Harry's Place

From the list of Ignoble Prize Winners 2009:

VETERINARY MEDICINE PRIZE: Catherine Douglas and Peter Rowlinson of Newcastle University, Newcastle-Upon-Tyne, UK, for showing that cows who have names give more milk than cows that are nameless.

REFERENCE: “Exploring Stock Managers’ Perceptions of the Human-Animal Relationship on Dairy Farms and an Association with Milk Production,” Catherine Bertenshaw [Douglas] and Peter Rowlinson, Anthrozoos, vol. 22, no. 1, March 2009, pp. 59-69. DOI: 10.2752/175303708X390473.

WHO ATTENDED THE CEREMONY: Peter Rowlinson. Catherine Douglas was unable to travel because she recently gave birth;

she sent a photo of herself, her new daughter dressed in a cow suit, and a cow.

It is obvious that the ‘milk’ from Penny might not have been so sour had you [Marcus] said, “you silly cow, Penny.”

Or perhaps not.

On the other hand, it is a bit worrying that Catherine Douglas is dressing her daughter in a cow suit – this must count as child abuse from Penny’s enlightened perspective.

Silly moo.

Err – didn’t Judy come out with something similar when her attitude was called “hysterical” on a thread here about Peter Tatchell ? And she’s right wing I think.

(We had a right laugh at her as well)

Although lets be fair, sometimes HP can be accused of finding anti-semitic talk where its not really intended.

I’m against all moaning about “bullying” and trash talking on political blogs, politics is too important for people to be worried about minor verbal assaults. Anyway one of the problems with politics today is that most politicians talk in ludicrously inoffensive PC terms.

“I have always been (and still continue to be) amazed at how utterly and irretrievably alien English people can appear to their fellow countrymen.”

This is strange sentence, but let us assume it means something. If they are not English I fail to see how they are my fellow countrymen. They just live here. Thanks to my ancestor’s, male and female, they enjoy the same rights and priviledges as English people. Myself, I tend not to consider them ‘aliens’ any longer, “but each to their own” as we English say.

I feel this is a poor place to start on about national identity. It may simply be the case that one of you, perhaps both, cannot write very well.

Somewhere on a blog, date 2019:

“What was the name of that silly cow who used to blog at the Sullen Samosa? Dredlocked Penny? Penny Arcade? Lotta Penny?”

Let us remember that Laurie Penny’s original piece contained the claim that Harry’s Place contributors (and not just the commenters) target “any Muslim” (yes, any Muslim) who does not have a “near non-inolvement in politics” with a “witch-hunt.”

Brownie was on her blog attempting to explain to her how this statement implied, directly, that HP contributors are bigoted against Muslims – and that it was strange how this was seen as acceptable, while ’silly cow’ was disproportionate.

Her response? Not to retract or even qualify the slur against HP writers, but to accuse Brownie of calling her a silly cow.

I give up.

“…I wondered whether it wouldn’t have been kinder of me not to have mentioned it.”

Nah. You don’t want to patronise her, do you?

How dare you compare the nobel hard working and useful cow to this pointless example of humanity.

Short version:- Blogger accuses HP of being spiteful, vindictive, abusive, small minded. HP responds with spiteful, vindictive, small minded, abusive post directed at blogger. Blogger points this out. HP gets upset and takes its ball home.

Aside from her sex, the main vitriol directed at Laurie was because of her class. Its amazing how this site’s selective class concience only kicks in when attacking people on the left from a rightist perspective, especially when it comes from such horny-handed sons of toil as David T and Marcus.

@ Larkers

I think that the sentence makes sense. I’m English, but have lived in France most of my life (I’m culturally French, I guess), whenever I go to the UK, I meet people with accents and words that I can find very hard to understand. So yes they are speaking English, but their regional variant of English is incomprehensible for me. Class can play the same role too.

I’m talking about Norfolk farmers, Yorkshire blue-collar workers and Liverpudlians, not just the sons and daughters of Jamaican immigrants.

As for Penny, my Nan would’ve called her a “silly cow”, but then again, she was probably a “VIOLENTLY MISOGYNIST, DEHUMANISING” woman.

stop giving the oxygen of publicity to this yenta. It’s how these nonentity nudniks build their careers.

Oh, leave her be. Anyone who’s read the insufferable dreary first-year undergraduate essays Penny Dreadful puts up on LabourList would know that winding her up will get you nothing but some (more) sanctimonious and pompous piss and wind, probably referring you to the Phallus Theme in Early Amis.

This is the inexorable direction of the British upper-middle class pseudo-socialist left: sham bohemianism and no common sense. It’s been the case for decades. Surely the rest of us can let it flow like water off a duck’s back?

“If she can’t tell the difference between an everyday phrase used without incident by literally millions of people on a daily basis”

Ah, but this is the result of a patriarchal society and such language must be constantly challenged.

I think that’s what the Far Left Feminists say isn’t it?

Short version:- Blogger accuses HP of being spiteful, vindictive, abusive, small minded.

No. The short version is Blogger accuses HP of being anti-Muslim bigots.

I’m always a bit taken aback when a large middle-aged man calls me “love” in Sheffield.

Am I homophobic?

This is an updated and edited version of the comment I’ve put up on Penny’s response to her treatment by HP:

Penny, well done for calling Harry’s Place on its bullying and for refusing to be put down by their usual abusive response techniques. In particular, thanks for going on pointing out the particular forms of misogynist and patronising abuse some members of the collective and a great many of the commenters invariably direct at women who challenge whatever particular piece of received wisdom they regard as beyond criticism. And for those of us who are religiously observant, the tirades of abuse directed at us are even more intense. Religious observance is of itself a target of abuse and vilification on the part of some HP collective members and commenters.

Like you, I’ve been subjected to tirades of the sort of violent, childish and deeply personalised misogynist abuse, and gave examples on the thread which grew out of your blog.

I see today’s response from Marcus is to put up yet another defensive blustering post which uses resorting to reductio ad absurdum and frivolity rather than dealing with these issues.

I’ve been commenting — and even had some guest posts– at HP for some years. Over the last year, I’ve been dismayed by the extent to which it’s becoming increasingly abusive, to some extent because some of the more recent collective members now on HP seem to be particularly given to resorting to such methods.

I read and comment on HP because I think it represents a left wing view on British and world politics–including Middle East politics –which I think is positive and hopeful. But I’m increasingly feeling alienated and depressed, because I think their abusiveness and the regular entirely personalised attacks on individuals, and women in particular, discredits them as a potential platform for such politics, and, even worse, the politics they seek to represent.

Ultimately, they allow and justify abusive responses in the name of free speech. But the reality is that they are unable to come to terms with their own misogyny and arrogance, and to the extent to which they continue unthinkingly to label as insane anyone who offers arguments they can’t cope with.

And I notice here on this latest post by Marcus, the commenters continue on form.

There’s this from “MoreMediaNonsense”:

didn’t Judy come out with something similar when her attitude was called “hysterical” on a thread here about Peter Tatchell ? And she’s right wing I think.
(We had a right laugh at her as well)

Doesn’t that just tell us that there’s a sense of an “us” group to which HP belongs, and from which others like me are defined as outsiders and of course if they’re women expressing the “wrong”views, labelled hysterical and right wing. Complete with a confidently expressed sense of shared delight at the use of the abusive tactics. Clearly MoreMediaNonsense feels himself to be amongst similarly minded mates.

And given HP Collective member Brett’s deeply considered “Silly moo” response, he’s right.

So much for the politics of this bit of the so-called Decent Left.

Like the MPs and members of the House of Lords, you really don’t get it, do you?

Calling someone a ’silly cow’ is a VIOLENTLY MISOGYNIST, DEHUMANISING INSULT. It is never ‘merited’. Not even Anne Widdecombe deserves to be called a ’silly cow’. You don’t get out of it by saying that there ‘might not be merit’ in the comment, you sexist ass.

I laughed hard when I read that. Who knew saying “silly cow” = dehumanizing violence? Can the death camps be far behind?

(I mentioned that on another thread but gene deleted my comment)

She was incensed at being called self obsessed and muddled, we forgot to add absurdly self-important and humorless.

you honestly, genuinely can’t see why it’s wrong to call a young woman a “silly cow”? Really?

This really is poor form, people.

I’m always a bit taken aback when a large middle-aged man calls me “love” in Sheffield.

Is it always the same man?

