Image courtesy of Threephin


Image courtesy of Threephin

For fuck’s sake. It’s none of my business when some has-been premiership footballer from the fucking nineties ends up fucking some never-was second rate tit model from lads mags that belong in the nineties.

Apart from the prurient anger that comes from knowing this overpaid cock muncher is getting soapy tit wanks off a double-D list celebrity, while I’m tugging my own cock with a bar of soap in the shower, I really couldn’t care less.

Having said that, if said footballer makes a living off his clean-living image, then maybe, just maybe, the public has a right to know. But despite that being the main argument for naming and shaming this pathetic little turd, that isn’t the real reason we’re all angry.

We’re angry because superinjunctions expose the legal system for what it is.
No, we’re not angry because superinjunctions make a mockery out of the legal system.
Superinjunctions perfectly expose the system for what it is:

Unequal access to the law. Depending on how much money you’ve got.

Now let’s imagine for a moment I were to shag Imogen Thomas. In fact, let’s imagine for a few moments. Maybe a few more. When we’re done doing that, let’s also imagine it gets reported in the Daily Arsewipe. What do I do about it? Nothing. Because I don’t have a spare fifty grand lying around to get a superinjunction.

Yes, this is about freedom of speech. I mean, what kind of thick, idiotic, piece of shit, wouldn’t-we-all-like-to-throw-you-int0-london-zoo-and-watch-you-get-raped-by-chimps kind of cunt tries to sue Twitter? What kind of utter shit-for-brains moron names everyone who’s tweeted about his pathetic, sordid little affair, in his case?

But once you get over the sheer idiocy of this twat, you’re left with a clear narrative about power and influence in the halls of justice. It’s Goliath versus a million Davids. The rich and powerful are using superinjunctions to grant them unequal access to the law. But in a digital age, that’s no longer possible. Together, we can fight back.

The rich and powerful are being brought down to our level, and there’s an enormous amount of schadenfreude about it. People are revelling in naming this twat precisely because he’s wasting hundreds of thousands on legal fees on it.

It’s the media equivalent of dawdling at your job and taking that little extra time over something because your boss is a cunt. Let him take on the entire internet. Let him spend every penny he’s got trying to force an eleven stone cat back into a small polythene bag. The whole world is laughing at him.

But the fact still remains. These high profile superinjunction cases are proving one thing and one thing alone — the rich and powerful have better access to the law than the likes of you or I. And even though I have modest means (by premiershit football standards), I still have better access to the law than someone with no money at all.

So take a moment out of your hysterical laughter. Stop to think. When the dust settles, who will have the last laugh? Wholesale reform of the justice system is needed to ensure all are equal before the eyes of the law. When law can be bought and sold, it becomes nothing more than a commodity. It is no longer justice.

Twitter has levelled the playing field — this time. But when this is all over and we go back to being a million individuals, rather than a million people united by a common bond (namely, being sued by a colossal dick), we’re just little people. A million of us may be able to fight one rich footballer on an equal footing. But individually? We wouldn’t stand a chance.

Think about that before your next tweet.

Chad Fanstor

Comments are closed.