Why is everyone a hypocrite?

[max_tranmere]

Most people preach about how others shouldn't do this or that, then do it themselves. Whether it's the rock band U2 saying Governments should give more money in aid to the Third World, then moving all their multi-millions from Ireland into a tax-shelter in Holland to avoid paying any tax; whether it's the actress Emma Thompson campaigning for no third runway at Heathrow Airport, but regularly flying to the USA for work and to attend award ceremonies (obviously if airports didn't keep expanding in order to meet demand then air travel would have to be rationed - inconvieniencing people like her; or whether it is everyone you ever meet constantly going on about how car use is ruining the environment, yet they have a car themselves, drive all the time, and don't care. I even read this week that many staff at the Environment Agency (the clue to what they supposedly do is in their name!) have taken hundreds of totally unnecassery flights, some as short as from Bristol to Plymouth, and not given a damn. These few examples are just a few of thousands of things like it. Does anyone have any theories as to why the human race demand for themselves things they wish to deny others, act in a completely contradictory way, and are basically hypocrites?

[one eyed jack]

Yes its all part of being human

Most of us have double standards whether we like to admit it or not. I call it being human and its that variable in our characteristic that makes us humans as opposed to robots.

In short hypocrisy has its advantages. Example: xenophobes can change their minds when they realise not all foreigners are bad for instance

[Sam Slater]

"Why is everyone a hypocrite?"

You should have a fair idea, Max. Aren't you the one that slags off Jordan for making money out of what little talent she has while at the same time adores porn stars making money from -some might say- the little talent they have?

[max_tranmere]

I never slagged Jordan off for making money, I criticised the fakery and synthetic-ness of what she did. It is fine and dandy for her to make a living as a model or even to do things that models often end up doing after that, like getting into acting and TV work (if they can find someone willing to hire them to do it) but when you pretend to write books you didn't write, and arrogantly and smugly talk about how you are 'an author' and how you 'want to get into writing who-dunnits and thrillers, just like Agatha Christie did', when all that will be happening is that somone else will write it, you put your name on the cover, and convince people (most of whom are probably not very bright) that you are a writer, then you have cheapened the industry, made fakery mainstream and acceptable, and taken away something from real writers. The more this happens the more those who spent thousands and thousands of hours writing a book, manually writing it like I am writing this comment, it will make many wonder whether they did write it and the respect and praise that real writers used to get won't be forthcoming. People such as that imbecile Jordan has cheapened the writing business, made fakery the norm, and taken away a lot of the respect real writers would otherwise get. That was what I was criticising about her - and she deserves to be criticised for it.

[Sam Slater]

[quote]I never slagged Jordan off for making money, I criticised the fakery and synthetic-ness of what she did.[/quote]

Lol. Welcome to the world of entertainment, Max. Porn itself has a bundles of fakery and synthetic-ness.

[quote]It is fine and dandy for her to make a living as a model or even to do things that models often end up doing after that, like getting into acting and TV work (if they can find someone willing to hire them to do it)[/quote]

Don't give me this bollocks about it being ok for her to get into singing and acting, etc, for you had just as much of a pop at Victoria Beckham for doing just that. Remember? Now you've been shown to be just as much of a hypocrite as the people you're complaining about, all of a sudden getting into acting is 'fine and dandy'?

[quote]People such as that imbecile Jordan has cheapened the writing business, made fakery the norm, and taken away a lot of the respect real writers would otherwise get.[/quote]

Imbecile? And I suppose you pick the pornstars you wank over in your lunch-hour by their IQ? And there you go again about fakery. WTF is your problem with fakery? Porn is the epitome of fakery and you don't seem to mind one bit!

I've no problem with you liking hand hating whoever you want, but all this talking shite just to justify your opinions is bollocks. In my opinion you're being very hypocritical.

[max_tranmere]

Porn itself has loads of fakery and synthetic-ness? Really? What, people claiming to have done things they didn't do? I've not heard of that in porn.

I never said anything about Jordan getting into singing, I did mention about her doing something else in showbiz (TV, acting, etc), that is quite common for people like her, it is glamourous like modelling is and in some films you don't have to be able to act (think Pamela Anderson in 'BarbWire'), and in some TV presenting roles you don't have to be able to present (think Davina McCall 'presenting' Big Brother - or her 'presenting' anything for that matter). I think it is hard to cheapen trash movie-making or trash TV but it is easy to cheapen the literary world when people like Jordan, that Colleen girl who Wayne Rooney goes out with, or when Victoria Beckham, 'write' books. If the majority of people don't write them anymore then it becomes something people will begin to expect and it will mean that real hard-working writers who actually do it may be questioned as to whether they actually did it or not. The 'my god, you wrote a book, that is a real achievement!' comment will be voiced less and less by critics and by people who buy them and hear about how someone has recently got into the writing game.

