An Explosive Reaction to Glitter Bombing
In my recent column for the campus paper, the Minnesota Daily, I playfully tackled the issue of glitter bombing, the state's most common form of precipitation this year, given the relatively warm winter. An explanation below:
Now if you’re unaware of what glitter bombing is, it’s the act of contesting someone else’s views that you consider intolerant by displaying your own intolerance toward their views by publicly humiliating them. This way is more fun though: Glitter bombing involves showering the target with dazzling confetti.
Committed by gay rights activists on exclusively GOP candidates, my overall thesis argues:
In the midst of this shimmering warfare that gives new meaning to the Enola Gay, what makes glitter bombing a black eye for the queer guy is that it completely surrenders the capacity for debate.
Even after making it clear that glitter bombing doesn't further legitimize the advocates' case, that they lower themselves to a level of discounting their own intellectual and rhetorical abilities, I've already heard back from a reader or two that they "really want to glitter bomb [me]" to teach me a lesson.
Well, these wanna-be assailants may want to reconsider. Following a glitter bomb incident on Mitt Romney in Colorado, a student has now "been cited on misdemeanor charges of creating a disturbance, throwing a missile and an unlawful act on school property" by Denver police. If convicted, he'll face six months in jail and a $1,000 fine, but stated he had "no regrets."
How do we feel about this? For over a year, Gov. Mike Huckabee and others have been calling for glitter bombing, and similar acts, to be considered "an assault," but I think even a lot of conservatives rolled their eyes at the notion. Not because they didn't agree, but because they thought, given the double standards towards these sorts of issues, it was a forlorn pursuit.
But now Huckabee's wish has been granted, at least to some degree. Most people here would prefer activists just didn't stoop to such childish levels, but it's a reality for whatever reason, so does the punishment fit the crime? I'm just as outraged when these sorts of incidents go unpunished, but that was part of the fun of it all: getting worked up over their collective dismissal. So, also, did we just like calling it "a crime" until it actually became one?
- Comment (18)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (0)
Comments:
May '10
Re: An Explosive Reaction to Glitter Bombing
My Dad was an optometrist. The first thing that I thought of was, all you need is to get a piece of glitter in your eye and you could be looking at a serious medical/visual problem. Yeah, I'd say that a serious assault charge is not out of line with the possibility of blinding someone.
Jun '10
Re: An Explosive Reaction to Glitter Bombing
No, you turn the microphone over to the bomber and ask him to explain himself. If the left wants to act childish, then put it on display for the entire world to see. Don't waste the opportunity to allow a fool his ten seconds of fame.
Edited on February 15, 2012 at 8:27amMar '11
Re: An Explosive Reaction to Glitter Bombing
The fine sounds insufficient. On the other hand the six months in jail seems inappropriate. Depending on how gay the activist is, jail time might be an incentive. Some kind of community service, such as cleaning up after OWS type demonstrations for example, would seem more appropriate. I suppose an suitable uniform to be worn while performing said community service would be over the top.
Aug '10
Re: An Explosive Reaction to Glitter Bombing
Jail time is a bit much. I'm okay with the fine, though. My preferred method of dealing with it would be to have society look down on such acts with contempt and mockery. The problem is that these acts make the offenders feel like they're speaking truth to power, and then the news media provides them their 15 minutes of glory to reinforce it. They should be laughed off for choosing such an infantile way of expressing themselves, because, as you said, "they lower themselves to a level of discounting their own intellectual and rhetorical abilities."
Grow up, be an adult, and string together a series of cogent thoughts to rebut an argument. That's what they should be told.
Aug '10
Re: An Explosive Reaction to Glitter Bombing
...either that or we can always respond with: "Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries. "
Jul '10
Re: An Explosive Reaction to Glitter Bombing
The reason they continue to do this to GOP figures is they know nothing severe will happen to them. The reason they don't glitter-bomb, say, bikers is they know there's a very real chance of getting the crap kicked out of them. The consequences have to be serious enough to get them to think twice before it will stop. Social disorder runs rampant in a society where citizens stand idly by waiting for the government authorities to address every last problem.
