Come now toggle surely you've realised by now if a woman says she experienced something a man hasn't written about and researched in great depth it didn't happen.
Alex Callinicos/SWP vs Laurie Penny/New Statesman Facebook handbags
- Thread starter Prince Rhyus
- Start date
- Status
Come now toggle surely you've realised by now if a woman says she experienced something a man hasn't written about and researched in great depth it didn't happen.
Paulie Tandoori
shut it you egg!
dunno really, all those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time... to die.."Disseminating someone's speech habits"?
Yeah, because remarking on how someone locutes is so offensive, isn't it?
So Paul, which axe are you grinding, and why do you believe that your being bothered to "carry on" with anyone carries any weight?
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Thanks for that, Mr. Batty.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
I haven't said you can tell if someone's being dishonest, have I? All I've said is that her posture is indicative of tension, and then speculated on the cause of the tension.
Oh, and "lie detectors" aren't used for catching criminals, they're used for testing the veracity of their statements!
And they're not much good for that, for a number of different reasons.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Who's claimed she's lying?
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
I possibly did last night after watching the first five minutes of her talk in which she claims that 3 or 4 young women a week write to her saying they want to be feminist bloggers/social activists but are worried about online abuse and that she herself receives graphic daily threats of sexual violence.
Without denying at all that it doesnt exist, and fully acknowledging I don't see a lot of it, and certainly not as much as female bloggers do, and recognising that online and offline misogyny are problems which should be urgently challenged, I still dont think that what she says above is true
love detective
there's no love too small
How true is what she says at 3:29 on that video?
Sorry if this is an unpopular thing to say, but I do think she is lying in what she says above
She clearly gets vile sexist abuse online, but to suggest she gets the kind of thing above every day just doesn't stack up. When she does get the kind of vile stuff above, she quite rightly talks about it publicly and makes it known who is saying it (and asked for it to be removed/retracted) and an appropriate backlash is directed at where it came from. But as smokedout says, she always uses this one same quote when talking about the volume/level/type of online abuse she gets
If she gets abuse every day of the sort that she mentioned in that quote, why did she only talk publicly about it happening and reveal who said it in for only a few instances of it happening. Why doesn't she out it every day when it happens every day? Why doesn't she use any other examples of it happening other than the handful of ones that have been talked about publicly. I can understand that someone may not want to talk publicly about abuse they have experienced, but she clearly was willing to talk about it in the instance she keeps mentioning, so why the silence on all the other supposed instances of it happening? If she is getting that level of abuse day in day out why isn't she revealing the identity of those doing it like she did with the example given in the speech?
She may well receive criticism every day, but it does feel that she's conveniently conflating (mainly) valid criticism of her/her methods/what she represents with sexist misogynistic abuse, something that we've seen happen on this very thread and countless times on twitter. If not that then she's clearly exaggerating the volume & frequency of sexist misogynistic abuse she receives. And to do that does, as smokedout says, risk putting young female writers off writing about stuff that they want to write about as the environment is made out to be even worse than it already is - she's debilitating rather than enabling freedom of expression for young females in that case. And it doesn't say much for her journalistic integrity that she will quite happily exaggerate events to suit her narrative
Laurie Penny at 3:29 said:
Sorry if this is an unpopular thing to say, but I do think she is lying in what she says above
She clearly gets vile sexist abuse online, but to suggest she gets the kind of thing above every day just doesn't stack up. When she does get the kind of vile stuff above, she quite rightly talks about it publicly and makes it known who is saying it (and asked for it to be removed/retracted) and an appropriate backlash is directed at where it came from. But as smokedout says, she always uses this one same quote when talking about the volume/level/type of online abuse she gets
If she gets abuse every day of the sort that she mentioned in that quote, why did she only talk publicly about it happening and reveal who said it in for only a few instances of it happening. Why doesn't she out it every day when it happens every day? Why doesn't she use any other examples of it happening other than the handful of ones that have been talked about publicly. I can understand that someone may not want to talk publicly about abuse they have experienced, but she clearly was willing to talk about it in the instance she keeps mentioning, so why the silence on all the other supposed instances of it happening? If she is getting that level of abuse day in day out why isn't she revealing the identity of those doing it like she did with the example given in the speech?
She may well receive criticism every day, but it does feel that she's conveniently conflating (mainly) valid criticism of her/her methods/what she represents with sexist misogynistic abuse, something that we've seen happen on this very thread and countless times on twitter. If not that then she's clearly exaggerating the volume & frequency of sexist misogynistic abuse she receives. And to do that does, as smokedout says, risk putting young female writers off writing about stuff that they want to write about as the environment is made out to be even worse than it already is - she's debilitating rather than enabling freedom of expression for young females in that case. And it doesn't say much for her journalistic integrity that she will quite happily exaggerate events to suit her narrative
toggle
wobbly
http://jezebel.com/rape-and-death-t...n=Buffer%3A%20%40RabidFeminist%20on%20twitter
http://jezebel.com/5961867/the-online-culture-of-niceness-doesnt-extend-to-the-ladies
http://jezebel.com/5924069/hey-lets...le-critic-of-video-games?tag=anita-sarkeesian
took me longer to cut and paste this stuff than it did to find it.
http://jezebel.com/5961867/the-online-culture-of-niceness-doesnt-extend-to-the-ladies
http://jezebel.com/5924069/hey-lets...le-critic-of-video-games?tag=anita-sarkeesian
took me longer to cut and paste this stuff than it did to find it.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
(Resists making an aside about Nicholas Lezard).