I’ve been subjected to tirades of the sort of violent, childish and deeply personalised misogynist abuse

Judy – are you seriously claiming you’ve been subjected to tirades of violent misogynist abuse here?

Could you back that up please?

Penny and Judy fancy themselves to be members of an oppressed class.

That completely absurd. Look around you!

The battle against real sexism was won over a generation ago.

You’re like the nutters who dress up in civil war costumes and reenact the battles.. The war is over. Your side won it. Now grow the fuck up and join society, and reality.

Just pointing to one violent misogynist tirade will suffice, if you’re short of time.

Is it always the same man?

Yes. usually the greeter in B&Q.

Do you think the relationship has any future?

Hilariously we are now going to get a whole bunch of middle-class people expressing shock at a young priveliged woman being called a silly cow.

Still I have not seen a single word of condemnation from these paragons of leftist values at people being called “council house scum” on a thread running concurrently.

Mad.

Hilarious stuff Judy – go on digging.

Given your last major contribution to debate here was to attack Peter Tatchell (a genuine hero of progressive politics) in absurd terms and complain about sexism when your garbage was shown up you’ve got little to complain about when your bizarre POV gets torn apart.

Mark T – someone said her views were “hysterical”, that was about it.

And shouting about sexist gangs of brutes

Well – if one listens to her claims that she was not hyper-rich but comfortably off, she might be referred to as “Spender” Penny, and she certainly pisses all over the internet with her gripes.

She tries to claim the sympathy card by dragging up her mental breakdown where she was carted off aged 17.

Argumentum ad misericordiam might work in “The People’s Friend” or a WI newsletter, but when she tries to portray herself as a hard-biting commentator of the world, and then criticises others’ political viewpoint when she has hardly been in the world for long, it cuts no ice.

Sympathy, Penny drearest, only goes to those who are capable of empathy.

And all you seem to be capable of is trumpeting your own vacuousness and your need to be noticed – a wannabe Big Brother contestant for the Guardianista brigade.

In June, she was regaling the world with her sad tale about her anorexia:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2009/mar/11/anorexia-mental-health

and then does an exposure (sorry) on her “burlesque” work done four years earlier.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2009/may/15/burlesque-feminism-proud-galleries

And though she volunteered to do this because she wanted attention, Penny decides to castigate burlesque shows as being misogynistic.

This socialist social butterfly who flits from one flower of contention to another does not seem to have a clue how to disentangle “writing as therapy session”, “writing as confessional” from “writing as social comment” and “writing as factual reporting”. Sadly she does not have the spark of radiance that could inject a little nuance of humour into her whiny prose.

It seems that Penny is trying to be like the old pros like Polly Toynbee or India Knight who can switch from discussing some issue of great portent in one column to then waxing lyrical about cookery or something they heard on Woman’s Hour in another. You need life experience for that.

And to you, Penny love, and I mean this most sincerely. I am sorry for your traumas, and ultimately they will – as Nietsche stated – make you strong. Harnessed, memories of overcoming those traumas could make you a fabulous writer, someone able to truly empathise with the misfortunes of others.

But right now, you have not been in the world of adulthood for very long, and I think that you still have some psychological maturing to do, as well as needing to put in the footwork on the path of life’s experiences.

I do synpathise with your previous psychological breakdown, but that is no excuse for you to go around making sweeping judgements upon others and labeling them as not having the right outlook.

For someone who has been through the mental health system, it is shameful that one so young should now be complaining of other’s “incorrect” outlooks, opinions, attitude or behaviour.

There. I’ve said it. Now I expect to be excoriated.

I never switched my bedside clock from daylight savings time, instead doing the arithmetic when I conulted it. This moring I added instead of subtracted, and had finished a full cup of coffee before I realized that instead of 5:30 am, it was really 3:30.

Sometimes, I’m such a silly cow.

is not on and possibly anti-maleist.

Had to add something :)

you honestly, genuinely can’t see why it’s wrong to call a young woman a “silly cow”? Really?

Yeah, but there’s ‘wrong’ and there’s ‘a VIOLENTLY MISOGYNIST, DEHUMANISING INSULT’ and while I’m not convinced it’s either, I know damn sure which of those it’s not.

“Still I have not seen a single word of condemnation from these paragons of leftist values at people being called “council house scum” on a thread running concurrently.”

Graham, amazingly, not everyone reads every thread. Mostly because they increasingly tend to descend into the pathetic playground circle-jerkery on display in this one.

What a twat (and only someone who’s hung around the English could think I mean the female pudenda).

Graham, amazingly, not everyone reads every thread. Mostly because they increasingly tend to descend into the pathetic playground circle-jerkery on display in this one.

This is much less embarrassing and absurd than the vacuously self righteous circle-jerkery that went on in Penny’s thread.

Graham, amazingly, not everyone reads every thread.

You don’t need to. I have been mentioning this for about three days – perhaps every single condemnation has been lost in the massive rush to defend Penny from those nasty men attacking because she cannot help having had a comfortable life.

Mark T– you only have to look at the comments I quoted on “Penny Dreadful”, the original attack on the blogger which Marcus links to above. And then look at the comments now being directed at her here, and the ones she cites in her response post. But here in any case are the ones I quoted:

Peter if you want those libelous fools given a good slap just ask.

People like Judy are just ignorant and bitter.

ooft! you took a beating there judy! never mind. go and lick your wounds and you can come back talking shite the next time.

Judy is as mad as a hatter. It is best to ignore her.
(that from Brett, a member of the HP collective)

Screaming Judy’s smart-alec confusion about Muslims and Islamic fundamentalists is enough to disqualify her from serious consideration.

There once was a blogging chalaria
well-known for her bouts of hysteria
whether kosher or traif
no one was safe
from the kadoches of her verbal maleria
(another contribution from HP collective member Brett–no anti-semitism there, then)

I think it would be amusing if Peter decided to suspend his usual policy of not taking those slandering him to court and *just this once* sued Judy. Go on Peter, they might even remove her PC to help pay her costs and save us from more of this shit.

Not much point though, her specialist would turn up in court and simply point out she obviously hadn’t taken her medication for 24 hours.

A long time on the potty and no poo poo little girl, try harder, there’s a good girl!

you’re making a vile accusation against someone based on statements that only a hyperventilating hypersensitive could consider anti-semitic. For someone who writes like an attack dog, you sure can’t take it.

A third point: It’s clear that Tatchell is well-respected for his honesty, integrity and anti-racism. By claiming the opposite, stooping to calling acts (like manhandling Mugabe) most would applaud him for, you simply sound like a vindictive little bitch who didn’t get her way and can’t stand being wrong even once. Quite pathetic really.

What fly’s bitten Judy?
Her yells mean nothing.

What Judy really needs is a nice Richard.

By ‘massive rush’ you mean ‘two people pointing out it’s not nice to call people silly cows’ don’t you Graham?

For God’s sake, play the ball, not the (wo)man. Have a go at her arguments, but really her background, youth and gender (and calling someone a ’silly cow’ is misogynist) have nothing to do with it.

Prolier-than-thouism isn’t an excuse.

I should add that I am not really bothered that people get called “council house scum” or “silly Cow” (although I think we can easily see how one is more hurtful than the other.)

What bothers me is the massive absurd hypocrisy of those who seek to say that someone is being “bullied” when their selective vision only embraces their own class.

Have a go at her arguments, but really her background, youth and gender (and calling someone a ’silly cow’ is misogynist) have nothing to do with it.

see what I mean? mad – and this is supposedly the left? Lunacy!

“I should add that I am not really bothered that people get called “council house scum” or “silly Cow” (although I think we can easily see how one is more hurtful than the other.)

What bothers me is the massive absurd hypocrisy of those who seek to say that someone is being “bullied” when their selective vision only embraces their own class.”

1. I am bothered by both terms, actually.

2. Who’s doing that?

In another thread I called someone — I think it was Graham — an “upper-class British twit.” There were no resulting hysterics.

Calm down, Judy. Then again:

>> Judy’s smart-alec confusion

Oi, get him!

By ‘massive rush’ you mean ‘two people pointing out it’s not nice to call people silly cows’ don’t you Graham?

No. I mean people on several threads – both here and elsewhere – and people who tell us they are “of the left” (and who therefore should have plenty of real-life work to do on equality) spending days on here defending their stupid pointless puffed up little egos after their arguments have been destroyed and yet not even noticing that others are also being attacked for their background.

And then we get the lazy (and pointless) accusation of “prolier than thou-ism” (the last refuge of a bourgeois tit who can’t actually answer the point) in response.