I don't accept that porn is the epitome of fakery, what is being faked? The people do what they claim they do. They don't pretend. And I've never put down any porn girls for having low IQ's, I am sure some have and some have quite high ones, but I am willing to use the word 'imbecile' with Jordan because of her audacity, set against the fact she isnt very bright, and when you have that combination then calling someone an imbecile is justified - she purports to be a literary queen, when she is not, the things are done by others but she pretends to be something she isnt. Someone who is not bright but smugly goes round implying they are conveys a certain arrogance and those people deserve to be slagged off. Not being bright, but not claiming you are anything else, deserves no comment at all. I will leave those people alone.

Being hypocritcal involves a straight contradiction between what you claim, what you state, what you say that others should do - whilst all the while you do the opposite. I don't see how I've been hypocritical at all, the examples I've given in my OP here are examples of pure hypocrisy - and there are many more examples of people operating in a hypocritcal way in society aswell.

[Sam Slater]

[quote]Porn itself has loads of fakery and synthetic-ness? Really? What, people claiming to have done things they didn't do?[/quote]

Yes. Without fakery the porn industry would be very different. Do you really think that 19 year old chick is being honest when exclaiming "I fucking love all that cum!" after having had 14 fat blokes old enough to be her grandad have jizzed all over her?

[quote]I never said anything about Jordan getting into singing,[/quote]

WTF? Ok, maybe you didn't mention singing but that wasn't my point, was it? And you've just said that it's not her making money that pisses you off but the fakery (claiming to do something she hasn't). If she did sing, regardless of her talent, you shouldn't have a problem with it as long as it's really her voice, right? My point was about you saying getting into acting is ok with you when previously you mocked and slagged off Victoria Beckham for doing just that. The posts are there in the archives, Max, go take a look.

[quote]in some films you don't have to be able to act (think Pamela Anderson in 'BarbWire'), and in some TV presenting roles you don't have to be able to present (think Davina McCall 'presenting' Big Brother - or her 'presenting' anything for that matter).[/quote]

What shite. So Pamela Anderson didn't act in her movies and Davina McCall has never presented anything. Ok, Max. What the fuck were they doing then, making the tea? What you mean to say is that, in your opinion, they acted/presented badly.

[quote]I think it is hard to cheapen trash movie-making or trash TV but it is easy to cheapen the literary world when people like Jordan, that Colleen girl who Wayne Rooney goes out with, or when Victoria Beckham, 'write' books.[/quote]

How is it cheapening the literary world? Tell me what you mean. You say these people had ghost-writers, am I correct? Well, having a ghost-writer, who can write, is better then them doing it themselves isn't it? Surely it's bad writing that cheapens the literary world. I'm reading Bertrand Russell's History of Western Philosophy at the moment and think it well written. If I find out someone else wrote it for him I'd be slightly disappointed but it would still be well written. Nothing would change that.

[quote]If the majority of people don't write them anymore then it becomes something people will begin to expect and it will mean that real hard-working writers who actually do it may be questioned as to whether they actually did it or not.[/quote]

Well, let them be questioned. Surely writers are more interested in expressing themselves artistically or sharing information than being worried about what people think they actually wrote. In fact a literary world where, as you say, the majority don't write their own books will actually make the writers that do stand out even more; they'd be looked upon with even more respect wouldn't they? Like an actor that does his own stunts is respected more than the actors who don't.

[quote]I don't accept that porn is the epitome of fakery, what is being faked?[/quote]

I'm not going to reply to this, Max. I have a feeling your whole world will crumble around your feet. Ok, everything in porn is real.

[quote]And I've never put down any porn girls for having low IQ's,[/quote]

Did I say you had? You used 'imbecile' as a slight on Jordan. If you see it as a derogatory term then what are you saying about any pornstars with equal to, or lower intelligence than Jordan?

[quote]but I am willing to use the word 'imbecile' with Jordan because of her audacity, set against the fact she isnt very bright, and when you have that combination then calling someone an imbecile is justified[/quote]

How is it justified? Do you have access to her medical records or something?

[quote]she purports to be a literary queen, when she is not, the things are done by others but she pretends to be something she isnt. Someone who is not bright but smugly goes round implying they are conveys a certain arrogance and those people deserve to be slagged off.[/quote]

So she's an imbecile that's clever enough to make herself a millionaire by playing the game? Hmmmmmmm.... And there's nothing wrong with arrogance if you have something to back it up. All successful people are arrogant to a degree. If they were humble they would never have the confidence in themselves to do anything. George Orwell mentions this in one of his essays, 'Why I Write':

"Putting aside the need to earn a living, I think there are four great motives for writing, at any rate for writing prose. They exist in different degrees in every writer, and in any one writer the proportions will vary from time to time, according to the atmosphere in which he is living. They are:

(i) Sheer egoism. Desire to seem clever, to be talked about, to be remembered after death, to get your own back on the grown-ups who snubbed you in childhood, etc., etc. It is humbug to pretend this is not a motive, and a strong one. Writers share this characteristic with scientists, artists, politicians, lawyers, soldiers, successful businessmen ? in short, with the whole top crust of humanity. The great mass of human beings are not acutely selfish. After the age of about thirty they almost abandon the sense of being individuals at all ? and live chiefly for others, or are simply smothered under drudgery. But there is also the minority of gifted, willful people who are determined to live their own lives to the end, and writers belong in this class. Serious writers, I should say, are on the whole more vain and self-centered than journalists, though less interested in money.

