I like and admire Danny, but it was very clear that he said something deliberately provocative to make his point.He didn't do any of those things. And knowing DLR, nor would he.
I like and admire Danny, but it was very clear that he said something deliberately provocative to make his point.He didn't do any of those things. And knowing DLR, nor would he.
She only learnt to ride a bike last year, I saw something about it after someone (some commentator I think) gave her grief for that too.The 'Left' doesn't speak with one voice tbf, I like her , sometimes see her cycling (badly) on Hackney Marshes. She gets most of the abuse from ex NME journos & other right-wingers.
On urban tooI like and admire Danny, but it was very clear that he said something deliberately provocative to make his point.
You say that like it's a bad thingI like and admire Danny, but it was very clear that he said something deliberately provocative to make his point.
Out of interest... where and how did you see them?
Did St Michael have a sword as traditionally depicted?
If this thread is about anything, it's about the difference between being deliberately provocative to make a point, and being deliberately and cuntishly offensive to attack a individual or group.I like and admire Danny, but it was very clear that he said something deliberately provocative to make his point.
One of my former flatmate's colleagues was tripping once and found god hidden away in a breadbinThe 'Jesus' one was in my home, I was sitting in a chair and he was just there in front of me for a bit. The other two I mentioned were in dreams. One told me about a problem I had, shook their hand and asked their name. Anyway.
One of my former flatmate's colleagues was tripping once and found god hidden away in a breadbin
He's everywhere, man.One of my former flatmate's colleagues was tripping once and found god hidden away in a breadbin
But not it seems equally dispersedHe's everywhere, man.
Hmmm. Not sure about this. A lot of the resulting mythology around the many rapes suggests quite strongly that this couldn't/shouldn't have been the case. When Leda was shagged by Zeus's swan for example, she was married. This theory therefore makes her adulterous. Madusa was punished by Athena for being raped by Poseidon; perhaps a stronger feminist angle there than her having chosen to seduce him, etc, etc.And there is also a feminist take on that, which says that they weren’t raped, they took lovers from amongst the gods but that was frowned upon because women can’t be seen to have sexual agency, so it must have been rape.
Agree with all of that but at the same time doesn't it leave you in a place where you can criticise 'your own' religion as much as you like (or the one dominant where you happen to live) but the irrational & oppressive ideas of The Other, the exotic or oppressed or just mostly elsewhere, must be treated with respect, or passed over in silence, which idea i think has its own issues.Danny's point was obviously a crude provocation, but I don't think it's anything like equivalent to Burchill's racist attacks on Sarkar.
Kenan Malik makes the point that what's often called an offence to a community is actually a debate within a community, and I think that's something that has some relevance here. While we may choose to be atheists in the UK, the christian church still exercises a huge amount of political and social control and influence over the communities we live in. The christian church is in our schools, in our legislative chambers, on our national broadcaster. In Northern Ireland, women are unable to freely access abortions because of the enduring influence of the church.
Criticisms of and provocations against christianity by people living in the UK - and anywhere the church still exercises political and social control - are not lobbing bricks at an oppressed minority, they are attacks against a powerful institution. There would be no real need to illustrate the deep misogyny apparent in christian myths if those myths weren't taught to our children as real things, if those myths weren't used to deny women medical care, if those myths weren't used to call gay relationships 'sinful', etc etc. It's the political power that is being attacked, not anyone's deeply held faith.
Oh, I don't think the irrational and oppressive ideas of religions dominant elsewhere must be treated with respect at all - but that's not what Burchill was doing. She wasn't attacking Islam, she was attacking a person.Agree with all of that but at the same time doesn't it leave you in a place where you can criticise 'your own' religion as much as you like (or the one dominant where you happen to live) but the irrational & oppressive ideas of The Other, the exotic or oppressed or just mostly elsewhere, must be treated with respect, or passed over in silence, which idea i think has its own issues.
If this thread is about anything, it's about the difference between being deliberately provocative to make a point, and being deliberately and cuntishly offensive to attack a individual or group.
danny la rouge has certainly done the former, which is OK; Burchill has done the latter, which is not OK.
Yes there are power imbalances here , and thats why a degree of sensitivity in regards the feelings of a minority and oppressed muslim population is required. But ultimately it shouldnt stop anyone continuing to try and dismantle orthodox religions. Rule 1: try not shouting Mo Was a Paedo at anyoneAgree with all of that but at the same time doesn't it leave you in a place where you can criticise 'your own' religion as much as you like (or the one dominant where you happen to live) but the irrational & oppressive ideas of The Other, the exotic or oppressed or just mostly elsewhere, must be treated with respect, or passed over in silence, which idea i think has its own issues.
Yep of course, no excuses or rationalisations at all for what she did.Oh, I don't think the irrational and oppressive ideas of religions dominant elsewhere must be treated with respect at all - but that's not what Burchill was doing. She wasn't attacking Islam, she was attacking a person.
He's everywhere, man.
Hmmm. Not sure about this. A lot of the resulting mythology around the many rapes suggests quite strongly that this couldn't/shouldn't have been the case. When Leda was shagged by Zeus's swan for example, she was married. This theory therefore makes her adulterous. Madusa was punished by Athena for being raped by Poseidon; perhaps a stronger feminist angle there than her having chosen to seduce him, etc, etc.
Oh I don't doubt for a moment that such theories exist. Just pointing out that they're flawed.Google for “feminist Madusa myth”
Google for “feminist Leda and the Swan”
Or just google for “feminist Greek myth” or any other myth system you can think of.
Or “feminist retelling of myth” or “feminist revisionist mythology” or invent your own search term
I thought of it all by myself as a baby feminist, and it was exciting for me, but I’m by no means the only person to have thought of it. It’s been part of feminist discourse for some time now.
Angela Carter made a living doing the same with fairy stories.
Oh I don't doubt that such theories exist. Just pointing out that they're flawed.
This is one helluva hot take you got there, its better to be raped than to be an adultress ok.Hmmm. Not sure about this. A lot of the resulting mythology around the many rapes suggests quite strongly that this couldn't/shouldn't have been the case. When Leda was shagged by Zeus's swan for example, she was married. This theory therefore makes her adulterous. Madusa was punished by Athena for being raped by Poseidon; perhaps a stronger feminist angle there than her having chosen to seduce him, etc, etc.
I dont think theyre theories as much as "feminist literary interventions" for want of a better word IYSWIMOh I don't doubt for a moment that such theories exist. Just pointing out that they're flawed.
Islam is not a minority religion everywhere in the world. In some parts it is definitely the majority, or only, religion. When it is, it can be very oppressive for non-Muslims and indeed for those Muslims who are deemed apostates or heretics. It shouldn't be left off the hook just because Islam is a minority religion here in Britain. At the same time I am not advocating senselessly attacking Muslim individuals or communities.Yes there are power imbalances here , and thats why a degree of sensitivity in regards the feelings of a minority and oppressed muslim population is required. But ultimately it shouldnt stop anyone continuing to try and dismantle orthodox religions. Rule 1: try not shouting Mo Was a Paedo at anyone
srsly ? maybe go out and about wearing a burqua and see if people treat you just the same.please enlighten me how someone adhering to Islam is more oppressed than an atheist like myself.
Ever been searched at an airport?If I am wrong, please enlighten me how someone adhering to Islam is more oppressed than an atheist like myself.
Fair point. I did say I might be wrong. I hadn't thought that through from a female perspective. Though not all Muslim women wear burquas of course, or indeed feel the need to cover their hair.srsly ? maybe go out and about wearing a burqua and see if people treat you just the same.