It is laughable.

Don’t HP commenters routinely call other male commenters far worse things than silly cow? Maybe her objection is part of the weird PC trend of being all coy about mentioning being female, as in calling actresses ‘actors’.

In another thread I called someone — I think it was Graham — an “upper-class British twit.” There were no resulting hysterics.

Mesquito -Enormous numbers of people are discussing it on threads elsewhere in the blogosphere. As for me. I have needed the help of several psychiatrists to get over it.

You bully!

Leaving “silly cow” aside though, Graham, do you think it is not a little bit odd that its OK to sneer at Laurie as a “silly little middle class girl” (the entire tone and point of Marcus’ original article), when Marcus, and David T come from precisely the same demographic, except for being older, and male. It is therefore, either sexist, or else just ridiculously hipocritical, take your pick.

Not even gales of laughter?

So you got a lot of insults Judy well good, your statements on that thread were absurd and insulting to Peter Tatchell.

Oh and as for sexist insults :

“Clearly MoreMediaNonsense feels himself to be amongst similarly minded mates.”

HaHaHaHa

And you don’t even know who I am !

Well, I did think hope for slightly better when it was pointed out that she’d falsely accused me of something, but the fear of loss of face can do funny things to people.

I did note that her final comment to me on her blog begins:

“No darling…”

I wonder what her response would have been had I begun a comment to her with such a phrase? Yeah, I wonder about that.

Marcus is of course right. It’s not even that “silly cow” is not sexist; it clearly is, but only to the same extent that “stupid wanker” likewise is. Both are forms of gender-specific abuse, ergo, they’re sexist. The question is should we give a shit about that manifestation of sexism? Even if the answer is “yes”, a further question would be: if you’ve just falsely accused someone of racism and you get “silly cow” in return, aren’t you going to look like a desperate hypocrite when you start ranting about how violated you feel?

Which is not to say that I take sexism lightly. With 3 daughters, why would I? When I was asked for the Normblog profile:

“What philosophical thesis do you think it most important to disseminate?”

I replied:

Sexual equality is a universal right, not a governmental or religious dispensation.

Right on, brothers and sisters, except I meant it and mean it.

It is perfectly true, however, that blogging is a male-dominated, testosterone-infused virtual world and it’s all the worse for it. I genuinely lament the lack of female bloggers both here at HP and actively participating in blogging generally. For that reason, I hope Laurie continues to write. I certainly hold no grudge against her and without wishing to patronise her think she has genuine writing ability.

Think how good she might be when she grows up?*

*Joke.

(On the patronisation thing, surely the ultimate patronistion would have been for HP to soft-pedal on Laurie, cut her some slack becuase, you know, she’s almost fresh out of university with limited life experience and from a specific type of background that precludes any possibility she might have genuine empathy for some of the subjects she choose to discuss? Instead, she got the same treatment that would have been meted out to a fat, tattooed 40-something from Yorkshire who’d laid false claims of bigotry at our door. Others and I might object to some of the responses she received, but I don’t see any evidence for claims she was patronised. Quite the reverse, in fact.)

1. I am bothered by both terms, actually.

Good for you. Write an hysterical post about them and attempt to get them banned – good luck!

2. Who’s doing that?

Quite obviously anyone who suggests Penny should not be criticised on the grounds of her class and then ignores other such criticisms is doing that.

They are actors, just as Cheri Lunghi was a Manager.

All this puffed up ego is hilarious. Penny makes a wonderful straight man. If only we could convince her to stick around and post more often.

Somehow Benji could be this self important without ever being this funny. I guess his skin was too thick.

Judy -

The “slap” comment does not refer to you – it is a little disingenuous to claim otherwise.

Being called ‘ignorant and bitter’ is unpleasant, but – as a far as I am aware – has nothing to do with your gender.

The ‘beating’ comment has nothing to with actual violence, or – again – with your gender, just a reference to the fact that may have lost an argument particularly heavily.

Calling you ‘mad as a hatter’ – again, unpleasant or unfair – but not gendered. Likewise with reference to ‘taking medication’, and ‘hypersensitive’ – unless you think only women can be accused of being ‘hypersensitive’?

However, ‘vindictive little bitch’ and the ‘Richard’ comment, are, I would agree, sexist and unpleasant.

do you think it is not a little bit odd that its OK to sneer at Laurie as a “silly little middle class girl” (the entire tone and point of Marcus’ original article), when Marcus, and David T come from precisely the same demographic, except for being older, and male.

Well quite obviously Marcus and David T are not silly little middle-class girls. You may argue that they are silly (although how they have ever been as silly as Penny is beyond me) and that they are middle-class (a fact that has never bothered me and probably would not bother them if you pointed it out to them.) You can only be insulted by being called “middle-class” if you yourself see it as an insult.

@ pangloss

Her background she cannot help. Her previous mental problems were probably something she could not control either.

But when she does discuss those things herself, it becomes very hard not to take issue with them and to juxtapose them against her criticisms of others’ outlooks or politics.

Maybe if she stuck to one theme of writing – factual reportage/social commentary, then her personal life and attitudes would not come into it.

But for someone who calls herself a “feminist” to then join a burlesque show because she wanted attention, and then flounced off to condemn the show as if she had been “exploited” – it all says one thing: “Silly cow.”

And if she were male, she would probably be called “silly prick” or a “silly knobhead.”

And no-one would patronisingly state that calling a man a “knobhead” is sexist, would they?

In 1981 I had an art exhibition in Centerprise, Dalston. I had captions beneath the paintings. On one, I had written about my previous employers that they were “a shower of c**ts.” A very nice feminist who worked there told me that I should not use women’s genitals as terms of abuse.

The very next day, she dropped a pencil and uttered: “Bollocks”. I could not resist retorting: “You shouldn’t use men’s genitals as terms of abuse.”

Graham. you are doing prolier-than-thou. As is Marcus, the sole basis of whose argument seems to be “it’s alright to call people silly cows round my way, so quit complaining”. It’s the pub misogynist line. We’re close to “only having a laugh love” and then on to “stuck up bitch”.

And you haven’t made a point beyond
a) you’re not bothered about people being slagged on the basis of class or gender
2) A Littlejohnish ‘you couldn’t make it up’.

You’re on here shouting ‘I am the left’, followed swiftly by ‘I win by calling other people I don’t even know bourgeois’.

I’ve seen better arguments in YouTube comment threads.

yoare gay!!!

are u gay?

I thinkso!!!!!!!

On the patronisation thing, surely the ultimate patronistion would have been for HP to soft-pedal on Laurie, cut her some slack becuase, you know, she’s almost fresh out of university with limited life experience and from a specific type of background

On that note, it is interesting that a lot of Laurie Penny’s supporters – here, on her blog, on PP – have claimed that HP have attacked a ‘young woman’ (for instance, “a bunch of middle-aged white blokes beating up on a young woman”). That is, they have specifically referenced her age and gender in order to make HP’s ‘crime’ look even worse.

Talk about having your cake and eating it.

Graham. you are doing prolier-than-thou.

No. I am being me. It is not my fault if you are too middle-class to see that others come from different backgrounds. My advice is that you open yourself up to new experiences at meet different people.

And I have made the quite clear point that you and others who criticise anyone for taking the piss out of people’s backgrounds are hypocrites if you don’t criticise all examples of that.

“Oh “Littlejohnish” that hurts.

I’ve heard better insults from a middle-class 3 year old.

Here’s Judy on a previous HP thread about Peter Tatchell :

http://www.hurryupharry.org/2009/11/17/penny-shares/#comment-410349

“Tatchell opposes every religious culture, and Judaism, Christianity and Islam in particular. It’s fundamental to his narcissism that he sees his own conscience alone as the arbiter on all these issues, and for him, gay issues trump everything else.

This is the mindset of a left totalitarian. He sees himself as “not against people”. But people do not experience life independent of their cultures. And he arrogates to himself the right to be the judge, jury and sentencer for every culture. He’s for democracy? Not if you take what he says seriously — and of course nothing illustrates that more clearly than his own one-man dictatorship operation. Not “Peter Tatchell and Friends”– just Peter Tatchell, the one-man rescuer and avenging angel. ”

Err – why bring “man” in here, what’s wrong with “person” ? And accusing a gay man of “narcissism “?

Disturbing stuff.

