Could this be karma for getting her fanny out in a bad film?
Sharon Stone, whose big hairy fanny I saw in Basic Instinct, recently drew the ire of the small portion of Chinese citizens who are allowed to express ire with an ill thought out comment about the Sichuan earthquake, which has killed tens of thousands of people, being karma for Chinese oppression of Tibet.
Unfortunately, Sharon is the face of Dior, who sell a lot of overpriced tat to the portion of Chinese people who are allowed to be rich. Dior have distanced themselves from Sharon’s comments for all the wrong reasons, saying, “We would never support any opinion that would hurt the feelings of our customers”.
What, any opinion that would hurt the feelings of their customers? Expressing opinions such as “peaceful protesters shouldn’t be shot”, “people should have freedom of religion” and “proper building regulations should be followed, especially when building schools in earthquake zones” would hurt the feelings of more than a few of their Chinese customers – the corrupt Party officials who are buying their Dior handbags with backhanders from builders who are bribing them to ignore regulations – but it doesn’t make them bad opinions. Dior give the impression that they would fellate a horse if it meant Chinese people would buy a few handbags.
Besides, Sharon’s opinion is actually quite Buddhist, which I think is the religion of choice for the portion of Chinese citizens who are allowed to be religious. Buddhism is based around karmic reincarnation, where deeds done in this life are rewarded or punished by your reincarnation. A wise and noble belief if you’re the Dalai Lama, but if you’re Glen Hoddle and you say disabled people are rightly being made to pay for the sins of past lives, everybody thinks you’re a cunt.
Clearly Sharon was wrong; the tens of thousands of Chinese who died in the earthquake are the wrong targets for karmic punishment; they had nothing to do with the occupation of Tibet and can hardly be blamed for not campaigning for its liberation. It’s easy to take the moral high ground when doing so endears you to your liberal Californian showbiz colleagues; not so easy when such expressing such dissent leads to life in Grandpa Wen’s gulags for you and a few of your close family.
Sharon’s a bit of an arse. Of course Dior are disowning her comments, but they should at least pretend they are doing it because the comments are abhorrent and wrong, rather than because it’ll hurt profits. Since when did companies not care about looking mercenary?
Unfortunately, Sharon is the face of Dior, who sell a lot of overpriced tat to the portion of Chinese people who are allowed to be rich. Dior have distanced themselves from Sharon’s comments for all the wrong reasons, saying, “We would never support any opinion that would hurt the feelings of our customers”.
What, any opinion that would hurt the feelings of their customers? Expressing opinions such as “peaceful protesters shouldn’t be shot”, “people should have freedom of religion” and “proper building regulations should be followed, especially when building schools in earthquake zones” would hurt the feelings of more than a few of their Chinese customers – the corrupt Party officials who are buying their Dior handbags with backhanders from builders who are bribing them to ignore regulations – but it doesn’t make them bad opinions. Dior give the impression that they would fellate a horse if it meant Chinese people would buy a few handbags.
Besides, Sharon’s opinion is actually quite Buddhist, which I think is the religion of choice for the portion of Chinese citizens who are allowed to be religious. Buddhism is based around karmic reincarnation, where deeds done in this life are rewarded or punished by your reincarnation. A wise and noble belief if you’re the Dalai Lama, but if you’re Glen Hoddle and you say disabled people are rightly being made to pay for the sins of past lives, everybody thinks you’re a cunt.
Clearly Sharon was wrong; the tens of thousands of Chinese who died in the earthquake are the wrong targets for karmic punishment; they had nothing to do with the occupation of Tibet and can hardly be blamed for not campaigning for its liberation. It’s easy to take the moral high ground when doing so endears you to your liberal Californian showbiz colleagues; not so easy when such expressing such dissent leads to life in Grandpa Wen’s gulags for you and a few of your close family.
Sharon’s a bit of an arse. Of course Dior are disowning her comments, but they should at least pretend they are doing it because the comments are abhorrent and wrong, rather than because it’ll hurt profits. Since when did companies not care about looking mercenary?
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home