2019
On 13th October of this year i made a series of comments on a Guardian 'beauty products' article - all were adjudged to be unacceptable, and were removed...
Basically i was saying that i find women who wear 'caked-on' make-up to be very unappealing indeed - and that i am not a fan of the wearing of make-up in general...
I conveyed such sentiments in 'street-talk' language, and used phrases such as 'having a giraffe' (cockney slang for having a laugh), and said that for all anyone knows such 'caked-on' individuals could be 'pig ugly' underneath such a mask of make-up - such references to animals were in fact very appropriate/apt ones...
As a result, i now have 'Your comments are currently being pre-moderated' typed in red ink above the comments box...
In response to such perceived unfairness i sent the following to The Guardian in the form of an offered comment on 14 October 2019...
'Just to let you know...
I do not intend making any future comments until 'Your comments are currently being pre-moderated' has been removed...
This status is not pre-moderation, but rather, a form of extreme censorship...' ...
I fully acknowledge that The Guardian has the right to remove any comments that they deem to be unacceptable...
However, to then put me on 'the naughty step' by limiting/controlling my rights to free speech is obviously unacceptable to me, so this is why i am currently choosing not to make any further comments until fairness prevails and such unfair restrictions are removed - after all i have the implicit support of Evelyn Beatrice to express myself freely, when she stated (way back in 1906) the following, 'I [may] not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it'...
So, do i feel any remorse for making such refused/moderated comments??? - the answer is a simple and clear 'no i don't', for clearly it would be completely inappropriate to feel remorse for speaking what, for me, is simple truth / truthful opinion...
The simple fact is that the 'beauty products industry' is well-known to be linked to animal cruelty, and is thus founded upon the suffering of so-called 'lower life forms' in the quest to make, mainly/predominantly, women appear more attractive/appealing than they would otherwise be - thus it is promoting the practise of falsity (under the rather convenient banner of 'creativity / artistic expression' perchance???)...
Such animals ('lab rats') are prisoners to such ongoing suffering - as far as i am aware there is no escape for them apart from death...
The simple fact is, there is a lot of negative karma in action for those that test, manufacture and promote such products - of that there can be little doubt...
A fact that such people will come to understand only too well upon their return Home after shedding their mortal coils, so to speak - one would most readily suggest...
So, the bottom line is that if i was adjudged by others to have been somehow 'hurtful' in the way that i expressed such deemed unacceptable comments/opinions/views, then clearly such perceived 'hurtfulness' was very apt/appropriate indeed, for it can be most readily seen to be reflective of the practised real hurt/cruelty that such an industry is founded upon...
Thank you for taking the time to read the above - i simply find it important that such a situation be known and understood both loudly and clearly...
I now leave such an apparent impasse in the hands of those at The Guardian to deal with as they so choose...
(https://www.ourquantumparticulates.org/videos/the-naughty-step)