I love that Judy’s got all those insults directed at her copied and pasted on her computer somewhere so she can just whip them out whenever she needs to demonstrate how badly she’s been treated. She really does need to get a (non-gender specific) grip doesn’t she?

The bottom line, Judy, is that if you don’t want to be insulted, don’t say idiotic things. It really is quite simple.

And if you don’t like the cut and thrust of a comments page (because that’s all it really is) then get the fuck out.

That is, they have specifically referenced her age and gender in order to make HP’s ‘crime’ look even worse.

Talk about having your cake and eating it.

You have hit the jackpot – the ugly truth at the heart of post-modernist feminism.

And similarly, the attitude of males who are protecting her here is chauvinistic, it regards women as vulnerable things that cannot be slandered.

Having worked once in a lesbian bar in Balls Pond Road and been head-butted by a troll-like little dyke called “Pixie”, and other experiences that I will not bore you with, such gentlemanly chivalry seems so dated. And genuinely patronising towards women.

As is Marcus, the sole basis of whose argument seems to be “it’s alright to call people silly cows round my way, so quit complaining”. It’s the pub misogynist line. We’re close to “only having a laugh love” and then on to “stuck up bitch”.

This is all a bit silly but even to get the analogy to hold water you would have to concede that “the pub misogynist” would only be behaving that way because a silly little middle class girl flounced into the bar and called him a racist.

Consider this a warning against poking your fingers into the den of one of the most venomous denizens of the blogosphere, the feminist horribilis.

Could have been worse, you could have annoyed the creatures dwelling at AROOO.

Their venom can kill a man within three steps, so they say…

“if you don’t criticise all examples of that”

Including ones that we’re not actually aware of? So I’m guilty of not criticising something I haven’t seen. What do you want me to do? Go back and retrospectively find every objectionable post on the site that I missed and criticise it?

I’ve already said the phrase “council house scum” bothers me. Unlike you.

“My advice is that you open yourself up to new experiences at meet different people”

You know nothing about me Graham.

luding ones that we’re not actually aware of?

But you were aware of it – as I have said I have been mentioning it on these threads for days. So you conciously chose to get all worked up about the criticism of a girl who went to oxford at the expense of council house scum.

Your choice.

You know nothing about me Graham.

I know you are an hypocritical wanker – and that’s quite enough for me thanks.

Well, firstly, I didn’t ban Brownie, I just called a halt to any more discussion of that particular topic. But you seem determined to carry it on, and minimise the way in which your posts, and others responses, were violently offensive to women.

I don’t care if you thought that ’silly cow’ wasn’t an insult. It is. You, as a male person, do not get to tell me, as a female person, what is and is not sexist, what I should and shouldn’t be offended by. That I’ve got you on the back foot enough for you to make a whole post about it just shows you as the hyper-privileged wankbabies you really are.

I’ve had enough with being slandered and degraded by this site. You and Brownie are both sexist arseholes, and until you sort out your own privilege and stop throwing gendered insults about, you have no business – no business AT ALL – presenting yourselves as some kind of defenders of women by muscling into the politics of the Hijab.

I resent the implication that somehow, because I’m unwilling to be spuriously insulted, I ‘can’t take the heat’. I’m afraid I’ve just got more important things to do than sit here and listen to drooling abuse – sorry if that upsets you, boys. But the attitude you guys are displaying here just proves the point I made in the origina article – that Harry’s Place is now far more about shit slanging than about having meaningful liberal debate.

Graham, as I’ve said, I haven’t looked at this site properly in ages. Just cos you typed something, doesn’t mean I’ve read it.

When I say I haven’t read something, I haven’t read it. So your idea that I’m a hypocritical wanker is based on the idea that I’m also a liar.

And that’s not very nice.

I think it would be better is things were depersonalised from here.

I’d be interested to know what others feel about whether and to what extent it is fair game to talk about another’s background, when that information was put into the public domain by the person concerned? Are we saying that in no circumstances is the background and upbringing relevant? Are we confident that none of that in any way influences and shapes the opinions that one goes on to hold in later life?

I’m talking purely hypotheticals here, but if a 22 year-old Oxbridge graduate from an avowedly privileged background who managed to make it through uni without having to borrow one penny of student loan did a post about student hardship, is it somehow beyond the pale to mention that this person’s life experiences probably do little to contribute to his/her understanding of the subject under discussion?

I’m a year older than Dylan Thomas was when he died and I’ve achieved somewhat less. More than once I’ve heard it suggested that my pessimistic outlook and cynicism is a result of my age, what I’ve seen, done and failed to do, both in my personal life and professional life. Should I feel violated?

Hang on – ‘went to Oxford at the expense of council house scum’?

My grandmother and grandfather, the former of whom died this year, lived on a council estate their whole lives after moving to this country when they were married. It is through their hard work, and their hard work alone, that my cousins and I were able to go to university at all. I’m monumentally offended that you could imply I’m somehow unware of the class issues here, or wilfully stomping on the poor with my big boots of privilege. No, sorry.

I’ll scweam and I’ll scweam and I’ll scweam!

Graham, as I’ve said, I haven’t looked at this site properly in ages. Just cos you typed something, doesn’t mean I’ve read it.

Well as you are commenting on these threads and have obviously not been ignoring what I have been saying (as you have mentioned me by name) I’d say it was fairly reasonable of me to assume that you had read what I had said about people being called council house scum.

And nice? We have to be “nice” now? What is this, the vicars tea party?

A trot spewing girl and
A cud chewing cow
There is a difference I must allow
The intelligent look on the face of the cow

“I don’t care if you thought that ’silly cow’ wasn’t an insult. It is. You, as a male person, do not get to tell me, as a female person, what is and is not sexist, what I should and shouldn’t be offended by.”

Well that’s it in a nutshell isn’t it ? What an illogical and absurd statement. Laurie – is this OK ?

“I don’t care if you thought that ’narcissistic’ wasn’t an insult. It is. You, as a straight person, do not get to tell me, as a gay person, what is and is not homophobic, what I should and shouldn’t be offended by.”

Allowing one group to define what cannot be said about them by others is a ridiculous idea.

And before anybody starts – yes I think this applies to accusations of anti-semitism as well.

‘I think it would be better is things were depersonalised from here.’

About 200 comments too late, Brownie. Are you going to actually respond to the charges that your site is replete with misogyny, and/or do something about it? Yes?

Okay Laurie. How about your allegation that above-the-line contributors to HP subject any Muslim involved in politics to a witch-hunt?

Would you consider retracting or apologising for that comment?

Or can you still not see how the targets of that comment might be a teensy bit upset at the implication of anti-Muslim bigotry?

I am surprised at this turn of tone by Laurie. Her initial comments on HP were good humoured, holding her own and apt. The response from HP commenters was appreciative and respectful and welcoming, and it looked like a promising, even if combative, relationship was in prospect. What happened? Is she still solabile from her earlier spell in the loony bin? Is it that time of month?

Laurie, may I offer some wisdom from an old crone. [ I and others have reclaimed this word away from any violently misogynistic meaning to its original, wise woman or elder http://www.yoni.com/crone.shtml

You have given permission to criticize you for "my weakness for overblown feminist polemic". okey doke. The upper case delineation of silly cow as VIOLENTLY MISOGYNIST, DEHUMANISING INSULT is overblown feminist polemic. In particular, the use of VIOLENTLY here is overblown to the magnitude of an exploding zeppelin.

And let me make it clear, I speak asafeminist.

You use the word loony bin. This is regarded as deeply deeply offensive by survivors of the mental health system (as they are known in my circles.) Does Laurie think that if she speaks asaloony she has immunity to use such terms?

You also invite attacks on your grammar. Well, having poured scorn on your It is a truth universally acknowledge, I could quibble over this use of myself: "bullying ad hominem attack, on myself": [see further Kamm's Pedant's column in yesterday's Times which deals with this solecism.]

But all of this is posturing on all sides. I know, I have indulged myself (correct usage) in this on HP- deliberately picking up on deliberately provactive anti feminist phrase and indulging in massive ding dongs with much dick swinging deployment by me of the f word to show how feisty I am.. (actually I do overuse the word at home and now try to cut down online) Graham will know what I mean.

And I was taken aback at the unexpected reaction to a post I did which garnered over 300 responses (sorry Laurie, with your 170) some of them attacks on my middle classness, (mainly by another languid lady of letters who runs her own well regarded literary blog) others on my racism, which you would probably have classed as violent. But I also got equally vigourous responses in support. It was all very exhilirating. But I was young then, not in biological age but in blogging years.

