real wrote:If I were to be harsh (and using my imagination) I might suggest that you feel ashamed that you yourself have not endured any large sacrificial acts recently "for the greater good" and so are just slagging off the (relatively, seemingly) "selfless" out of bitter player hating. Like I said, just my imagination, I'm sure.

is the most patronising sanctimonious piece of shite I've been subjected to for a while - fully up there with the crap made up and spouted by the most self-important god-botherer.

You don't know me. You don't know what my life experiences are. You do not get to tell me what I feel, especially on a subject as emotive as self harm or suicide. I certainly don't have to justify myself to you.

I think it best I leave it at that.

What did you expect?

Oh and by the way: you also obviously condone the torture of bunny rabbits - you said you'd 'be blunt', and that clearly indicates the preferred tool you'd use to enact your vile conduct against the innocent wee fluffy creatures.

Wrong TG, I'm not trolling you, I'm just trying to work out how you've arrived at this bizarre "self harm protest actions are just exhibitionism and should be ignored" position. Yes my blood runs hot on this issue, probably largely as I've actually done a (painful and traumatic) hunger strike in protest at gov inaction on global warming last year.

I predict it's futile, as you've painted yourself into a corner so can't answer, but I'll try one last time anyway: is hunger striking exhibitionism and to be ignored? Please try and wrench yourself away from the persecution/misrepresentation/personalisation narrative and discuss the actual issues raised in this thread calmly/logically/on topic...futile probably but had to give it one last stab...

LOL

Spearthrower wrote:LOL

There we have it folks: hunger striking = hilarity. That's me taken to school.

Tortured_Genius wrote:Protest is fine. Public self-flagellation is more a weird form of exhibitionism.

That sounds unduly categorical even after you back-pedalled by bizarrely excluding suicidal protest actions from self harm protest actions as "something entirely different". To be sure, protests involving self-harm are aimed at generating publicity, but how can you tell if they are motivated by an intent to draw attention to oneself or to a problem?

The criterion for distinguishing between one or the other is not whether the self-harming protester finished up dead, is it?

On the one hand public suicide might be an extreme case of exhibitionism. To remain known by everyone beyond the point of one's death. That's about as exhibitionist as one can get. Herostratus comes to mind. He destroyed the second Temple of Artemis in Ephesus, knowing that he will be killed for it, but he did so precisely because he wanted to be remembered forever by name for doing so.

On the other hand, what makes you certain that non-fatal self-harm is not motivated by a sincere belief an individual can think of as the most effective action to help a cause / fight a problem?