I DON'T BOTHER AND NOR SHOULD YOU

On Monday August 11th, 2015 I was extended a rare opportunity by an even rarer journalist.  It will stick in my memory for a number of reasons, not least for a particular opportunity I failed to use to best effect. 

But before elaborating, I should advise that any conversations or statements referred to below, unless otherwise indicated by exclamation marks, represent only my recollection of what transpired and may be heavily paraphrased for reasons of brevity that are already in doubt. 

The interview with journalist Genevieve (Gen) Jacobs from “Mornings with Genevieve Jacobs” on ABC 666 Canberra began with the usual primer call on the preceding Friday. 

Genevieve Jacobs

Genevieve advised, in so many words, that she’d been following the public response to the ill-fated African lion named Cecil and was hoping to bring a little depth and contrast to the emotive ‘debate’ on hunting that had ensued. 

Genevieve indicated that she’d read some of the things I’ve written about hunting, which suggested to her that I’d given various issues more than cursory thought and she hoped I might be willing to discuss some of my views with her and her listeners.

The focus, she said, would be the things that motivate hunters who do not hunt for trophies, but rather to put meat on the table, for cultural reasons, to aid the eradication of damaging pest species and so on. 

Having been burned by more than one radio journo with an agenda, I would usually have said, “Thanks, but no thanks!” But Genevieve gave me the impression of more than usual sincerity, so I agreed to chat with her.

It was a good call! 

She began the interview with a brief rundown of my form, referring to my years as a social justice advocate in the housing and homelessness sectors, which had won me an OAM, my years of service as a member of a shire social planning committee, my community service as an emergency response coordinator with the NSW Volunteer Rescue Service and so on. 

All this she did, I suspect, not to pander to my ego, but rather to establish that I was not in fact a wild-eyed, gap-toothed thug, standing with his club poised, nail gleaming in the sun, above the head of the planet’s sole surviving cuddly big-eyed fur seal pup. 

This suggests that Genevieve was all too aware of the pervading stereotypes and sought, in good faith, not to take advantage of them.

Yes, amazing, I know!

The interview, which can be found below, did not set out to give me a free ride. The journalist asked pertinent, sometimes tasking questions in a respectful and objective manner. 

I know!!

This was not a feeding frenzy orchestrated to slake the hunger of the emoting mob, but an exploration of the possibility that all hunters should not be judged on the actions of a handful of people who, if reports are accurate, are best described as poachers. 

Yes, she’s clearly a ring-in!!!

From my perspective the conversation had been productive. Not chockers with eureka moments in terms of inciting the nation to epiphany on the topic of subsistence hunting perhaps, but at least rational, inquiring and informative. 

And then the texts began to roll-in on Genevieve’s phone....the typical texts, from the usual suspects, for whom predictable slights and profound ignorance count as erudite opinion. 

“Well, he just likes to kill, doesn’t he?” was the standout. Not for its intellectual integrity and certainly not on the basis of originality, but for the fact that it’s typical of those who are incapable of distinguishing between objective reason and simple condemnation, which they believe to be the purpose of debate.

So Genevieve asked the only question she could under the circumstances; “how do you respond when people asked you to explain yourself...how do you respond when you need to explain why it’s OK to take that animal’s life?” and this is where I let the side down. 

My response was brief and to the point, “I don’t!” and it’s true; I refuse to “justify” myself to people who have proven their minds are closed and impenetrable to all but the four winds. 

But my brief reply deserved more fleshing out, because it is key to the whole hunting ‘debate’ and in particular, to the contextual analysis of the worldwide outcry that followed the death of a solitary prosaically-named lion in Zimbabwe.

Let’s be crystal clear about one fact if no other.

The outcry following Cecil’s death was not born of the public’s abiding love for animals. 

It was born of the public’s unbridled hatred for a human-being. 

Upon what do I base that assertion? Nothing better than simple logic and the evidence at the disposal of anyone who chooses to think about some obvious facts.

In the hours, days and weeks after Cecil’s death, the Twittersphere, Facebook, Instagram and text services across the planet have been fit to meltdown with demands for Walter Palmer’s blood and an end to all forms of hunting.

The same was true of the many agencies like Change.org that nurture and mine the outrage economy for profit by facilitating inarticulate online petitions with neither concern given to, nor responsibility taken for, their accuracy or intent. 

Yet despite the almost universal access we have to these modern-day wonders that might be used to effect positive change, international concern was not channelled into something productive such as encouraging the outraged to donate to African wildlife conservation agencies. Not on your nelly! 