And you know what Laurie: get to know the people on HP you spar with and its fine. As you say, you have more in common with them ideologically than that which divides you. Your statements about anti Muslim bigotry were ill judged, ill researched, intemperate and unjust. On other blogs they might be regarded as actionable in defamation. But as you would know from your familiarity with HP, HP is staunchly and in principle against sueing people for defamation, preferring the remedy as the response you received.

And btw, BROWN COW? WTF??
What bizarre turn of mind managed to crowbar that in? I will have you know that in my country of origin, South Africa, brown cow is a beverage well loved by all- milk mixed with Coca Cola. In fact, in our home for the past 21 years in the UK, it is still our minhag from the old country to break our fast on Yom Kippur with brown cow.

Sisterly regards

“Not even Anne Widdecombe deserves to be called a ’silly cow’.”

“Not even….” !!!
I would disagree with Anne Widdecombe’s views on many things, but the woman has more intelligence, common sense and integrity in her little finger than this vacuous self-obsessed juvenile harpy has in her whole body.

Actually Brownie, I did have to take out a student loan. I’m paying it back, and other loans back, as we speak. I also worked my way through university with bar jobs and waitressing jobs. Christ, talk about assumptions.

I’m a year older than Dylan Thomas was when he died and I’ve achieved somewhat less.

Although to be honest you have probably drunk more.

It is in my opinion impossible to ban people from talking about others backgrounds.

I was responsible for the ’silly cow’ quip & I’m certainly not a hardcore misogynist. Yes, ’silly cow’ is gender specific but so are terms like dickhead & tosspot (terms hich I happily direct towards fellow males who for one reason or other displease me).

The way I see it is that Ms Penny is a prig & terribly self absorbed & has no real life experience aside from university & living with ‘toast eating pagans’. Most of her ‘journalism’ seems to be about herself. She wrote a piece that was plain wrong & really can’t complain when she’s hauled up on it.

On reflection I’d say silly cow was inaccurate. I think ‘very silly calf’ fits the bill better.

About 200 comments too late, Brownie. Are you going to actually respond to the charges that your site is replete with misogyny, and/or do something about it? Yes?

What exactly do you expect him to do? By the logic of your post above, he’s not allowed to define misogyny. So, short of letting you (or, God help us, Judy) compose a list of prohibited insults, he’s in no position to clean it up.

Consider this a warning against poking your fingers into the den of one of the most venomous denizens of the blogosphere, the feminist horribilis.

I suppose it’s ironic to point this out when what penny accused HP of was “bullying” but if I had to characterize the feminist blogs I’ve run across the main qualities I’d point out would be:

1) a deliberate rejection of any wish for fairness – ie deliberate bullying

2) overweening and vacuous feelings of persecution, self righteousness

3) resentment – as if resenting rather than understanding how people think or how the world works was primary

4) misandry – also a deep rejection and resentment of all of the qualities of male sexuality

5) circle jerks of resentment and judgment

… And to me the odd thing is that, objectively, women are now powerful as men in our society. Sexism has been dead for over a generation. Winning is not enough, apparently. One must continue to hate.

“I don’t care if you thought that ’silly cow’ wasn’t an insult.”

Most things that get said in blog comment sections, including your own, are insults. Grow the fuck up.

Laurie – here is the precise form of your comment, with ‘Muslim’ changed to ‘black.’

Blog X has pursued what has been seen as a ‘witch-hunt’ against any black or black-ally who does not fit the site editors’ strict definitions of ‘moderation’; to whit, near non-involvement in politics.

Can you still not see why HP authors might have taken offence at your comment? Particularly when you provided no evidence at all for your assertion?

Mark T ….I’d retract it, apart from I didn’t, actually, make that statement. I said that Harry’s Place contributers had pursued ‘what has been seen as a ‘witch-hunt’ ‘

‘What has been seen as’ = i.e, not by me. I chose my words carefully. Others have seen it as a witch-hunt, and described it to me as such – their opinions matter. I didn’t, at the time, know enough to comment either way, I was merely reporting on what I’d heard.

If you’ll offer me evidence that you are considerate and tolerant towards political Muslims, I’ll gladly affirm that. Now, will you ease off on the sexist bile?

Many of the comments directed towards Judy were misogynistic and personalised. They did nothing to advance the arguments of those who made them. It was a typically vigorous HP discussion in other words.

However they were no less outrageous than the calumnies Judy herself directed towards Peter Tatchell. Surely I am not alone in detecting a snide disdain towards homosexuals who have the temerity to fight against the often vicious opprobrium directed towards them from church, mosque and synagogues. Judy seems incapable of understanding why homosexuals could possibly have issues with the teachings of the Mosaic religions relating to homosexuality. She instead caricatures this issue as one of gay aggression and intolerance.

These are some of Judy’s comments from that earlier post:

“The only Muslims it seems Tatchell approves of are those who regard male homosexual practice acceptable”

“So it’s the equivalent of saying (as I believe he does) he execrates and actively campaigns against those Muslims and Jews who follow the commonly accepted laws of their religion.”

“I believe that it’s correct to regard him as an Islamophobe–he’s driven by hatred of the mainstream beliefs and teachings of Islam”

“This is anti-semitic drivel from Peter Tatchell”

“Tatchell is also deeply anti-democratic, since he regards it as acceptable to use his fists in physical attacks on those who are found guilty at the court of his personal conscience. I regard him as an extreme narcissist for these reasons”

“It represents a great many more of the UK’s Jewish people than Peter Tatchell, who I don’t recall having been elected to anything broadly representative of the constituency he claims to represent by anybody (but maybe he was elected by OutRage? But how representative is OutRage of the gay population of the UK?).”

“he’s an undemocratic narcissist who both churns out unjustifiable and grossly misleading representations of the Jewish and other religious communities, and uses physical violence”

“Alternative forms of lifestyles practised by many Jews, including watching mainstream secular television, practising follow-your-inclinations sexuality (including the practice of homosexual penetrative sexual acts by those who wish to do them) are held to be incompatible with the life that the Almighty is believed to have commanded Jews to lead.”

“. . . the unfailingly self-regarding narcissist Tatchell and his cohorts . . “

That I’ve got you on the back foot enough for you to make a whole post about it just shows you as the hyper-privileged wankbabies you really are.

I’ve had enough with being slandered and degraded by this site. You and Brownie are both sexist arseholes, and until you sort out your own privilege and stop throwing gendered insults about, you have no business – no business AT ALL – presenting yourselves as some kind of defenders of women by muscling into the politics of the Hijab.

If not then it is sauce for the gander here – you equally have, by your own flaky logic, NO RIGHT TO BE MUSCLING IN ON THE POLITICS OF THE HIJAB.

Say your shahada right now, and willingly accept that from now on in a sharia court of law your value is worth exactly one half that of a man.

But I loved the term “wankbabies”.

Are we getting near the point, in British political discourse, where a lawsuit and a cease-and-desist are filed?

Richard – no, I wouldn’t mind it as much. I’d probably disagree with her, but at least she’d be speaking from a position of some experience, despite being an anti-feminist person herself.

Laurie,

You and Brownie are both sexist arseholes

Evidence-free repetitions of falsehoods do nothing to lend validity. If it’s made up, it’s made up no matter how many times you type this shit. I’ve made no sexist remark to you and your failure to withdraw this allegation does you no favours.

If you really are planning a career in journalism, this habit of lying about people is something you need to quickly lose. Unless you plan writing for The Scum, of course?

Just two questions:

1 – Why did you refer to me as “darling” when we’ve not so much as cuddled?

2 – Where does “wankbaby” stand in the pantheon of sexist insults?

“Well as you are commenting on these threads and have obviously not been ignoring what I have been saying ”

I am not commenting on ‘these threads’. I am commenting on this thread.

And it’s not the vicar’s tea party, but it’s not Ultimate Cage Fighting either.

Now play nice.

“You, as a male person, do not get to tell me, as a female person, what is and is not sexist, what I should and shouldn’t be offended by.”

You won’t mind a female like Nadine Dorries telling you then?

“If you’ll offer me evidence that you are considerate and tolerant towards political Muslims, I’ll gladly affirm that. Now, will you ease off on the sexist bile?”

Please define “political Muslim”.

Isn’t it obvious that for all her remarks about feminism and being insulted it’s simply that Laurie is a little bit dim and needs to grow up a bit? A lot?

