I just cannot believe the self-centredness of this gay girl in damascus hoaxer

[HerBeX]

story here

When I heard it on PM, I assumed he was about 18 or 19 because obviously, only a child would be that self-obsessed that he would do something as irresponsible and egotistical as this, use someone else's photo without her permission, put other people's lives at risk... But no, he is a grown up 40 ish man with a wife, if you please.

I felt it deserved a feminist respons...

He is a prick, a knob and an attention seeker.

Peppered with explicit descriptions of hot girl-on-girl action (apparently, haven't read it). He does sound like a prize dick.

To add a supra-layer of sanctimony though , I do find it depressing that - as the Syrian security forces stand accused tonight of torturing children to death - this story is what's got the media going. I know it's man-bites-dog and therefore news, but nevertheless it makes me want to run around major newsrooms hitting people with a big stick.

Stupid man, with no ability to foresee or understand the consequences of his actions.

Eddie Mair was pretty scathing in his questioning.

I saw this too ... what an utter wanker. Reading that some people in Syria have put themselves in harm's way trying to find the 'gay girl' when 'she' disappeared, and that this guy justifies it by saying it's all ok because his account was quite realistic does make me fairly sick.

Bloody Hell- and I thought we had problems with trolls here!

At risk of sounding like a postmodernist, I do think this is a very clear-cut case where this guy wants to write a little story pretending he's a lesbian, because in the real world he has no control over lesbians and feels their sexuality excludes him, so he's chosen instead to make himself into the narrator because that feels much more powerful.

It is really disgusting that he still tried to justify it and has been carrying on an email 'relationship' with some poor woman under this persona ... as BoF says, it makes trolls here look almost tame.

Cross-post.

Oh, that's ok then. He 'feels a little like shit'. Aww, poor guy.

Is it just me, or is the Guardian in that extract actually doing some of this guy's excusing for him? They say 'He denied having been sexually excited by the interaction', then quote what the guy says, which isn't at all a denial that he was sexually excited .... it's a refusal to comment to the reporter: '"I don't want to go into that aspect particularly of it.""

That's not just me is it? That's shitty reporting.

Amazing, he and the other fake blogger were actually corresponding, neither realising the other was also a bloke!

Obviously the guy did a pretty creepy thing, but I don't think he deserves the complete destruction of his reputation that has resulted. I want to tut at all the annoyed people not to believe everything they read on the internet.

Also, I've always thought that the art is separate from the creator. The author of the piece is irrelevant (but I'm not sure how to apply that view if people were using his/her posts (recklessly) as informative/educational).

Well how would you defend him?

It's not 'art', surely he hasn't been so crass as to pretend that has he?

(I also think art being separate from the creator is dubious except in the most literal sense, but that's perhaps not relevant.)

I don't think he's claimed it's art, but I do think fiction can be art!

Fiction can also, as in this case, be simply a bunch of lies.

I think separating art and the artist is very important, it's the only way I can enjoy Roald Dahl books and Roman Polanski films!

Well, you could argue that's a good reason not to separate art and the artist.

But this guy isn't doing 'art' at all. It's trivializing to claim he is (though I take the point upthread that the media reporting of this in preference to other events in Syria may be trivializing in itself).

So long as we separate art from the creator - then it's OK to write fiction that puts people's lives in jeopardy?

Even he isn't suggesting that it was art.

dittany - re: "no art in this"

Says you. That's not an objective fact. Clearly due to the number of people worried/investigating this 'kidnapping', the man managed to create an emotionally involving character. That might be enough for art, for some. It's not black and white, is all I mean.

Oh come on ... you're not seriously saying you do think it's art are you?

Of course art is subjective, but let's bring in the common sense of a minute and accept that art this is not ... and that it would be no excuse if it were.