(ii) Aesthetic enthusiasm. Perception of beauty in the external world, or, on the other hand, in words and their right arrangement. Pleasure in the impact of one sound on another, in the firmness of good prose or the rhythm of a good story. Desire to share an experience which one feels is valuable and ought not to be missed. The aesthetic motive is very feeble in a lot of writers, but even a pamphleteer or writer of textbooks will have pet words and phrases which appeal to him for non-utilitarian reasons; or he may feel strongly about typography, width of margins, etc. Above the level of a railway guide, no book is quite free from aesthetic considerations.

(iii) Historical impulse. Desire to see things as they are, to find out true facts and store them up for the use of posterity.

(iv) Political purpose. ? Using the word ?political? in the widest possible sense. Desire to push the world in a certain direction, to alter other peoples? idea of the kind of society that they should strive after. Once again, no book is genuinely free from political bias. The opinion that art should have nothing to do with politics is itself a political attitude."

[Nob3y]

Thats what I have thought all along regarding the subject of glabal warming/pollution.
Its fine for the powers that be in government to say,dont do this or dont do that or cut down on this and that when they carry on with variuos plane trips,hellicopter trips,car journeys etc etc......
But they dont ever cut down do they?

Do as I say not as I do seems to be the rule.

When they do as they tell others to do then I will take notice.
Until then I carry on as normal.
Lead by example I say.

[max_tranmere]

Porn girls may pretend to enjoy it more than they do but they are really doing all the things, arent they? They are actually shagging, actually blowing the guy, actually taking the load all over her, etc. If it was just pretend, faked, no real sex, a body double was used and isolated shots of her face kept appearing, cleverly edited in to the scene - so she's not really doing it but it looks like it is her in the scene, and she goes round saying "I'm a porn star and a I shag on camera" then that WOULD be fakery.

Jordan has as much to do with 'her' books as I do, yet she pretends to be an author, turns up at book signings and so on to sign them (I imagine she can just about write her own name) so she is faking it, and YES I do think it cheapens the literary world. You say that the real writers will be more respected because they actually do it, well no one knows who has had them ghost-written or not, do they? It is obvious Jordan, that Colleen bimbo, and Victoria Beckham do have ghost-writers but it isnt clear on the cover - you are supposed to think they are the author and most of the people who buy them think that.

If a man called Joe Smith who lives in your road worked his arse off writing a book, 40 hours a week at his PC for months, edited it himself, and put it out then it is no more clear to the purchaser that he wrote the thing himself (which he did) than whether any of the afore-mentioned did or not. I would be happier with all of this if 'ghost-written by...' appeared on the cover, or 'as told to...' appeared, but it doesn't. I think that unless the reality of what is happeneing is made clear most people will be none the wiser and the real art of book writing, and the respect that should go to real authors, is diminished.

[Sam Slater]

[quote]Porn girls may pretend to enjoy it more than they do but they are really doing all the things, arent they?[/quote]

Fakery is fakery, be it acts or emotions. There's plenty of A2M that's faked, lots of ejaculates faked, erections helped by viagra, camera angles changed to give the girl a break if she's a little 'sore down there'. In the end all that matters is that the voyeur is happy.

[quote]Jordan has as much to do with 'her' books as I do,[/quote]

That's not quite true though, is it? The personal details of her private life, her thoughts, desires and aspirations are what made the book, not just the bashing away at a keyboard. The manual labour involved with the writing is only a minor part in any book, Max. Come on lad.

[quote]and YES I do think it cheapens the literary world.[/quote]

That's your opinion and that's fine, Max. But you can't justify that opinion can you? In my opinion it's the quality of the prose, accuracy of the facts or art of conveying a story to the reader that enriches the literary world. And so it follows that a lack of these things spoils it. The authors are immaterial to me because it's the skills that are the real worth. Like I said, if Bertrand Russell really hadn't written History of Western Philosophy would it alter the quality of writing or it's worth to the literary world? And if you had to choose would you rather read a badly written book by Jordan or a competently ghost-written book? I think of a ghost writer as a kind of translator. They're using their skills to aid someone to tell a story. Using a porn analogy you could say the lighting guy and make-up artist are aiding the porn actress to look more attractive, but they can't do the scene without the girl. Likewise, regardless of how many ghost-writers Jordan has at hand they have nothing without her story and input.