Fez909
toilet expert
More support from the media elite, this time Daniel Finkelstein (LSE, not Oxbridge!)
https://twitter.com/Dannythefink/status/281764761044131840
https://twitter.com/Dannythefink/status/281764761044131840
She's not gonna do that fair or no fair, it's just not how she works. She knows she can't bullshit her way out of the stuff that's been collated here, so why bother? There's nothing in it for her being here.I would like to get Laurie back on here to answer everyone's questions. I think she could learn a fair bit if she does that and I dare say there's a thing or two I and others on here can learn from her. But she's never going to do that while people are defending that cartoon. I agree that it wasn't a genuine threat of violence and that Firky didn't intend to intimidate her but I also think it's plausible, considering the crap she gets from the right and the fact that she doesn't know the kind of character Firky is, that she honestly took it to be so.
I'd quite like to get her back on here to answer some of the questions put to her but she's not going to do that if it doesn't look like people are being fair with her.
More support from the media elite, this time Daniel Finkelstein (LSE, not Oxbridge!)
I think her reaction to the cartoon was calculated, I don't believe for a moment that she felt threatened or intimidated by us. That is borne out, to an extent, by the fact that she came here and engaged in discussion after, and largely a a result of, the offending image being posted.
Take saying "I work for a living" as your initial reaction to seeing this, well, if you're still lurking Laurie, i'm unemployed at the moment, and what fucking of it?
How do you expect a young unemployed person, y'know one of those people you've built a career claiming to speak for, to take that comment?
I didn't come from a family who could subsidise me living in London whilst I interned my way around the place for years on end. Those options were never on the table for me.
Perhaps I should be working at the New Statesman on the work programme for nowt, would that be more to your liking?
You can see the real public-school upbringing shine through there. Soon as a bit of criticism is applied, the pretence of radicalism drops Penny reverts back to being a sneering snob.
to be honest, if you read a few of her articles and look at the comments attached, there's a lot of it sees to be because she is a) a lefty,and b) an woman talking about sexism . And there's a lot of really unpleasant stuff that i've seen that i think justifies her paranoia a little bit.
I would like to get Laurie back on here to answer everyone's questions. I think she could learn a fair bit if she does that and I dare say there's a thing or two I and others on here can learn from her. But she's never going to do that while people are defending that cartoon. I agree that it wasn't a genuine threat of violence and that Firky didn't intend to intimidate her but I also think it's plausible, considering the crap she gets from the right and the fact that she doesn't know the kind of character Firky is, that she honestly took it to be so.
I'd quite like to get her back on here to answer some of the questions put to her but she's not going to do that if it doesn't look like people are being fair with her.
It's a bit strange that the article make no mention of this thread at all.
If you were doing even half a decent job as a left-wing commentator then people like Daniel Finkelstein would loathe every inch of your being. Jesus wept.
I seem to recall a similarly nauseating display of backslapping when she was up against The Mensch formally known as Bagshawe on Newsnight. Absolutely no edge at all.
I would like to get Laurie back on here to answer everyone's questions. I think she could learn a fair bit if she does that and I dare say there's a thing or two I and others on here can learn from her. But she's never going to do that while people are defending that cartoon. I agree that it wasn't a genuine threat of violence and that Firky didn't intend to intimidate her but I also think it's plausible, considering the crap she gets from the right and the fact that she doesn't know the kind of character Firky is, that she honestly took it to be so.
I'd quite like to get her back on here to answer some of the questions put to her but she's not going to do that if it doesn't look like people are being fair with her.
Put yourself in her shoes, with her motivations. What does she have to gain by coming back? Nothing. She's already seen as the oppressed underdog in this little spat, and she has right-wing columnists falling over themselves to support her. She doesn't give a shit about class politics, which is all anyone here wants to 'educate' her in. She's obsessed with identity politics, which a lot of people here would like her to tone down. She's totally sorted. Exactly where she wants to be. Coming here can only harm her (in her eyes).
You mean write another column for the NS?And if she wants to prove you wrong, if she wants to show that she's more concerned about what genuine grass roots activists with genuinely impressive political CVs think about her than right wing columnists, then she knows what she needs to do doesn't she?
Okay, it's par for the course that prominent (even self-promoted) people on the left would receive threats and abuse from the usual suspects, but can any of the abuse and threats be attributed as a direct result of any words or images posted on this board or thread?
She might learn something from the exchange with Spiney though, you never know.
not that i'm aware of. i hope none of our posters are right-wing women-hating rape advocates.
She's not gonna do that fair or no fair, it's just not how she works. She knows she can't bullshit her way out of the stuff that's been collated here, so why bother? There's nothing in it for her being here.
And if she wants to prove you wrong, if she wants to show that she's more concerned about what genuine grass roots activists with genuinely impressive political CVs think about her than right wing columnists, then she knows what she needs to do doesn't she?
Ball's in her court but it's obvious she's not playing ball anymore.Maybe you're wrong and maybe she can prove you wrong by coming back on here and answering some of those questions. The ball's in her court isn't it? Does she want to side with right wing journalists or does she want to side with the working class activists who're supposed to be on the same side?
LP said:Why is it that thinkers on left and right seem happy to be called 'sexist' - but when 'racism' is mentioned they explode + threaten to sue?
Yeah, but I think she can't, even if she wanted to. She's too invested in what she's already said (I almost said achieved and then realised that's how she'd frame her writing: as achievements ). If you get to be '55th most influential person on the left', you can't suddenly say, "I was wrong. I went on a message board and talked to some people and I realised I wasn't speaking for the people I claimed I was representing." The about-face would be damaging enough, but the admission that her whole political career so far has been built on rubbish? She just couldn't do it.
Yes, way, way upthreadHas this tweet been picked up? Thread is moving so fast I can't keep up.
Yeah, but I think she can't, even if she wanted to. She's too invested in what she's already said (I almost said achieved and then realised that's how she'd frame her writing: as achievements ). If you get to be '55th most influential person on the left', you can't suddenly say, "I was wrong. I went on a message board and talked to some people and I realised I wasn't speaking for the people I claimed I was representing." The about-face would be damaging enough, but the admission that her whole political career so far has been built on rubbish? She just couldn't do it.