Why do we give Jason Wong attention?
Ironically, I suppose, this entire article will be doing the exact opposite of what I am advising in its title. This is the last time you’ll hear from me, however, on this issue; primarily because I’m usually too busy doing vaguely important or fun things with my life that do not pander to an attention-seeker desperate to restore his reputation.
Wong seems to have it in his head that the campaigns against him are nothing but a “conspiracy against democracy” by those radical totalitarians on campus that would rather run the place according to what fits in with their own ideology than anything else. This, to me, shows nothing but ignorance and unawareness of the student body around him: probably because he doesn’t actually know any of the people he’s criticising. Whatever one thinks of the radicals on campus, you don’t have to be a socialist to be outraged at the suggestion that his disqualification for breaking electoral rules was anything remotely like the Nazi book burnings of 1933. You don’t have to be a socialist to think that giving toasters to the women dressed as French-maids to cook for the boys while they’re playing on their Xboxes is anything but pathetic sexism which would have been more appropriate in an ‘old boys’ club 60 years ago than during a halls election of 2011.
See Jason, your critics aren’t just socialists. They’re conservatives, moderates, socialists, liberals, women, Jews, Hindus etc. In fact, they’re a fair share of the student body, in case you haven’t noticed. They don’t despise your views because they are anti-democratic: they despise your views because you have no qualms about being hurtful and offensive to members of the student body you have probably never met.
I can’t decide whether you are actually completely unaware of the offense you cause others and genuinely believe what you say, or whether you are more than aware of its controversies but get some kind of satisfaction in promoting them. The embarrassment you faced in your first term can’t have been great for your own ego nor for your future career prospects, so perhaps you’re hoping half the student body will jump on your bandwagon and you’ll become some kind of student saviour.
However, these things look unlikely. You’re making yourself look more foolish than attractive; more immature than credible.
Your criticisms of The Penguin amounted to the suggestion that the editor would never make it as a journalist; the furthest he would get was as a “big issue seller”. I would like to congratulate you for coming across as a) mature, b) coherent and c) not in any way the kind of snobbery that unfortunately can be aroused in prestigious institutions.
Your efforts are counterproductive, your unpopularity is thriving but I don’t think that bothers you, as long as you are getting attention.
It is for these reasons that I would personally advise students to stop responding to Wong by replying to his twitter posts, Facebook statuses or posts in one of his many Facebook groups.
Offensiveness gets its kicks when it knows it’s done its job. Wong loves the attention; for every person that replies that’s more publicity and probably a few more idiots to be attracted to the cause.
That really is all the attention Wong will be getting from me. Now I should put on my maid’s outfit and get back to the kitchen. Or not.