‘The Guardian’ meets Vic&Bob
Alright, we get it, about how in the world of perpetual criticism and finding fault that masquerades as journalism over at ‘The Guardian’. That whilst it can be trying to find new ways to pandering to its disciples need to feel guilty to just for being alive, in their world, The Garrick Club is something vexing. Their interminable pursuit of this men only members club has been a staple of its output for well over a week now, so much so that it has reached beyond the confines of “The Guardians’ sanctimonious morality, and causes four judges to resign their membership of it today.
If ‘The Guardian’ were a dog, one would think it had rabies it’s been frothing so angrily about it. But the thing about it is, is it really that important a story? How is the fact that a group of successful men like to socialise in comfortable surroundings with other successful men and have formed a club that only allows successful men to join it a story? Especially since they’ve been at it since 1831.
But in the echo-chamber that is ‘The Guardian’s’ editorial stance, one which ruthlessly assumes some evil machinations lurking hidden somewhere such a privileged club, being a member of such a club is suspicious and that suspicion is enough to permit a kind of guilt by association that’d make Senator Joe McCarthy blush.
It’s as if no-one at ‘The Guardian’ would ever dream of using social connections to help bolster theirs, their friends or associates careers, or to use those connections to some other advantage. It happens everywhere, from rugby clubs and Chambers of Commerce to the Women’s Institute. To imagine it wasn’t ever thus is being dangerously disingenuous. If Kath Viner, the editor of ‘The Guardian’ was serious about highlighting the pernicious dangers inherent in of cronyism, of friends doing friends favours and keeping those favours quiet, then possibly being open and transparent about her relationship and subsequent marriage to Guardian copy whore Adrian Chiles might be a good place to start. He claims the relationship started after he started working there in 2019, ending in marriage in 2022.
Isn’t this exactly the sort of behaviour that ‘The Guardian’ would be quick to condemn? Someone in a position of power, not only having a relationship with a subordinate but also powerful enough to terminate their employment? Just because here there is a reversal of the sexes of the people involved that usually accompanies these stories, doesn’t make it any the less problematic. They’re ever so quick to call on someone to resign over something that offends their own highly selective moral sensibilities, just as long as it doesn’t happen to involve their editor, it seems.
And also what, essentially, is the difference between The Garrick Club and Warner Hotels. One is men only club whilst the other provides other adults only holidays. Can someone explain why one kind of discrimination is so much worse than another? Or is age discrimination alright, just as long as its done to those too young to notice their being discriminated against?