Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Julie Burchill forced to apologise for twitter comments , and pay out a fat wedge .

I am pointing out a contradiction. Is there a contradiction there? Sure looks like it. In which case the obvious question is, why? Unconscious biases are a thing, it doesn’t make that person evil. Being ‘a racist’ involves a lot more, IMO, than simply having a dubious outlook on one particular question. Without wanting to pun, it isn’t simply black and white.
I'll admit I'm not familiar with the posts of Danny's about antisemitism that you're claiming contradict his opinions on this thread. Maybe you could link me up.
 
I'll admit I'm not familiar with the posts of Danny's about antisemitism that you're claiming contradict his opinions on this thread. Maybe you could link me up.
Yup. The ones where I said nobody can criticise ultra orthodox cultural misogyny. Or where I said Judaism is beyond reproach.
 
I'll admit I'm not familiar with the posts of Danny's about antisemitism that you're claiming contradict his opinions on this thread. Maybe you could link me up.
I suspect we'll find that these comments, if they actually exist, don't meet the claims belboid is making for them.

This sort of disingenuous mis-representation is pretty standard for them, unfortunately.
 
I am pointing out a contradiction. Is there a contradiction there? Sure looks like it. In which case the obvious question is, why? Unconscious biases are a thing, it doesn’t make that person evil. Being ‘a racist’ involves a lot more, IMO, than simply having a dubious outlook on one particular question. Without wanting to pun, it isn’t simply black and white.

Are you not conflating being anti-(name of a religion) with being prejudiced against people who follow that religion?

It may sound like a subtle distinction, but it's a crucial one. To give a very simple example, I am anti-Christianity but I also love my mum, who is a Christian.
 
Are you not confusing being anti-(name of a religion) with being prejudiced against people who follow that religion?

It may sound like a subtle distinction, but it's a crucial one. To give a very simple example, I am anti-Christianity but I also love my mum, who is a Christian.
It’s actually worse than that, because he has misread my position on anti Jewish racism as being different to my position on anti Muslim racism. Which does make me wonder why he sees values applied equally as being different.
 
I am shocked you disagree. But you joined this thread in order to post your support for the idea that Mohammed is a paedo. And have doubled down on that stance. I really don’t see the difference between your comments and Ken Livingstones, both are crude and will knowingly cause offense even with a highly debatable basis in ‘fact’. Why is yours okay but his wasn’t?
 
It’s actually worse than that, because he has misread my position on anti Jewish racism as being different to my position on anti Muslim racism. Which does make me wonder why he sees values applied equally as being different.
Because I don’t think you do so.
 
You mean professionally? Any examples?
At club level, I have now heard this kind of story from three different people - you're one of them - so it seems it must be common. At professional level, I only really know about the racism that existed in the 80s and 90s, specifically at Yorkshire and the hostile environment there towards local Asian players. I don't have more recent examples but the recent reports out of Yorkshire ring true, sadly. They only ended the 'by birth' qualification in 1992. They said then that they were going to clean up on this stuff. I'm not so surprised that they haven't.
 
Are you not conflating being anti-(name of a religion) with being prejudiced against people who follow that religion?

It may sound like a subtle distinction, but it's a crucial one. To give a very simple example, I am anti-Christianity but I also love my mum, who is a Christian.
I am still failing to see the important distinction between ‘The Jews killed Jesus’ and ‘Muslims worship a paedophile’ - we both know what those phrases are used for.
 
At club level, I have now heard this kind of story from three different people - you're one of them - so it seems it must be common.
Can you refresh my memory? Most teams, in London at least, have Muslims in them. Provision of halal food options is routine at pretty much every club I've known and it's actually required by most leagues. I'd be very surprised if there weren't more muslims playing cricket in the UK than any other team sport so it's hard to see why they wouldn't be catered for.
 
I am shocked you disagree. But you joined this thread in order to post your support for the idea that Mohammed is a paedo. And have doubled down on that stance. I really don’t see the difference between your comments and Ken Livingstones, both are crude and will knowingly cause offense even with a highly debatable basis in ‘fact’. Why is yours okay but his wasn’t?
I posted in response to this story: Calling Muhammad paedophile ‘not protected by free speech’

I don’t think any religion deserves the protection that instance of law provides.

