Thursday, July 20, 2006

Judge rules that climbing Everest is dangerous

Without wishing to speak ill of the dead, Micheal Matthews is just the latest in a string of unfortunates with more money than sense who thought that $40,000 was an adequate substitute for skill, experience and judgement. There's nothing new about it, over-wealthy FHM readers have been carking-it on Everest for years, but because these people don't bother to find out what they're getting into there's always plenty of fresh avalanche fodder. There's probably a few out at base camp now, having the 'ultimate adventure' supplied (for a small recompense, of course) by X-Treme Fanny-Magnet Adventures, Ltd. I have very little sympathy for them. I do however note that nobody throws their hands in the air in horror and starts threatening court action every time a Sherpa with a wife and five kids to feed gets killed by his client's ambition and incompetence. The whole farce hearkens back to the Victorian era of mountaineering, when first ascents were always accredited to 'gentlemen' (i.e. rich British toff being dragged up on a rope) as opposed to 'professionals' (i.e. competent local doing the dragging).

Some will accuse me of insensitivity - but hey, that's mountaineering for you. If you choose to stick your dick in a bee's nest that's your prerogative, but don't sue the beekeeper when you get stung.

I don't know why these people bother to climb Everest anyway, it's not as if there's much actual 'climbing' on the South Col route. You could get the same experience at a fraction of the cost by going into an airtight, refrigerated meat-locker and spending thirty six hours on a stairmaster.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home