Handbags and Gladrags

Why the hell are we talking about Golriz Ghahraman again?

UPDATE: This newsletter was previously pay-walled but is now open to all. Thank you to the paying subscribers of Nick’s Kōrero for all your support.

---

So what becomes of you, my love?
When they have finally stripped you of
The handbags and the gladrags
That your poor old granddad
Had to sweat to buy you, baby

Songwriter: Mike D'abo

---

In yesterday’s newsletter, I expressed sadness at seeing Golriz Ghahraman back on the front pages for shoplifting.

As someone who is no longer in parliament and someone who has clearly acted out of character due to mental health issues, I questioned the public interest in giving the story such prominence.

Even Jordan Williams, a highly unlikely source of compassion, thought it was a bit much.

If the sort of people who run the Taxpayers’ Union think we ought to leave someone alone, then things have gone way too far.

What happened to the presumption of innocence? Why is Golriz’s name in the papers for something that police are only investigating, where other political figures receive name suppression for years for much more serious crimes where there is no doubt of their guilt? She isn’t even an MP any more.

It seems the default name suppression for someone associated with the ACT party is about a million years, whereas if it’s the Greens, you get named and shamed before you’ve even been charged.

Another problem is that now that the details have begun to emerge, I’m not even sure she has done anything wrong. This is the headline on the front page of Newstalk ZB this morning:

It turns out the former Green MP was “allegedly” seen placing items into a tote bag. According to the story, the “manner of her shopping” aroused suspicions of store security, which is an odd thing to say.

Was she wearing a traffic cone on her head? Did she do a little dance at the end of every aisle? The article notes nothing other than that she put some items into bags she had with her.

Quick, put her in the stocks and throw things at her! If she’s had three strikes, can we burn her too?

Image: BeFunky.

As Golriz approached the checkout, security stopped her and asked her to empty her bags. She took the items out and told the staff she had every intention of paying for the items. So that was the end of that.

I’m kidding, although I suspect it would’ve been the end of the story for some other people.

I myself do what Golriz did, even if I have a trolley. I’ll put my carry bags in the cart and place the items in them; then, you can lift the whole lot onto the checkout - easy. If I’m not using a trolley, I’ll definitely put my items in the bags to carry them - it’s just common sense, and nobody has ever stopped me and asked about my “manner of shopping”.

Come on, guys. The supermarket is even named “Pak ‘n Save” because you save money by packing your own groceries and putting them in your own bags!

But I’m a middle-aged white bloke, right, and not someone with a shoplifting record. So is that what we’re doing? Splashing Golriz’s name over the papers because of her past deeds and/or her demographics? The same demographics that made her such a target for online abuse?

This doesn’t feel right to me. It felt bad enough when I assumed she was guilty that it should receive so much coverage, but what if she is entirely innocent?

We can’t just assume that because she shoplifted before that, she has done so now. She pled guilty to those other charges and has cooperated fully with police; why would she now lie and say she would pay for these supermarket items, which she was immediately open about having in the bags? It doesn’t ring true.

Besides which, considering she didn’t actually make her way through the checkout without paying, she didn’t deny she was carrying items when asked, or in fact, leave the store with any stolen goods, I can’t see how they can make a case, not unless we’re just going to presume guilt.

I’m quite curious about who the “source” is that is leaking information to the media.

Pak and Save won’t answer any questions; they stated, “We have responsibilities around respecting people’s privacy, so providing information on whether an individual is known or not known to our retail crime teams is not something we can help you with,” so it clearly wasn’t them.

It’s obviously not Golriz, the Greens, or the Police. So if it is neither of the parties involved nor the authorities, then who was it?

The security people? That would be pretty unprofessional, but I can’t see who else would’ve had the information. Some helpful coalition-voting bystander?

In a world where certain people commit the vilest of crimes and receive years of name suppression. At a time when someone guilty of all manner of crimes is elected to the most powerful position on earth. Why the hell is our media hassling this poor woman who probably hasn’t even done anything this time?

Yesterday, I was sad to see another headline about Golriz; it seemed mean-spirited and without merit in terms of public interest. Today, though, after reading these details, I feel angry.

Racism is real; misogyny is real. It’s easy to see those things in a cartoonish light that the left always moans about - but they’re fucking real, and I’m sure at least half of you don’t need me to tell you that.

When the hell are we going to start treating young women of colour the same way that we treat middle-aged white men? Or those on the left the same as those on the right?

I reckon it's been a rather average week for our media. C’mon guys - do better.

We all know who will get off on a story like this - targeting a brown woman from the left and a refugee to boot and giving her another good kicking while she is down - and we certainly know there are much more important stories for the front page.

---

I had thought to add another couple of topics and make this a wrap of the week, but I figured I’d try a shorter newsletter to see how people liked it.

Speaking of, this one is paywalled. If there is a groundswell of reaction, hmm, perhaps not the best choice of words, I’ll open it up, but otherwise, I’m happy to leave it for paid subscribers.

Have a great day, all you lovely people. 🙂 And if I don’t say it enough while I’m touting for new subscribers - you guys rock - I could not do this without your support - so thank you. ❤️💚🤎

I hope no one is offended by this choice of song, Handbags and Gladrags, considering past events. It’s a very nice cover. I have a feeling I might have shared it before, but I suspect that it might have been on Facebook.

You almost got “Lost in the Supermarket” by the Clash, which is a favourite of mine, but I’ve definitely used that one before.