Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Julie Burchill's attack on transsexuals...

smokedout said:
err, I was being sarcastic

I dont really think it's tasteful that on a thread about misogyny and transphobia you seem to think that penis size is a good line of attack
Click to expand...

Something said on Urban not being in the best of taste ? There is a shocker. Not sure what Pickman's tiny dick has to do with misogyny or transphobia.
 
Reno said:
Something said on Urban not being in the best of taste ? There is a shocker. Not sure what Pickman's tiny dick has to do with misogyny or transphobia.
Click to expand...

Nah, you were a bit out of line - You surely must understand that drawing attention to the fact that Pickers has to call upon the aid of the monocle he keeps in his top pocket in order to find his dick isn't really cricket on a thread about transphobia? Best just to admit it and move on.
 
cantsin said:
oh purlease, Sid didnt die so we could sit around 35 yrs later getting attacks of the vapors over JB spiking Country Jo Macfucking Donald ffs, get over it ....
Click to expand...
No way, guy.

I, and a few friends of mine, have had trouble with drugs in the past - if someone spiked me it would fuck me up good and proper these days.

I maintain that spiking someone is a terrible thing to do, and if you think its an okay thing to do then you are as much of a tosser as said Burchill is.
 
D'wards said:
No way, guy.

I, and a few friends of mine, have had trouble with drugs in the past - if someone spiked me it would fuck me up good and proper these days.

I maintain that spiking someone is a terrible thing to do, and if you think its an okay thing to do then you are as much of a tosser as said Burchill is.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I agree with that - Spiking someone might seem like a jolly wheeze but really it's a wankers trick of the highest magnitude.
 
Pickman's model said:
She founded her journalism career off the back of punk, writing with tony parsons the book 'the boy who looked at johnny' or some such title. Yet despite affecting to like punk she said on DID that she was never a fan and went home from punk gigs to listen to the islay brothers.
Click to expand...

Freudian slip. :)
 
D'wards said:
No way, guy.

I, and a few friends of mine, have had trouble with drugs in the past - if someone spiked me it would fuck me up good and proper these days.

I maintain that spiking someone is a terrible thing to do, and if you think its an okay thing to do then you are as much of a tosser as said Burchill is.
Click to expand...

it was 3 + decades ago, the punk wars were raging, the trenches full of the wounded, the shell shocked and the disorientated, refugees from the 60's like Country Joe mac were getting caught in the crossfire, shit happened.

Btw, have you actually thought of how likely the whole incident was to have actually happened ? like , 1 in 100 chance i'd guess ? So prob. no need for the amateur dramatics anyway...
 
cantsin said:
oh purlease, Sid didnt die so we could sit around 35 yrs later getting attacks of the vapors over JB spiking Country Jo Macfucking Donald ffs, get over it ....
Click to expand...

Somehow seem to have missed this story completely -- was she boasting about it on Desert Island Discs? Spiked his tea was it, and with what? :confused:
 
Is speed water soluble? Or would it just collect in the bottom of the cup? I don't know much about drugs.

Anyway, spiking of food and drinks could cause health problems. Or could worsen health problems that the person already had. Since one doesn't always know which health problems a person has, it is best to not spike anyone's drink at all, just in case. Then again, Burchill has often been dismissive of illnesses that she doesn't understand, mental and physical.
 
Been forwarded this:

Further to your complaint to the Press Complaints Commission concerning the article published by The Observer on 13 January with the headline “Transsexuals should cut it out”. As you are aware, the Press Complaints Commission received over 800 complaints about this article and, in accordance with its standard procedure, selected a lead complainant for the purposes of its investigation.

That investigation has now been concluded and the Commission has issued its ruling. A copy of the Commission’s decision appears below.

Thank you for raising these concerns with us.

With best wishes


Ben Gallop
Complaints Officer





Commission’s decision in the case of
Two Complainants v The Observer / The Daily Telegraph

The complainants were concerned about a comment article which responded to criticism of another columnist on social networking sites. The article had first been published by The Observer. Following The Observer’s decision to remove the article from its website, it had been republished on the website of The Daily Telegraph. The Commission received over 800 complaints about the article, which it investigated in correspondence with two lead complainants, one for each newspaper.

The complainants considered that the article contained a number of prejudicial and pejorative references to transgender people in breach of Clause 12 (Discrimination) of the Editors’ Code of Practice. They also raised concerns under Clause 1 (Accuracy) that language used by the columnist was inaccurate as well as offensive, and, furthermore that the article misleadingly suggested that the term “cis-gendered” was insulting. Additionally, concerns had been raised that the repeated use of terms of offence had breached Clause 4 (Harassment) of the Code.

