Injunctions

[poliphilo]

Gossip is a basic, low-down human activity. It's hard to see how society could function without it.

 

Sometimes it's malicious, sometimes merely informational.  

 

If gossip is untrue it becomes slander and libel. And it can be addressed in law. No problems there.

 

But if the gossip is true it functions as a kind of rough justice. Mr Moneybags the adulterer may not like being talked about, but tough; he should have kept his trousers on.

 

And if he goes round the neighbourhood trying to shut people up he becomes a bully and an oppressor.

 

And that's at least as bad as being an adulterer.

 

I don't know whether gossip can be defined as a human right, but when someone tries to stop me doing it I feel that it is- and then I rebel and get stroppy and feel all righteous about it.

 

Most people do. Which is why a certain footballer's name is all over the Internet and his mug shot is on the front page of a Scottish newspaper and everybody is laughing at him.

Comments

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

After Giggs people are going to think twice about wasting their money on injunctions.

I like how parliament and the judges have been bouncing off one another- the way they were designed to do. I think today- indeed this whole series of events- has been good for democracy.