Richard – no, I wouldn’t mind half as much. I’d probably disagree with her, but at least she’d be speaking from a position of experience, despite being an anti-feminist herself.

Sorry, posted that comment twice as I thought the internet had eaten it – mods, if there are any, please delete one. :)

In a sense all this is about respect and those who feel they are entitled to respect without having earned it. Speaking personally, I would never call Judy or Amie a “silly cow” (however silly they may get) because they have both earned my respect. I feel no such problem with calling someone that I have never seen before such a name. However much they then desperately try to attach themselves to others that I do have respect for.

I am not commenting on ‘these threads’. I am commenting on this thread.

Your comment (actually) was on me saying that there had not been one expression of shocked outrage at someone being insulted for their background as “council house scum” on any thread…

Brownie, you’re splitting hairs. Respond to my actual points like a grown-up, ey?

No it’s not Graham. It’s about misogynist language.

And the idea that people have to ‘earn’ your respect isn’t something that has any place on the left. Respect for a person should be a default position. People can lose that respect through their actions, but they shouldn’t have to ‘earn’ respect in the first place.

‘Political Muslim’ – okay, for now let’s have a definition of ‘any Muslim who allows their faith to inform their politics in any way whatsoever’.

“If you’ll offer me evidence that you are considerate and tolerant towards political Muslims, I’ll gladly affirm that. Now, will you ease off on the sexist bile?”

Please define “political Muslim”.

I think if she actually meant something (other than defending baseless charge) she would have chosen a meaningful phrase.

By choosing a phrase with no meaning, she is hoping to create an impossible task. This is a semantic version of “have you stopped beating your wife yet?”

Mark T ….I’d retract it, apart from I didn’t, actually, make that statement. I said that Harry’s Place contributers had pursued ‘what has been seen as a ‘witch-hunt’ ‘

Hahaha. Okay.

Are you still maintaining that HP pursue, or target, “any Muslim” who engages in politics, even if ‘witch-hunt’ is someone else’s word? Because that was the nub of the disagreement, not the use of the word ‘witch-hunt’.

And the idea that people have to ‘earn’ your respect isn’t something that has any place on the left.

Then your “left” isn’t anywhere that anyone with an ounce of integrity or self-respect would want to be is it?

“Your comment (actually) was on me saying that there had not been one expression of shocked outrage at someone being insulted for their background as “council house scum” on any thread…”

Yes. Your comment in this thread. I have not seen the other threads you’re talking about. And I made clear my position on the phrase ‘council house scum’. As did you.

Out of interest, if, as you say, it doesn’t bother you, what were you saying about it in the other threads?

“You, as a male person, do not get to tell me, as a female person, what is and is not sexist”

Why, because men aren’t capable of understanding the Special Knowledge? Isn’t that, well, sexist? If there’s Special Knowledge men (sorry, “male people”) can’t access, while women (sorry, “female people”) can, does the reverse hold?

As far as I can tell, Laurie, I personally have not used any sexist language towards you, nor have I referenced your age, gender or background.

I don’t think it’s a great idea to do so, basically because it’s a bit childish. I certainly don’t approve of it. ‘Silly cow’ is a bit unpleasant, although I would not describe it as a VIOLENTLY MISOGYNISTIC term.

But you appear to still be standing by your accusation that HP authors target any (ANY!) Muslim who engages in politics. Even if ‘other people’ might have described that as a ‘witch-hunt’, your basic allegation is one of bigotry on the part of HP authors.

‘Political Muslim’ – okay, for now let’s have a definition of ‘any Muslim who allows their faith to inform their politics in any way whatsoever’.

Which parts of the Muslim faith would you include and which may we exclude?

If we are allowed to reject those who want apostates killed, or who play to Jew hatred, or support jihadist violence in some part of the world, perhaps can you find us an example of who we should be supporting.

Also assuming you can find anyone, ask why they would be notable and come under the preview of blog who’s purpose is to criticize foolish politics, mostly in order to save the center left from insanity emanating from the nutcase left.

I think I’ve addressed some those points above, Laurie.

But as for this

Again, if you show me evidence that you don’t target political Muslims – and let’s not forget that I contacted you before writing the piece, asking you to do so – I’ll gladly retract that.

No. Your claim was that ‘ANY Muslim’ is targeted by HP. That is an allegation of bigotry.

Laurie Penny says that she chose her words carefully in saying ‘what has been seen as a ‘witch-hunt’’. Indeed she did. She used a passive construction to suppress agency, to avoid the question: who has seen Harry’s Place contributers as pursing a ‘witch-hunt’? and to avoid asking whether they are sensible people or ignorant fools. They are the latter, as she would have known if she had bothered to do her research.

“Then your “left” isn’t anywhere that anyone with an ounce of integrity or self-respect would want to be is it?”

Graham, the last time I checked, the idea of the integrity and dignity of the individual was central to any kind of progressive politics. If people don’t deserve respect as a default, what is the left actually for?

For some bizarre reason, my posts are appearing before the posts I am responding to. I hope that’s not too confusing.

Out of interest, if, as you say, it doesn’t bother you, what were you saying about it in the other threads?

Are you really this stupid? Not one person has objected to someone’s background being presented as “council house scum” but many (such as yourself) have arrived here whining about people being called middle-class. What exactly does that tell you about “your left”? and its detachment from priorities?

Now on the subject of me not caring what people are called online that comes from not thinking that comments boxes are the real world (or even a representation of it) one of Laurie’s supporters even called me a paedophile on another thread – and guess what – I didn’t even post a whiny, self interested 300 word riposte on my own blog.

Jesus…

Sounds like a silly cow to me.

Graham, the last time I checked, the idea of the integrity and dignity of the individual was central to any kind of progressive politics.

their speaks someone who has never been to a public meeting where more than one “left” group was represented!

That was my point, Graham. I think we can say some of us have arrived at a position of mutual respect after slugging it out for a while. This may seem aunpalatable and horribly macho analogy, but what I heard on a radio programme about the New South Africa has always stuck with me. Some Black activists said that they now had a relationship of mutual respect with the Afrikaner after having got down and rugby scrummed in the mud with them, whereas there was still an unease and distrust for the effete white liberals who had always pussy footed around them and whom they still (sometimes unjustly in my view) suspected of sneering at them behind their backs.

Of course, Laurie may regard me as having internalised my oppression here, and I am now ensconsed as the feminist equivalent of a house slave, uncle Tom or court Jew. (Is there a term for it?)

But in any case, this crone is feeling very hurt and disrespected at Laurie ignoring my carefully thought out comment and the hand I reached out to her. I am feeling overlooked and insulted as an elder, and don’t tell me what is insulting to elders, mkay!

Mark, I’m not maintaining anything. I never was! All I explicitly said on my own behalf was that HP, like other sites, is full of bullies and pursues ad-hominem politics. I think you’ve pretty much proved that, actually.

You guys have misinterpreted my words from the very start. Again, if you show me evidence that you don’t target political Muslims – and let’s not forget that I contacted you before writing the piece, asking you to do so – I’ll gladly retract that.

Instead you arrogantly refused to defend your intellectual stance, and made it all about me, and encouraged others to do the same in two separate posts that are both incredibly off-topic and personally attacking. Why was that?

Again, if you show me evidence that you don’t target political Muslims

It’s hard to contain my paternalistic contempt for someone so spoiled that she fails to understand that journalism has never worked that way. If you make a claim in an article you have to be able to support it.

Innocent till proven guilty, not the reverse.

I’m not exactly against people being given a level of respect as default – that’s why I felt slightly pissed off when someone posted Laurie’s accusations of racism in one of my threads.

But if you want real respect you have to earn it kid.

Silly Cow Has Attack Of The Vapours Shocker

Ee, there’s nowt like humourless feminists if you want a good laff.

I think Harry’s Place writers are on very weak ground arguing about offensive language given that one contributor (Hello Brett) thinks “Nigger Balls” is not a racist phrase. Equally, I don’t think writers of this website should be so quick to accuse others of “lying about people” given this website’s record (which includes wrongly accusing the head of Christian CND of writing anti semitic articles, “accusing ” writers of being members of the SWP in some McCarthyite attack )

100% with you Amie

(And the ability to coin a new word such as “auntpalatable” whilst making your point just makes me respect you more.)

