Whingefest

They were hailed as heroes in the summer. Now, they feel they have lost out in the New Year Honours List compared with able-bodied athletes. And they are very, very angry.

Firstly, they are not heroes. The trend for calling people who run a bit faster than someone else or jump a bit higher than someone else heroes, debases the term. People who indulge in sport are not and never were, heroes; not even paralympians.

Likewise the trend for giving out gongs for such stuff debases the principle of an honours system. These days you can spend a lifetime pretending to be someone else and get a gong. While I don’t doubt that Danny Boyle will be criticised for being churlish, I have a sneaking admiration for his refusal to accept an award. They are meaningless tat after all.

When one of these shallow, facile people has gone over the top, facing a barrage of enemy machine gun fire to rescue a comrade, I might look upon them as being worthy of an honour and of being heroes. Until then, they are just a bunch of self important shallow nobodies.

6 Comments

  1. They do seem to have miscontrued the concept of ‘honour’, don’t they? Muddled it up with ‘entitlement’ or ‘logical outcome’ or some such thing. Meanwhile, the 92 year old sole survivor of the Bletchley Park team responsible for cracking the Tunney code (Hitler’s own code) is the first and only one ‘honoured’, with a rather derisory MBE. Eisenhower calculated their success shortened WW2 by two years and saved 20 million lives. Perspective much, people?

  2. Of course, many paralympians were, in fact, soldiers injured in wars of the last few years. But yes, they should be hailed as heroes for their war record, rather than their mild success in the Olympic circus.

    DK

    • Actually, being a soldier or even an injured one does not itself mean that they were heroic. That’s why certain medals are so highly regarded – because that is what heroism is about – courage under fire above and beyond.

      I do admire those who have overcome their injuries and succeed in whatever endeavour they put themselves to. But I refuse to call them heroes and I fail to see why they should be honoured for it.

  3. How different from someone I was reminded of yesterday ..
    Olympic medal-winner (sailing)
    Internationally-known wildlife painter.
    War hero (MTB commander, then MTB-squadron commander in WWII)
    Then coservationist, rescuer of several endangered species, international sailplane record-holder, writer.
    Sir Peter Scott.

  4. Firstly, they are not heroes

    Indeed they are not. They allowed themselves to be used by unprincipled conservatives as yet another stick with which to beat disabled people. The argument went, if so-and-so disabled athlete can do that then surely you can hold down a full time job, you scrounger?. The fact that most able bodied persons could also not do what the disabled athlete did did not affect the morons making the argument.

    I see no reason why any athlete, or businessman or politician should receive an “honour” for simply doing his job. Why has Richard Branson got a knighthood simply for being an aggressive and predatory businessman?

Comments are closed.