I have lots of problems with Ken Livingstone, but I don’t remember pronouncing that that statement of his was in itself anti semitic. You are drawing a comparison where there is none. Ken was opining (stupidly) about the nature of Zionism and Nazism. I was pointing out that it is in fact a mainstream belief in Islam that the Prophet had sex with a girl of 9 or 10. I disagree with the view that because it was a long time ago we “mustn’t judge”.

I also don’t think it makes things much better to take the line that if she was old enough to bleed she was old enough the breed.
 
Let’s move this along. I recommend to you all, read Living Judaism by Rabbi Wayne Dosick. I recently did. It’s a fascinating portrait of contemporary Judaism from an American perspective, and goes through the many traditions and strands. Much of what he describes feature very conservative and often reactionary attitudes. These are all worthy of criticism. And I am indeed critical.

I am also critical of Israeli state policy and actions.

What I’m not OK with is hook nosed tropes, blood libels and the more modern left anti Semitism. Those are quite different things.

And that applies to whatever religion I’m talking about. Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism even.
 
Dunno if this is helpful or not, but it's been rattling around in my head, so might as well share it and see what people think: as anyone with a basic knowledge of Judaism will be aware, one of the most important Jewish festivals is Pesach, which celebrates the story of the liberation of the Jews from Egypt. Fwiw, it's also one of the more popular festivals with like liberation/progressive/reclaiming tradition Jewish types cos of being about freedom and overthrowing the oppressors and all that. As you'll also probably be aware, the Passover story involves the Ten Plagues, culminating in the slaughter of the firstborn*.

So, looking at the Passover myth as it's told, we can accurately say that one of the most important Jewish festivals, Pesach, celebrates the killing of children. I also think that that statement would be an incredibly unhelpful and counterproductive one to make in like at least 99.9% of possible conversations.

And it might be possible to make an argument that talking about Mohammad's marriage to Aisha should be held to a different standard than talking about the um, bloodthirsty nature of certain aspects of Jewish myth, like if it's used to justify present-day practices more then it makes it more relevant. That might be true, or true in some cases, idk. But that's what I've been thinking about, anyway.



*to be strictly fair to Pesach here, I should acknowledge that it's ambivalent on the plagues themselves cos you're meant to spill a drop of wine and that. But I think it's also fair to say that the festival as a whole is a celebratory one overall, and that there are parts of it that seem to specifically celebrate the vengeance against the Egyptians, Dayenu for instance.
 
After recent family bereavement am fascinated by aspects of Shintoism like Kami but am also mindful that the religion was embraced as part of Japanese imperialism during the expansion era. At the end of the day, can't think of any belief system that hasn't been twisted and left open to interpretation and vigorous... debate.

Don't think anyone has been malicious here. Not deliberately, at any rate.

Well, apart from Burchill, of course.
 
Sorry for the derail, but it seems Burchill’s saviour publisher is a Nazi. Lol.

And I suspect, part of the reason for the settlement & apology , in a way this is perfect publicity for her book on Woke stuff. She , no doubt, finally realised she had a weak defence.

There is a long interview between Ash Sarkar & James O'brien which covers the grounds of the case. She had some hideous abuse as a result of Burchill encouraging a pile on.

Eta , she sacked the nazi publishers, so no doubt will get it published elsewhere
 
There is a long interview between Ash Sarkar & James O'brien which covers the grounds of the case. She had some hideous abuse as a result of Burchill encouraging a pile on.

Yes she did. However, as we know everything about Burchill this is immaterial now and it's best we discuss mythical women giving consent via angels to empower other women. Plus the shagging of swans. Or goats. I can't keep up.
 
I think it's entirely possible to think on the one hand that Burchil acted like a bullying cunt, while on the other also being a massive atheist who can talk about religions and their writings being damaging and ridiculous. There is a difference.
Burchill doesn't claim to be a massive atheist. She found god in the '90s and was on the verge of converting to Judaism but decided that her local synagogue was too pro-Palestinian.
 
Yes she did. However, as we know everything about Burchill this is immaterial now and it's best we discuss mythical women giving consent via angels to empower other women. Plus the shagging of swans. Or goats. I can't keep up.
this derail has really upset you hasn't it?
 
Back
Top Bottom