Every tweet, every post and every petition focused on banning, punishment, extradition or vengeance - including torture - of one form or another.  Social media turned to so-many virtual pitchforks, shades of any medieval inquisition one cares to mention. 

Imagine what could be accomplished if just a fraction of the money sunk into acts of self-indulgent and largely ignorant rage such as texting insults, writing to politicians, buying $40 t-shirts that declare the individual's hatred for hunters etc., was forwarded instead to African conservation agencies.

Not only would there be so many lions on the plains that we might actually run out of idiotic names to burden them all with, but African poverty could be addressed sufficient to remove all motivation for poaching.

But where would be the dopamine driven instant ego gratifying point in any of that?

This is the point I failed to make in response to the fatuous accusations of Genevieve’s anonymous texters. 

I refuse to ‘justify’ anything about myself or my views to people whose own opinions emanate from a place so dark that even the fish with little lights on the ends of their noses, need little lights on the ends of their noses. 

It is a point we should all keep in mind when tempted to dignify the accusations of the mindless masses with our time spent in response. They do not speak for “the community”, only those among it who believe anger and hatred are essential to sound decision-making processes. 

Alas, this is the mentality the world’s media strives to give voice to and portrays as responsible. Indeed the media nurtures hate and ignorance for gain, by feeding the public information that, while not strictly false, is certainly not true and is definitely crafted to manipulate through inference and what is omitted every bit as much as what is said.

NEWSFLASH - As if in answer to a prayer, an example of the way the media, even with off-hand comments, has the power to influence a nation of less than intrepid thinkers has just gone to air.

It’s 2pm and the sorts of people who are watching television in the mid-afternoon on a weekday, looking to be captivated with the latest news about who’s cheating on whom in Hollywood, whose breasts are legit and whose aren't, or perhaps just hoping for a little advice from the other side courtesy of an oh-so reliable psychic, are tuned to 7’s The Daily Edition.

The show’s intro is followed by nearly 5 minutes of realish news from across the nation, read by an attractive, elegant young woman of the kind women everywhere would either love to be, or love to beat to a pulp for having way too much of what they don’t have any of at all. 

The last story in her update involves an elephant that’s resident at Taronga Zoo. Its keepers have fitted a wee GoPro camera to the pachyderm’s forehead, the better to see how the animal perceives the movements and actions of its keepers and, no doubt, the public too.  

Now one could be forgiven for thinking this ‘story’ was pretty harmless and viewed on merit alone it certainly was, until the aforementioned elegant newsreader decided to anthropomorphise the elephant’s plight. 

“I’d hate to have a camera on my head so everyone could see what I saw”, she said to her colleagues with a look of disapproval on her face. 

Instantly, what had 'til that point been a perfectly harmless experiment aimed at better understanding the elephant’s perceptions and responses, has been imbued with connotations of animal abuse, no-doubt associated with the denial of privacy or dignity or who knows. All because someone couldn’t resist conferring human concerns and notions of violation on an animal.

Well here’s the rub!

Elephants are not people and because they are not, they are unconcerned by the prospect of someone having access to video evidence of the bums they perv at, the tax returns they falsify, the kiddie-porn they watch on their laptops or who they’re cheating on their partners with.

Elephants are animals. They poop and pork in public, yet somewhere tonight, in a room reeking of patchouli oil, an angry little person is writing an indignant missive about the manifold cruel indignities imposed on a completely oblivious pachyderm that will form the plea for justice that graces a Change.org petition. 

This is the calibre of those some believe I should attempt to justify myself to. Well I don’t bother and nor should you!

Anyway, I’ll get outaya way now...

Interview with Genevieve Jacobs
Mornings with Genevieve Jacobs
666 ABC Canberra
The relevant portion of the program begins approx 1-hr and 8-minutes into the program, just after the appalling 'song'.

Follow the blog on Twitter @Hunters_Stand

If you'd like to share this post the link to cut & paste is http://thehunterstand.blogspot.com.au/2015/08/i-dont-bother-and-nor-should-you.html

For those wishing to leave comments either anonymously or under their own names (go-orn, I dares ya!), please select the 'Name/URL' option from the drop down menu beneath the comments section at the bottom of this page. You do not need to enter a URL.

If you would like to receive notifications when new posts are uploaded to the Hunters' Stand, send your name and email address to thehunterstand@gmail.com This service will not include notification of new comments. All information provided will be treated with the utmost confidentiality and discretion.