I think the content is true/accurate (the threats to her, and that she's had women who'd like to become more active tell her that one of the reasons they don't is fear of misogynistic abuse). I can't, however, make any judgement on the claims of frequency, and I certainly can't imagine (only empathise with) how being on the receiving end of such abuse must feel.
Her claims of frequency may be exaggerated, but then she is a journalist - it's a stock-in-trade for some to "round upward" in order to add more meat to a story (Johann Hari used to indulge in it quite often too) - she's got a narrative (and a book!) to sell, so the possibility of exaggeration as a promotional device should be borne in consideration.
love detective
there's no love too small
you could have saved even more time by responding to what I said rather than something that I didn't
toggle
wobbly
if i got a fuckton of abuse, i'd discuss it under my terms, not yours. I'd probably pick an exemplar quote rather than memorizing a few dozen rape threats to make you happy.
love detective
there's no love too small
how you get that i've implied that online sexist/misogynistic abuse doesn't exit nor happen on a regular basis from what I posted is beyond me
fucking hell lads, you know how cunty this makes you look? i think on this occasion you can assume that she's telling the truth, if only 'cause if she isn't she's utterly beyond the pale, and on a subject that she usually writes with more sincerity than normal. nail her on the shit she writes that's provably nonsense rather than just giving her fuel to fuck it all off, please. ffs.
toggle
wobbly
do you want graphic details of every time i've been abused before you believe me as well?
none of those sites support what lp is claiming, but mostly reference specific and horrible incidents that no-one is denying exist.
lp claims that she gets the kind of threat lovedetective just posted, on a daily basis, presumably to her email because it doesnt happen on twitter and her blog doesnt accept comments.
another point is that the comment she speaks of wasnt a message to her, but a post on a site that slagged off celebrities run by someone trying to show how edgy and cool he was. now if she is talking about comments made about her, rather than too her, then it becomes an issue of celebrity, and yes people say very misogynist and abusive things about celebrities all the time on the net - but that is a different issue which is more wrapped up in the misogynist nature of a lot of popular culture and society at large rather than a specific and new aspect of the internet and social media. She is conflating an unpleasant downside to being famous with a social phenomena that she claims will affect any woman who writes a blog post - its the same trick hugh grant pulled essentially, and just like the dowler case, there is truth in it, but it is being distorted out of shape by her dishonesty.
love detective
there's no love too small
it's not about making me happy
she has form for lying, she lies regularly, she's been caught out lying many times, many of us on this very thread have been the victim of her lying, so when she lies about something, regardless of what the topic is, i'm not going to apologise for pointing it out. she's a journalist for fuck's sake, she regularly lies about her life experiences and uses that to push her work and promote her brand. Most people are happy to pull her up on it in relation to her lies on other topics, and while I can understand/appreciate the sensitive nature of this, i don't see why she should get a free pass to lie about it. The truth of the matter is bad enough, there's no need to exaggerate/lie when talking about it, as it allows her (sexist, abusive) opponents to claim that she's talking a load of shite (in general) and diminish/belittle the actual real lived experience of her and others like her
i couldn't give a shit what pointing this out makes me 'look like'
_angel_
.
Is there somewhere you can report this? I'm sure there must be.
I've no idea if she's telling the truth (or not) about the frequency of such abuse. She has, however, been caught making things up on various occasions, as well as, for example, falsely accusing other people of racism/misogny. Going on her past record does make me doubt the veracity of pretty much everything she says tbh.
hadnt seen this before my last post, youre right, ill shut up
toggle
wobbly
she is picking an example of something so she doesn't have to hold in her head a dozen examples of some nasty graphic descriptions of what men have said they want her next rape to be like.
i don't have a problem with that.
DaveCinzano
WATCH OUT, GEORGE, HE'S GOT A SCREWDRIVER!
To further confound all the confused-looking old grumps here: presenting the Lego Steampunk collection!
love detective, I have a lot of time and respect for you as you know and you quite rightly pulled me on on 'that cartoon', but I do think you're in the wrong here. Laurie Penny is a charlatan, a horrible manipulative liar but I can't imagine her surfing in the wake of rape to further herself. I of course could be wrong and you maybe right, but if I were you I'd keep those thoughts to myself because it is exactly the kind of thing she'll pick up on and use against you / us.
"I told you so! They were nasty misogynists all along!"
Anyway...
"I told you so! They were nasty misogynists all along!"
Anyway...
So she's been caught lying on various occasions but we're not allowed to doubt her on this because it'll help her 'dismiss [any] valid criticisms'? Think you'll find she's already ignoring and/or misrepresenting those.
equationgirl
Respect my existence or expect my resistance
If a man makes rape threats to me in person, for example on the street or even at work, I'm going to be able to find out who he is even if I don't know him, there's likely to be CCTV images of him, witnesses, even a passing police officer or two. Chances of him being found would be reasonably high.
Online, it's somebody behind a screen. I don't know who they are. They might not even be in the UK. If the post isn't made on a site such as this one, via sign-up, I have no comeback whatsoever. There's no mod to tell even. That anonymity gives some men the courage to make threats against women that they wouldn't ordinarily make, simply because there is nothing to stop them.
So yes, on this I believe lauriepenny absolutely. Just ask the Feminist Harridans (TM) how much causal sexism there is on this site. More than there bloody should be - not that it's ALL male posters, not by a long shot, but there are a dedicated few who deliberately go after women posters on certain topics, certain threads. I've been told I shouldn't post on a football thread because I'm a woman, for example.
It's not right to doubt her about this. It crosses a line in my book. Victims of sexual violence - in real life or online - need our support, not our disbelief.
- Status
Similar threads