The Commission first considered the complaints, framed under Clause 12, that the article had contained a number of remarks about transgender people that were pejorative and discriminatory. It noted that the Observer had accepted that these remarks were offensive, and that it had made the decision to remove the article on the basis that the language used fell outside the scope of what it considered reasonable; however, the Observer denied a breach of Clause 12 because the article had not made reference to any specific individual. Clause 12 states that newspapers “must avoid prejudicial or pejorative reference to an individual’s race, colour, religion, gender, sexual orientation or to any physical or mental illness or disability”. However, the clause does not cover references to groups or categories of people. The language used in the article did not refer to any identifiable individual, but to transgender people generally. While the Commission acknowledged the depth of the complainants’ concerns about the terminology used, in the absence of reference to a particular individual, there was no breach of Clause 12.

The Commission also considered the complaint under the terms of Clause 1, which states that “the press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information, including pictures”. Complainants had suggested that the terms used in the article to refer to transgender people were inaccurate or misleading. Whilst the Commission acknowledged this concern, it was clear from the tone of the article that these terms were being used to express an opinion. Whilst many people had found this opinion deeply distasteful and upsetting, the columnist was entitled to express her views under the terms of Clause 1(iii), so long as the statements were clearly distinguished from fact. The same was true in relation to the columnist’s assertion that the term “cis-gendered” is offensive. Viewed in the context of the article as a whole, particularly in light of the fact that the article had been deliberately identified as a comment piece, this was clearly distinguishable as an expression of her opinion about the term rather than a statement of fact about how it is perceived more broadly. This did not constitute a failure to take care over the accuracy of the article, for the purposes of Clause 1(i), and neither was there any significant inaccuracy requiring correction under the terms of Clause 1(ii). There was no breach of Clause 1.

The Commission turned to consider those concerns raised under Clause 4, which states that “journalists must not engage in intimidation, harassment or persistent pursuit”. It made clear, however, that the publication of a single comment piece was not conduct which would engage the terms of Clause 4. There was no breach of the Code.

The Commission acknowledged that the complainants found much of the article offensive. Nonetheless, the terms of the Editors’ Code of Practice do not address issues of taste and offence. The Code is designed to address the potentially competing rights of freedom of expression and other rights of individuals, such as privacy. Newspapers and magazines have editorial freedom to publish what they consider to be appropriate provided that the rights of individuals – enshrined in the terms of the Code which specifically defines and protects these rights – are not compromised. It could not, therefore, comment on this aspect of the complaint further.





Reference no’s 130403 / 130404


Ben Gallop
Complaints Officer

Press Complaints Commission
Halton House
20/23 Holborn
London EC1N 2JD

Tel: 020 7831 0022
Website: www.pcc.org.uk
Click to expand...
 
I suppose its not terribly surprising that a code that is supposed to protect individuals (and doesnt even have a good rep for doing that) is not going to apply to such a piece.

The PCC or other lists of rules are not the means by which we get to see whether certain opinions are well out of step with what a society seems to deem acceptable these days.

Personally I suspect that the reaction to Burchills shit article was a sign that some progress is slowly being made, but I doubt we will see ignorance or hate totally vanish from the scene. All the same away from the shittest ends of the press I think something really has started to change in the last decade when it comes to gender stuff. For example I see there was a BBC piece on Richard O'Brien that managed not to make all the usual mistakes about gender issues, and was the most read article at one point. I havent yet checked to see if the stupid elements of the press picked up on it and did their own sneery mocking version. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21788238
 
She probably had a few sleepless nights as a result; can't say I am sorry. I am not surprised either, elbows. Didn't really agree with people complaining but I can totally understand why they did.
 
Meanwhile in the USA there will be opportunities to cover trans issues in a crap way as there is currently some debate about a MMA fighter who is now a woman wanting to fight other women. Plenty of opportunities for schoolboy humour there. As for the actual practicalities of the case, in this instance I dont think its wrong not to let her compete as any other woman would, because there are physical reasons why parts of the body that developed when a man shouldnt be allowed to smash women in the face. You'd need to transition early to avoid that issue, eg large hands, broad shoulders. In mixed martial arts the only thing that complicates this issue, which is one of health & safety, is the women who abuse testosterone and other performance enhancing drugs so dont exactly have a 'normal' female body either when competing.
 
Interesting. I'll reserve judgement till we hear the details, but I suppose I wont be completely surprised if some action is taken. When a society has evolved in terms of acceptable attitudes, but some still lag behind, there will be moments where people are made an example of in order to highlight the new realities. If this is one of those then it would be something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

story
Sword attack in Hainault, London. 30 April 2024
2 3 4 5
Replies
129
Views
6K
GarveyLives
G
chilango
Attacking politicians? Unpicking the ethical dimensions.
2 3 4
Replies
106
Views
3K
hitmouse
hitmouse
savoloysam
Knife Attack in France. 4 Children critically injured.
Replies
7
Views
821
Pickman's model
Pickman's model
Jeremiah18.17
Truss & Rees-Mogg prepare for massive attack on workers rights?
Replies
3
Views
514
Pickman's model
Pickman's model
BristolEcho
Dover Migrant Centre Attack (30th October 2022)
Replies
9
Views
874
DaveCinzano
DaveCinzano
Back
Top Bottom