Feb '11
Re: An Explosive Reaction to Glitter Bombing
If it works, yes. If not, then ramp it up.
Jun '10
Re: An Explosive Reaction to Glitter Bombing
ABC World News Now: Newt Gingrich Gets Glittered
www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHQYaTK4tv0
If there's any good in it, it's maybe exposing what poor security these events have. It was glitter, but it could've been something much worse.
Edited on February 15, 2012 at 9:32amOct '10
Re: An Explosive Reaction to Glitter Bombing
Andrew Johnson:
But now Huckabee's wish has been granted, at least to some degree. Most people here would prefer activists just didn't stoop to such childish levels, but it's a reality for whatever reason, so does the punishment fit the crime? I'm just as outraged when these sorts of incidents go unpunished, but that was part of the fun of it all: getting worked up over their collective dismissal. So, also, did we just like calling it "a crime" until it actually became one? · · 2 hours ago
In my book, yes. I for one don't want become blind by glitter specks getting in my eyeballs.
May '10
Re: An Explosive Reaction to Glitter Bombing
Whatever the punishment, the liberal media will emphasize the punishment and pass off the offender's harrassment as minor. We won't win against this nonsense through the liberal media.
~Paules
No, you turn the microphone over to the bomber and ask him to explain himself.
That might work once, if the glitterer was too stupid to give the media even one good soundbite (no cogent argument necessary). Then the glitterers would know how to get their words on TV.
Exactly. We need to get local governments and not just the federal government to back off so that citizens can take their proper role in law enforcement.
A punch, like a spanking, is an immediate and clear response. Imagine a kid whose parents always delayed punishment by days and then only sent him to Time Out. One size doesn't fit all.
Jun '10
Re: An Explosive Reaction to Glitter Bombing
6 months in jail is probably about right. It is an assault -- but it is more of an assault on the civil society. These are thugs -- albeit fruity thugs who would wilt and start crying if they were slugged as they deserve in response.
Aug '11
Re: An Explosive Reaction to Glitter Bombing
I just don't get Glitter-Bombing. If someone did that to me, I would walk proudly through the falling glitter, triumphantly smiling and waving like Miss America!
Oct '10
Re: An Explosive Reaction to Glitter Bombing
I'm with TucsonSean on this. It's as much intimidation of civil society as it is an assault on an individual. Tolerance of this kind of thuggery invites more, and worse. The "broken window" theory applies here.
Oct '11
Re: An Explosive Reaction to Glitter Bombing
Limestone Cowboy
I'm with TucsonSean on this. It's as much intimidation of civil society as it is an assault on an individual. Tolerance of this kind of thuggery invites more, and worse. The "broken window" theory applies here.
· 23 minutes ago
Limestone has touched the real crime here but has not named it. This is terrorism plain and simple. "The use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims." It is soft terrorism, but terrorism nevertheless. If this continues without consequences it will escalate to hard terrorism. That is simply the nature of things.
Apr '11
Re: An Explosive Reaction to Glitter Bombing
I would only find such actions acceptable if the glitter folks doused THEMSELVES in the presence of their protest target. That of course, would be ridiculous.
Apr '11
Re: An Explosive Reaction to Glitter Bombing
This is not a problem that requires state involveemeent. It's political. The proper treatment for a glitter bombing or similar "statement" is what the British Medical Association calls "putting the boot in". If the bomber can walk away under his own steam, the dosage was too small. Cf. Mrs. Murdock.
Apr '11
Re: An Explosive Reaction to Glitter Bombing
My response would be: "Thanks for helping me secure the Twilight Mom vote!"
Mar '12
Re: An Explosive Reaction to Glitter Bombing
Don't make glitter bombing a crime. Simply pass a law that makes it a petty misdemeanor ($25 fine max) to punch the activist in the nose.