I, Furkan Derya

Given all the media coverage related to "I furkan derya" over the last coupla days, it does look very likely to become an oft-used catchphrase -- certainly among the Twitterati.

Clearly, it's no longer just a former youth worker's name. It's also something else entirely. To me, and I think a lot of other people, it's an idiom to challenge "culturally sensitive" posturing. It says: "Garn, compassionista, prove you actually believe all the sanctimonious, hand-wringing shite you're spouting. Bet you can't!"

Others may have a different take on it. But I suspect it will usually be in that general ballpark of meaning. Lefties, fond of hijacking memes for their own petty purposes, might try to use it "ironically" to expose what they see as the right's appalling bigotry. But they'll still be stifling a laugh when they do. So, as is so often the case with the tragic shenanigans of these child-brained quarterwits, it will just be another own goal they're scoring.

And just on that accusation that its use belies a racist attitude: Utter bollocks! Names of people from all races and creeds can be used as joke fodder, as this list so hilariously attests. If anything qualifies as racist it's to demand that monikers common among certain cultural and ethnic groups should be deemed off limits for comedic or satirical usage.

Whatever your view on those aspects of the item of word-play in question, it's certainly worth considering what its, ahem, traditional owner might be thinking and feeling. This Turkish former youth centre worker would be a very good subject for an interview. And if no journo has tried to find and contact him for one I'd be very surprised. But until such a discussion appears it's worth conjecturing about how he might be feeling.

I certainly have some sympathy for the bloke. If he is the shy, retiring type then it would be quite upsetting to know that countless people are laughing out loud (or hypocritically stifling guffaws) whenever they say his name, which has been splashed all over the internet. And if he's politically of the Left and is being encouraged to take offence and be a victim, then he'd be mortified, of course.

Well, if that's the case that's unfortunate. But in defence of the gag I'd say this: It's not mocking Mr Derya himself. Using it is heaping scorn on the idea that some things should never be laughed at, right? Not so much mock heroic; more its exact inverse.

Not that you qualify as a genuine hero for repeating the phrase, mind. Anyone can do that. But there are serious issues at play -- namely freedom of speech. If you're gonna say #JeSuisCharlie then you can't get your knickers in a twist over #IFurkanDerya now can you?

This is why I think that if I were the original FD, I might be a bit miffed, but I'd also be chuffed that my name had became code for the right to make fun of whatever the hell you wanted to, even if it offends some people. That's an essential part of freedom of speech, itself integral to true democracy, after all.

Surely we want to have a society in which everyone is an individual first, regardless of which group, class or tribe he or she belongs too. And given that, we can all slag off, mock and deride each other. It's when this mockery escalates into violence that's the problem. And creating different standards and laws for different groups won't prevent this happening. On the contrary, it will increase its likelihood.

Now, I know a lot of mealy-mouthed jelly-backs on the Left have the opposite view. It gets in the way of their sinister, parasitic goal of controlling our minds and hearts from within. But as things stand in Oz most people don't want it to become the nanny nation these malignant creeps desperately want it to be. And frankly I'd like to keep it that way.

For this reason I hope that the bloke whose name was the inspiration for the phrase can see its significance and is at least a bit proud of it. That would suggest an alternative meaning for it, more along the lines of #JeSuisCharlie.

If we can say I furkan DERYA! in provocative mockery then we're kinda also saying -- in defiant solidarity -- I, Furkan Derya ... right?

Furkan Derya gag an elegant jab at political correctness

As Mark Twain noted, explaining humour is like dissecting a frog. "You learn a lot in the process, but in the end you kill it." So, if you don't want a slimy trail of figurative amphibian entrails sliding down your computer screens, then leave this page immediately. Because explain -- or at least analyze -- a gag is what I'm gonna do here.

And the gag in question was written by Tim Blair in a recent column about another kind of lethal dissection: suicide bombing -- namely that involving a sad, lost young Aussie bloke called Jake Bilardi. In it he quoted a source named Furkan Derya. As a throwaway, he added: "I furkan derya to find a better name than Furkan Derya."

When I read this, I laughed out loud, as I'm sure pretty much everyone else did too. (Well, at least those who got it. Amazingly, plenty didn't!) Even many of those now spluttering with indignation would have guffawed too -- or at least struggled to stop themselves from doing so.

Predictably, the line has caused outrage and consternation on Twitter and similar sites and ultimately in the mainstream media. 

As well as neatly revealing the literal minded stupidity and po-faced pomposity of the PC Left the gag has other things going for it. For example, it has a symmetrical elegance to it on a par with the classic "How do you titillate an Ocelot? Oscillate its titalot."

The other thing I like about the line is that it tells you exactly what it's doing as it does it. It knows there are overblown sensitivities around the context and content that will make people try to stifle a laugh when they read or hear it. It's daring you not to laugh. And that makes it all the funnier. 

