#126
Posted: 9/4/06 at 2:42pm
"Let this ignorant slut clarify some things. I don't doubt that Steve Irwin did a lot of good and taught a lot of people about the animal kingdom. But he did so by taking unnecessary risks to his life. It was sensationalist TV and we watched. While he was young and single he only had himself to answer to and support.
Then he had CHILDREN and didn't change his wild behavior, in fact he put his child at risk to make even MORE sensational TV. THAT is what I have a problem with. When he became a parent, IT IS MY OPINION, that he should have changed his act. Take it to the class rooms, write books, use the footage he had collected over the years to reduce the risk that his children would grow up fatherless. THAT IS WHAT I AM SAYING."
But the reason his message was heard by so many people is because he was a bit different. Do you really think he'd have been nearly as popular if he just stood around and talked. He drew attention to conservation by being different, and in doing so, inspired a whole new generation of naturalists. He made being a biologist fun again. Kids (and adults, for that matter) could watch his show and say, "that looks like a cool job."
By your logic, should all policeman and firefighters change careers when they have children? What about other biologists who live in the Serengetti studying lions? Or the guy who works the overnight shift at the convenience store? Or construction workers? The list goes on...
It's a great tragedy his children will now grow up fatherless, and that a woman has lost her husband. However, he was still doing his job, and doing it darn well. To suggest he ought to suddenly change professions is silly. I suspect his wife would even have laughed at such a notion.
Then he had CHILDREN and didn't change his wild behavior, in fact he put his child at risk to make even MORE sensational TV. THAT is what I have a problem with. When he became a parent, IT IS MY OPINION, that he should have changed his act. Take it to the class rooms, write books, use the footage he had collected over the years to reduce the risk that his children would grow up fatherless. THAT IS WHAT I AM SAYING."
But the reason his message was heard by so many people is because he was a bit different. Do you really think he'd have been nearly as popular if he just stood around and talked. He drew attention to conservation by being different, and in doing so, inspired a whole new generation of naturalists. He made being a biologist fun again. Kids (and adults, for that matter) could watch his show and say, "that looks like a cool job."
By your logic, should all policeman and firefighters change careers when they have children? What about other biologists who live in the Serengetti studying lions? Or the guy who works the overnight shift at the convenience store? Or construction workers? The list goes on...
It's a great tragedy his children will now grow up fatherless, and that a woman has lost her husband. However, he was still doing his job, and doing it darn well. To suggest he ought to suddenly change professions is silly. I suspect his wife would even have laughed at such a notion.