Penny, you keep writing that HP “targets Muslims.” This is nonsense. I’ve read this blog for several years and this is manifestly untrue. HP “targets”, with surprisingly evenhanded zeal, what it takes to be ideas and persons hostile to to universal rights and democratic tolerance. Now, as an American right-winger, I hold a somewhat more jaundiced view of universal rights and democracy than does Harry’s Place. And, consequently, I more often than not find my oxen being gored here, and my values being besmirched and ridiculed. But I am a Big Boy, and the overall civility and friendliness keep me coming back.

You seriously need to grow a pair, Sweetheart.

“their speaks someone who has never been to a public meeting where more than one “left” group was represented!”

Any more random assumptions you want to make their, Graham?

Re the council house scum thing. I’m still confused. Are you annoyed cos I didn’t say anything on threads I didn’t see? That people used the phrase at all? Or that other people who you’re classing with me didn’t say anything?

As a gay homosexual of the male variety, I’ve been called a silly cow more times than I care to enumerate. Part of banter, dear, calm down.

Laurie Penny asks for evidence that HP does not target political Muslims. I wonder what she has mind. Anyone could point to posts which are not targetting political Muslims, but that wouldn’t show anything, just as a photo of a duckbilled platypus not laying an egg would not show that duckbilled platypus do not lay eggs. Only looking at every single post on HP would show that HP does not target political Muslims. Instead of someone trying to show that HP does not target political Muslims, Laurie Penny should try to offer some evidence that it does. She saw fit to publicize this accusation. It’s up to her to offer some evidence for it.

Mark – it now seems to me that you WANT me to call all HP authors bigots. You aren’t. You’re bullies, but you’re not bigots.

Being accused of bigotry is something you guys obviously get a lot, and your sensitivity on the matter is understandable. If I get to explain to you why I found your attacks so hurtful, then it’s only right that you get to explain to me why my accusations were hurtful to you. I’m sorry for not listening initially. I was somewhat distracted by people shouting at me about my gender, age and background, but that’s a reason not an excuse.

So – I still don’t understand why you’ve extrapolated an accusation of total bigotry, it wasn’t one I intended to make. But I’m sorry anyway.

I wrote what I did in the way that I did because I’d spoken to a lot of people who had been upset and offended by what they saw as slander and lies posted on HP. I haven’t seen conclusive evidence that HP calls ALL muslims involved in politics bigots, but a lot of people seem to think so, and because site authors didn’t offer me their view of the situation even after I asked them to do so, I had to go on the information I had.

So no, I can’t offer you proof that you’ve called every single political Muslim nasty names. I never claimed to be able to – that’s your inference, your hyper-sensitivity. I’m not going to apologise for the fact that I haven’t spent the last 6 years reading every single HP post, as some of you guys seem to have done. But if I offended you, if you interpreted what I said as a straight accusation of out and out bigotry, then I’m sorry.

What I haven’t done is deliberately set out to insult and slander you all over the internet. This is something that you have done to me, with little cause and less attempt to actually sort out the details beforehand. I’d like you to explain why you thought that was justified, why you thought that that would make YOU look like the grown-ups, and what you intend to do about making your site more welcoming to women in the future.

Brownie, you’re splitting hairs. Respond to my actual points like a grown-up, ey?

I’m afraid that’s not how it works, Laurie. You don’t get to invent stuff and then when you’re called on it claim I’m splitting hairs and then change the subject. Not if you want to be taken seriously.

Is Ed Husain okay as a “political Muslim”, by the way? He’s Muslim and political, but I don’t know if that’s what you meant?

What about Mehdi Hasan? The first few posts about Hasan were critical, but the most recent – last week- was supportive. A clear illustration that what we write is motivated by how we feel about the things others say, not what colour they are or which God they worship.

How many examples is enough, though? I have work to do.

Brownie – see my comment above.

A linguist friend of mine did his master’s thesis on ‘heterosexism’ in language. If I had a fit of pique every time heterosexist language was used within earshot, I’d be huffing and puffing all day.

“I think Harry’s Place writers are on very weak ground arguing about offensive language given that one contributor (Hello Brett) thinks “Nigger Balls” is not a racist phrase.”

I do not think the confectionary was named after the genitals of black men. If you have evidence that it was, I’m open to being persuaded to your point of view. I do not accept your theory that white supremacist fathers got some perverted sexualised racist kick out of getting their little daughters to give black men a metaphorical blow job. Sorry, I just don’t buy it.

>> No it’s not Graham. It’s about misogynist language.

You dippy tart. D’you have similar disdain for calling men “knobs”?

Re the council house scum thing. I’m still confused. Are you annoyed cos I didn’t say anything on threads I didn’t see? That people used the phrase at all? Or that other people who you’re classing with me didn’t say anything?

My advice is that you go back to the top of the thread and read clearly what was said before you make an even bigger fool of yourself.

It really is no surprise that the biggest defence of the student politics espoused by some has come from someone as right-wing as Judy. Its a gift to them you see. Most of us realised that 20 years ago.

She saw fit to publicize this accusation. It’s up to her to offer some evidence for it.</i?

The burden of proof lies with the person making the accusation, not the person who denies (the accusation).

Well. The claim was quite specifically that HP targets “any Muslim or Muslim-ally” who doesn’t have “near non-involvement in politics”.

It’s quite demonstrably false, and it is an absurd defence to say that you merely reporting how others view this particular “campaign” as a “witch-hunt.”

Were someone to argue that

Laurie Penny has subjected the male bloggers of HP to what has been seen as a disgusting, vile and anti-male campaign of irrational and personal harassment.

I doubt that the use of ‘what has been as’ would act as mitigation in any way, shape or form for the transparent falsehood of the sentence.

I think the argument that Harry’s Place does not have an anti Muslim bias does not stand up when you consider that Douglas Murray of the Centre for Social Cohesion made a speech in which he said:-
‘“Conditions for Muslims in Europe must be made harder across the board” and that
“it is late in the day, but Europe still has time to turn around the demographic time-bomb which will soon see a number of our largest cities fall to Muslim majorities. It has to. All immigration into Europe from Muslim countries must stop” and that
“At the heart of this problem is the primary disease – the AIDS of the West – the disease which has made the opportunist infection of Islam so deadly. That disease is relativism. It is the belief that all cultures are equal even while one culture (our own) is ridden over daily and even while another (Islam) is becoming uniquely violent”
However, a recent post on Harry’s Place defended this speech of Murray’s and said it was one in which he “He advocated equal rights – and treatment – for all”

‘a recent post on Harry’s Place defended this speech of Murray’s’

Give us a link.

Laurie is a sensitive uhm no-gender-specific, non-age-specific human. Let’s just agree that by her oh so sensitive judgment we’re all despicable bullies. That would hardly put us in an exclusive category because no doubt she thinks the same of 99% of humanity.

Having agreed to agree can we forget her now?

I’m just wondering if Laurie has ever met anyone who did not end up “bullying” her?

No Josh, 99% of humanity are not ‘despicable bullies’. You guys are playground bullies, and you’re by far the worst site on the British left for launching slanderous personal attacks on individuals. It amuses me that you think this goes on everywhere – actually, the only place that’s as bad as HP is Comment Is Free, and then only in the comments.

Of course not, Alec. Context and power structures are important here.

Don’t deflect, Graham, you coward. I am calling you guys bullies, because that’s what you are – you personally attacked and set out to injure me without cause, as you have done with many others. Actually, not many people do this – the left is full of reasonable people who are able to debate, argue, share ideas and have disagreements without resorting to asinine personal bellowing.

“My advice is that you go back to the top of the thread and read clearly what was said before you make an even bigger fool of yourself.”

I’ve read it. And I’ve made clear my position on the phrase and the reason why I haven’t commented on it at the time. There’s obviously no point in me going over to the other thread and posting something there.

Now the question remains. If we do not respect the person as a default position, what is the left for?

“a lot of people who had been upset and offended by what they saw as slander and lies posted on HP. I haven’t seen conclusive evidence that HP calls ALL muslims involved in politics bigots, but a lot of people seem to think so:”

Ok Laurie, you do the proving now: Exactly how many people is “a lot”? A lot of people “seem” to think so? Does “seem here denote a subjective interpretation on your part of their attitudes? Or does the word “seem” qualify the phrase “a lot” and it is only your subjective impression that there are a lot of people?

Can you give us a breakdown of the demographic on political or ideological lines of this “lot” of people? Any particular bias in the demographic might help in the assessment whether the perception of HP is a valid one. As others have said, the burden is on the claimant to prove their assertion. These are the kinds of questions you would be obliged to answer if a libel case were brought on the basis of your assertions.

