Gabby Douglas and Her Hair Are Not a Controversy

August 7, 2012 – 6:51 pm by McD

Gymnastics team competition and all-around competition gold medalist Gabby Douglas’s hair is not a controversy. It is if you’re a complete idiot, aren’t paying attention, or endorse Internet bullying. But otherwise, it’s not a real controversy, so everyone shut the hell up.

This girl should not have to comment on your stupid question just because some one found some ill-tempered tweets about her hair the night she won the damn gold medal in London.

Finding things on Twitter does not count as discovering an actual controversy. It’s f-ing Twitter, which last I checked is on the Internet. Being mean on the Internet isn’t a reportable event. It’s part of the freaking landscape like readily-available porn, the first comment on anything always being someone saying “First!”, and the five comments after that using the N-word.

Unless Jason Whitlock feels it’s necessary to analyze the cultural significance of 45 N-bombs in the comment section of an open forum too, no one is allowed to cite bad behavior on the Internet as a sign of a real controversy. After all, Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, etc. are popular with the teenagers and college students for a reason: it’s a consequence-free environment to say whatever dumb crap is on their minds at the moment.

No one acts like they’re on the Internet in real life because some one can punch you in real life, whereas the Internet just involves flame wars and trolling.

The Internet is 95 percent of the reason we have a tons of different anti-bullying campaigns. The first thing idiot children do when they’re angry is tweet something insane or create a fake Facebook page about the person they don’t like called something like “Occupation: Slut.”

And this Yahoo! blog (or possibly The Daily Beast) took those insane, bullying tweets and legitimized them by preposterously calling it a “controversy.” The only debate should be whether the author of the blog that began this mess should be forced to edit teenagers’ tweets for grammar and content as punishment for being a f**kwit.

But this is exactly what happened to Gabby Douglas. Some one took Internet Bullying and made it into a real news “controversy” simply by saying it was controversial. Watch, I can do it too:

Controversial website Yahoo! has taken to bullying teenagers through one of their online blogs because they have no idea what the hell they’re doing.

Of course the originator of the controversy seems to be from a blog, so naturally the implication of something so meta (you know, because you’re reading this on the Internet and crap like this “controversy” has sparked a debate about the validity of Internet reporting versus real reporting and their influence on each other…oh, forget it…) happening are vast and confusing, but ultimately they’re also pointless. Much like 99 percent of what’s on the Internet.

Attempting to add meaning to anything you see on the Internet is adding legitimacy to a place that doesn’t actually exist, and that’s the last f**king thing you would teach your kids to do with a bully.

Need proof? Try meeting up with the “person” behind one of the 83 million fake Facebook profiles or asking the Bronx Zoo Cobra its thoughts on Gabby Douglas’s hair, or trying to limit everything you say out loud in daily life to 140 characters.

Taking behavior from the Internet and applying it to real life is literally the worst thing we can do to our culture. And that includes overreacting to everything. While there is so much entertainment, funny stuff, useful things and information online, we should feel compelled to keep it where it is and remain the obese, neurotic sociopaths we always have been in real life.

Besides, the girl won two gold medals and was pretty much as badass as a 65-pound gymnast can be for a solid week. #smh #TeamNoBullying

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

  1. 2 Responses to “Gabby Douglas and Her Hair Are Not a Controversy”

  2. social media breeds the war reporter heroes. the social media warrior, like the war journalist are not allowed a firearm with one bullet. the war correspondent is not even allowed to handle any weapon not even a camera. The social media warriors are the same. they talk but would die if they actually had to stand toe-to-toe with the person they are subjecting to thier verbal poison. That is why it should be totally ignored because they are not directed to a any living being; it directedto the readers of their comment. Thehy are talking big shit hid behind all the screens of the internet. If they are not saying it to the person they are talking about then it is nothing put farting out the mouth. They would run in the opposite direction if any of their evil words would demand they say it to and in the face of the wo/man they alledgely critizing. In fact they are drafing off the fame of others to draw attention to themselves. There is no substance in such words – its all show.

    By Nat on Aug 27, 2012

  3. social media breeds the war reporter heroes. the social media warrior, like the war journalist are not allowed a firearm with one bullet. the war correspondent is not even allowed to handle any weapon not even a camera. The social media warriors are the same. they talk but would die if they actually had to stand toe-to-toe with the person they are subjecting to thier verbal poison. That is why it should be totally ignored because they are not directed to a any living being; it directedto the readers of their comment. Thehy are talking big shit hid behind all the screens of the internet. If they are not saying it to the person they are talking about then it is nothing put farting out the mouth. They would run in the opposite direction if any of their evil words would demand they say it to and in the face of the wo/man they alledgely critizing. In fact they are drafing off the fame of others to draw attention to themselves. There is no substance in such words – its all show. Yea.

    By Nat on Aug 27, 2012

Post a Comment