Then there's the fact that it's uniquely Orstrayan ...

Hell, it's not just comedy gold. It's bloody satirical platinum! Which is why I think it will be garnering wuckas for years to come. It might even become part of the local lingo like that other offering of Blair's, "frightbat". 

Well, whatever the future has in store for the plucky, pinko-prodding little pun, it's confirmation that too many on the Left have lost their sense of humour. That's sad because they used to be a hoot.

Take the video below, surely the ne plus ultra of silly name jokes. Be great if they could see the funny side again, wouldn't it? If they could do that, they might just see sense as well.

UPDATE: More thoughts on this subject here.

Howard haters helped the then PM. Will the same effect apply to Abbott?

Back in the days of John Howard there was a fascinating process at play. Quite often during his reign, the more the Howard haters whinged and wailed about him, the more he rose in the polls.

As many have said, Howard's ordinariness worked strongly in his favour. He was non-threatening to most, even if they weren't great admirers of him. So when the spiteful, infantile Left arced up about every little thing he did, the majority could see this for the massive ongoing tanty that it actually was. These people are waaay OTT, they thought. Howard doesn't deserve this hate.

And this happened so often often that the Left's infantile squawking became a reliable reverse indicator for many. The more his haters expressed their outrage, the more people suspected that Howard was on the right track. And so his support tended to rise with the volume of their Godawful shrieking -- or at least did not fall as a result of it.

Now, for some reason Abbott hasn't benefited from an equivalent process. I think it's due to several factors, the main one being his devout Catholicism. His love of the monarchy turns off a lot of people too as that Prince Philip knighthood train wreck so vividly illustrated.

Then there's his devotion to physical fitness and his love of boxing. He was also an extremely high achiever academically, having been a Rhodes Scholar. Abbott is a far more extreme character in many ways than Howard was.

The former PM was low-key when it came to religion. And while he was physically fit for his age he didn't swim, run and ride all over the joint like a man possessed. Just did some early morning power-walking in his daggy tracksuit. While obviously intelligent, he was not an academic star in his youth. Unlike Abbott, he wasn't a career high flyer before entering politics. Just ran a modest suburban law practice for many years.

So, there's widespread wariness about Abbott. Even though he craves acceptance and admiration from his countrymen and has clearly won it from those volunteer fire fighters and other ordinary Aussies that he spends to much time with, a high proportion of the population just don't quite trust him. He's a bit too full on and intense for their liking.

But now, after many months in the top job, I think this general mistrust is starting to thaw. They are increasingly willing to see him as a decent but flawed bloke who's competent and rational, and has our best interests at heart. He might make a few crazy calls. But when he does he quickly corrects his mistakes. And he has enough humility to listen to criticism and change his behaviour as a result.

That's why I think that from now on he might start to benefit from the insane rage of his infantile enemies in the same way Howard did. For this reason I think he's got a far better shot at retaining his gig as PM than most of the commentariat believe.

What do you reckon? Will the Abbott-haters win? Or will they win it for him?

Margolyes abuses Abbott on Q and A. Love media exultant

Didn't see Q and A last night. But clearly the highlight of the show for the armies of child-brained fans on Twitter and in the mainstream media was the moment when pompous Pommie actress Miriam Margolyes called Tony Abbott a tit. They've all been punching the air, crowing triumphantly about this as if it was a crippling blow landed against the Pugilist in Chief.

"Take that Abbott!" they cry. "The daffy ol' actress who played Professor Sprout in the Harry Potter movies called you a tit on our favourite leftie love-in! No man alive could withstand that kind of an assault. You're toast, Tony! Just accept it."

Makes you wonder why so many Aussies would attribute such political power to such a clearly balmy ol' Brit. Hell, she's just another luvvy blowhard spouting the same ol' socialist shite they all do. She has no special interest or expertise in politics ... She's clearly a few plays short of the canon, too! I think all those years of playing mad aunts, wizard instructors and Dickensian scrubbers have taken their toll on the poor woman's psychological health.

Or perhaps she was barking to start with? Do a search for her name and in pretty much every photo that turns up she's sporting this strange purse-lipped smile. Loopy lefties, gruesome greenies and others of their ilk notice this alarming smirk and see it as confirmation she's a mischievous eccentric with searing insights into the workings of the world. But any sensible person would shudder at such a weird default facial expression and see her for what she is: an emotionally retarded simpleton who delights in her own spite; a narcissist who's spent her life in pursuit of adulation from complete strangers.

And thanks to their ABC, she's just been given another way to get it. Better still for Margolyes, this new role of "public intellectual" is even easier than the other fictional ones she usually takes on. No lines to learn or rehearsals required! All she need do is hurl nasty, puerile abuse at conservatives and the job is done.

How could anyone fail to see through her? Those poor pinko dupes. They really are the saddest little puppies in the park aren't they?