Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Milo Yiannoupoulis banned!

media, Sun et al, have been feeding and priming for decades -
Paediatrician attack: 'People don't want no paedophiles here'
Paediatrician attack: 'People don't want no paedophiles here'
Though we all know that the selection of 16 as an age of consent is arbitrary and that many are active of their own volition prior to that
wasn't that shown to be a fabrication though? regardless of whatever else people re saying, the paediatrician attack was a wishful look at the paranoid thick proles jobbie?
 
Jess Philips' piece in the guardian last week was actually quite good on all that (yes, really)
this bit?

Her book addresses the less rarefied but more pressing problems of how to give girls the same self-belief boys have always enjoyed, so that they can silence the internal monologue of doubt and stop measuring their worth by how much men fancy them. Phillips knows just what a tall order this is, and my favourite bit of the book is an anecdote about her 17-year-old friend being sold to a bloke in the pub by her own 27-year-old boyfriend for a bag of weed. “Today, I call this sexual exploitation; back then, I swooned over the idea that these edgy men found us so desirable,” Phillips writes. I think I would have, too, and wish more feminists would acknowledge this truth. At the time, Phillips and her friend didn’t object, but simply joked about holding a whip-round in the pub to buy her back. Years later, she heard one of the men was serving a long prison term for rape. “It hurts me deeply to say this,” she writes, “but I’m sure if we had known this at the time, we wouldn’t have thought it anything but glamorous.”

Jess Phillips: ‘I never felt scared in my old job. As an MP, I feel it every day’
 
wasn't that shown to be a fabrication though? regardless of whatever else people re saying, the paediatrician attack was a wishful look at the paranoid thick proles jobbie?
Was it fabricated?
I cant recall seeing it debunked at the time but it may have been in the form a tiny little box on page 23 on something..
If its fake, many sorries
 
I don't think anyone is suggesting he hasn't been hoist by his own petard, or that there isn't a certain amount of schadenfreud in his disgrace - whether the hoisting in this manner is something to be supported or celebrated is what we're currently discussing.
I cant see anything to celebrate other than in an enjoyment in the playing out of the notion of Hubris in so classic a manner
My point was he knowingly walked into and stirred up a cesspit
This is the way such action was bound to play out
"in this manner" - I cant see what is specifically unique about some chancer taken down because his own ego allowed him to spout stuff which HE KNEW would enrage his somewhat volatile supporters
 
I cant see anything to celebrate other than in an enjoyment in the playing out of the notion of Hubris in so classic a manner
My point was he knowingly walked into and stirred up a cesspit
This is the way such action was bound to play out
"in this manner" - I cant see what is specifically unique about some chancer taken down because his own ego allowed him to spout stuff which HE KNEW would enrage his somewhat volatile supporters
This thread, and the internet in general, is full of people - ostensibly on the left - who haven't seen the videos (or who have and haven't thought it through) calling him a paedo apologist, which he just isn't. It's a homophobic slur - while it's good to see him destroyed, it can't be at any cost. We at least can say what's happening here.
 
If this is really what causes his demise, not any of the other things he's said and done, i see nothing to celebrate in it at all.
 
This thread, and the internet in general, is full of people - ostensibly on the left - who haven't seen the videos (or who have and haven't thought it through) calling him a paedo apologist, which he just isn't. It's a homophobic slur - while it's good to see him destroyed, it can't be at any cost. We at least can say what's happening here.

No Milo has literally made a career of attacking the gender and sexuality of other people. His own proclaimed worldview doesn't allow for a nuanced, reasoned debate, so when he's saying trans people can't go to the bathroom because they might rape children, and also saying there's no cut and dried hard and fast rule about age of consent, he's hoisted himself on his own petard.

I think most of the accurate and honest anger about Milo, is the fact that this, and not the other more offensive things he's said that's brought him down.
 
Press Gazzette story on paediatricians, although it is Brendan O'Neil so bear that in mind when reading - the facts of the case at least are correct.
Thanks for this.

One reason the story stuck in my mind was that the week before it was reported Private Eye had a cartoon of a mob running a paediatrician out of town and the week after they re-ran it alongside the tabloid headline under the tag line "life imitates art."
 
This thread, and the internet in general, is full of people - ostensibly on the left - who haven't seen the videos (or who have and haven't thought it through) calling him a paedo apologist, which he just isn't. It's a homophobic slur - while it's good to see him destroyed, it can't be at any cost. We at least can say what's happening here.
No I haven't seen any of those vids, I tend not to watch much of the output from the alt whatever as I already have enough grip on their style not to have to watch on a "know your enemy basis" - the minutiae of their internal quarrels only make me depressed
What amazed me tbf that they had suspended their innate bigotry for so long in his case. I put it down to the fact he was such an outrageous attack dog for these people they were prepared spare him until such time as he was no longer useful
It seems he is no longer useful
 
Jess Philips' piece in the guardian last week was actually quite good on all that (yes, really)

I was a bit put out by how much I liked that piece, since she does my head in usually. There were a few bits in it I wanted to shout at, but I'm glad I read it.
 
Friends in her constituency think very highly of her personally, even as they disagree with her politically.

That wouldn't surprise me. And maybe I was falling under a spell, but I believed she was genuine when she was talking about why she got into politics.

It's frustrating - she has the potential to be a good thing for politics, if only she did things I wanted her to do :D
 
Friends in her constituency think very highly of her personally, even as they disagree with her politically.

This is common in a lot of places. When you're on the outside looking in it's very easy to see everything as cut and dried, through a national political lens, but it rarely gets to the bottom of the reality of people.

I still reserve the right to not like her and make snap judgments :D
 
I think most people are genuine about why they got into politics, even Tories. Very few people are totally cynical - and even they mostly convince themselves it's for some kind of greater good.
Indeed. However "I was only doing what I thought was the right thing" won't be enough to get them out of the tumbril :)
 
Of course not. But I think it's worth bearing in mind when tempted to dismiss someone's argument as dishonest (this also applies to internet arguments, cf. that thread of ska's).
 
I was a bit put out by how much I liked that piece, since she does my head in usually. There were a few bits in it I wanted to shout at, but I'm glad I read it.
She contradicts herself a couple of times, I think, but is generally interesting and (probably) honest. I've heard the Diane Abbot story before, but it is still cracking.
 
Back
Top Bottom