Lacking reason on Key and Beckham
Now I can assume that Mark Reason attributed nothing of his last name to write his opinion.
Reading his article about Prime Minister John Key's supposed remarks about David Beckham reminds me of a man who skipped the learning aspect of academia and played his so-beloved sport all day. Does he really believe the overheard words of a private conversation to such a degree that he will not forgive this so vile perpetrator?
I inquire whether Mr Reason is aware of a term called anecdotal evidence and the sister term which is that of a fallacy? But having said that he ridiculed a sportsman! None other than Beckham! Someone that we all know is so intelligent.
Does Mr Reason know nothing else but to analogise other sporting figures with Key? Does he hold Key's apparent comment in a higher concern then the economy, jobs, policing, taxation, civics, you know – the stuff that runs the country? No, he has a clear love of sport. An unforgiving one.
It seems he has really just presented a piece of scribble that can be laughed at on all fronts. To call a man who studied at Harvard, who headed the Global Foreign Exchange for Merill Lynch and became our PM before the age of 50 thick is… what? I can’t think of a sports analogy that he would understand.
In Mr Reason's ideal world our PM would have no backbone, he would never be himself due to the need to be absolutely perfect in every sense, he would consult his book of Political Correctness before uttering any speech, he would know that educational establishments or rather high schools are devoid of any foul language and yes he would bow to the God-like figures of Richie McCaw and Dan Carter.
Mr Reason then attempts to criticise Key's remark about the "gay red shirt", which is clearly lacking contextualisation. The Prime Minister was speaking of red in terms of political leaning. Here’s the context of the conversation.
“What you’re wearing is an absolute disgrace. You parade yourself as some sort of centre-right invested community leader, but you’re in the red!”
Apart from context if Mr Reason understood colloquialism and what a homonym is, he may be better educated to write about the "gay red top". Instead he somehow connects the red of the Labour Party to the red on the Welsh rugby team. Oh yeah – he loves sports.
There is no malicious intent or homophobia in what Key said in calling a shirt "gay," it is simply teen-speak. It has developed another meaning in our vocabulary; a playful one. When I call something lame am I offending someone crippled or injured?
But the fatal flaw comes with Mr Reason’s own ethical reasoning. For him to call Key thick is just the same as if the prime minister did call David Beckham thick.
View all contributions
Which reader's plan would you support?Related story: (See story)