(I am a lawyer as well as being a feminist crone).

‘you’re by far the worst site on the British left for launching slanderous personal attacks on individuals’

Could you give some evidence for this? Could you tell us which individuals you have in mind?

Context and power structures are important here.

That is right! How dare powerful unemployed men criticise weak Oxbridge-educated teenagers without anyone to defend them.

Mark T – so when I do offer an apology, you’re not willing to accept it. You don’t even acknowledge it. You’re more interested in carrying on this shitstorm.

Haha!

I’ve just realised, as I should have done a long time ago, that there isn’t actually any point to this thread, or this post, other than to attack me.

I’m going to do my work now. Bye, guys, it’s been real.

***Laurie out***

Good man, Wolfie. You gone done a joke.

I haven’t seen conclusive evidence that HP calls ALL muslims involved in politics bigots.

Yes, Laurie, but unfortunately, that was the claim you advanced in your piece for the Samosa. Remember? You said that HP have targetted

any Muslim or Muslim-ally who does not fit the site editors’ strict definitions of ‘moderation’; to whit, near non-involvement in politics.

And now you’re saying you haven’t seen any conclusive evidence for the claim that caused all this trouble. Can you not see why you have got yourself into difficulty!?

Don’t deflect, Graham, you coward. I am calling you guys bullies, because that’s what you are – you personally attacked and set out to injure me without cause, as you have done with many others.

Actually my objection was that your article accusing everyone here of racism was posted in my thread. A case of you personally attacking me and setting out to injure me without cause if ever there was one. I don’t know if you have done that to many others but from your unwarranted self-righteous arrogance I’d say you have the potential to become a Mussolini of the future.

FFS Laurie – this is the blogosphere, which is, as far as I can tell, choc-full of opinionated people slagging each other off. Get used to it, get over it and grow up.

“a Mussolini of the future”

does this come under Godwin’s Law? Or does it specifcially have to be Nazis?

Me, Me, Me, look at me, don’t look over there, look at ME.

Ms Penny is a silly young person who really should GROW UP. ISn’t it time to get back to the serious stuff and stop engaging with trolls like her?

I haven’t seen conclusive evidence that HP calls ALL muslims involved in politics bigots, but a lot of people seem to think so, and because site authors didn’t offer me their view of the situation even after I asked them to do so, I had to go on the information I had.

So you’ve seen “non-conclusive” evidence? I can only assume this would be examples of HP posts where the person being criticised is a Muslim. I concede – we’ve done that. Others on the receiving end of HP authors include Quakers, Catholics and short Dundonians with dictator fetishes. It seems there is a lot of non-conclusive evidence that HP targets all members of all communities. It’s a wonder there have been no arrests.

But this bit…

I had to go on the information I had

No Laurie, that’s precisely what you didn’t have to do. What you were obliged to do was spend more than 5 minutes reading this blog and listening only to those who are already detractors.

Lastly, whatever intellectual gymnastics you’re now attempting to disassociate yourself from the main theme and central allegation in your post, you absolutely did suggest HP and MPACUK are two sides of the same coin. Given they are bigots, you are laying the same charge at our door. I strongly suspect this is because you know as much about MPACUK as you do about medieval ceramics, but that doesn’t get you off the hook.

That said, I think your last comment was written in a spirit of reconciliation(-ish), so I’m leaving it there.

>> Of course not, Alec. Context and power structures are important here.

Good. So calling a female blogger who’s forwarding a deeply silly argument a “silly cow” deserves to be considered in the same context as calling a male blogger who’s forwarding a deeply silly argument a “knob”.

It amuses me that you think this goes on everywhere – actually, the only place that’s as bad as HP is Comment Is Free, and then only in the comments.

But I noticed that you wrote an article on Comment is Free, and then joined in the comments (where you bizarrely called yourself “litlevigilante”)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2009/may/15/burlesque-feminism-proud-galleries

to challenge a commentator who was at the burlesque show you were writing about.

The commenter had said:
“If I remember rightly the writer of this piece rather wanted to be a part of the show, it fitted with her image of herself as ‘extremely liberated’ and she actually became a large part of [muscled in on] the show’s creative team and suggested how it was run. No big nasty man came and forced her to take her clothes off, she thought it was cool and tried to take it over. The reason she didn’t like it in the end was because she realised that in truth she was far too inhibited to be a successful performer in this genre.”

Do I detect a note of projection, where you now say that the male gendered creatures of HP have no right to muscle in on the politics of the hijab?”

And at the end of that CiF piece that you wrote, amendments were made on June 8, to whit:

• This article was amended on 8 July 2009. Changes were made to the second paragraph to make clear that the author was not persuaded by the managers of a local burlesque troupe to get into stripping, but did so voluntarily. The Burlesque troupe, with which the author performed, created a new format for the show after the Edinburgh 2005 run, not before, as the article originally suggested. The sentence beginning “Peeling off my fluffy underwear…” was moved from the end of the relevant paragraph to the beginning to correct this impression.” The words “after I left” were added before “as my troupe became more successful” to make clear that Laurie Penny did not perform in the new show.

What was that about? In the original version of the article, were you insinuating in your prose, or just clumsy in your use of English?

Basically HP has been attacked as a group and when the obvious objections have been raised the attackers have retreated behind accusations of sexism to defend an indefensible position. Most of us have seen all this before but when this is pointed out we are accused of ageism.

History repeats itself – the second time as farts.

I’d say you have the potential to become a Mussolini of the future.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kc07G1LOBDU

Oh dear oh dear oh dear.

fwiw I don’t think Judy has anything to apologise for with regards to those comments about Peter Tatchell: they are pretty much well reasoned and based in objective fact , whereas the insults thrown at her were simply vile invective with no basis in anything other than the ego and/or bad mood of whoever uttered them.

>> does this come under Godwin’s Law? Or does it specifcially have to be Nazis?

Nah, but your truncated the previous word (i.e. potential) raises questions about your depth of sillyness.

I can’t offer you proof that you’ve called every single political Muslim nasty names. I never claimed to be able to – that’s your inference, your hyper-sensitivity.

No, you didn’t claim to be able to – you just claimed that unattributed ‘other people’ had seen the evidence.

Laurie, I’m sorry you are upset – I’m not interested in carrying on a ’shitstorm’, I’d just like you to see how your words could have been as upsetting to the anti-racists at HP as the language that was used back to you.

That is all.

I wasn’t going to comment on this until I saw this:

“I’m monumentally offended”

FFS, what a monumental muppet.

Laurie Penny, you wrote an ignorant, unprovoked ad hominem attack on HP on the Samosa site. Not only was the article trite and spiteful, but it contained seriously defamatory allegations about HP, i.e. that it supports anti-Muslim bigotry.

Having read HP for 6 years, it’s fair to say that the allegation is totally untrue (it’s not fair to infer anything from a few anti-Jewish or anti-Muslim commenters – it’s like saying HP-BNP (er, hang on, didn’t an HP commenter say that too?) because Lee John Barnes has started commenting here).

The truth is that the allegation was made in order attack HP’s politics. It was ad hominem because, presumably, you chose not to debate issues such as Islamist extremism and Islamist antisemitism, which are covered very well by Harry’s Place and appear to be the cause of your problems with it.

Laurie, in your original post, you wrote of the “sectarian ideology of websites like Harry’s Place and MPACUK”. From a 5 second glance at MPACUK this morning, I found this comment by Salim:

“If you want to know what zionist are up to i suggest you read a book by Henry Ford called ‘ THE INTERNATIONAL JEW’ the founder of FORD motors knew in the early 1900′ what the zionist are up to. There was also another individual in the 1930’s who knew what the zionist were trying to do in the world. i wonder who he was?”

Laurie, to demonstate your argument, please could you then identify an HP equivalent to this MPACUK comment.

Marcus wrote quite a fair response to your piece. Laurie, you’ve responded by trying to blow smoke over the issues.

Laurie, lastly, try to think about this on a personal level. You’ve crossed the road to pick a fight with people you don’t know, shouting mean and ignorant slanders about them to the world. And now you declare yourself to be “monumentally offended”.

p.s. Judy, thank you for your comments over the years. I quite admire Peter Tatchell but I didn’t see the thread you’ve referred to. In any case, in relation to MMN’s attacks on you, please remember that others appreciate your perspective.

Four years ago, I was a miserable teenager…

I’m laughing my ass off.

What’s with all this “to whit” stuff? Unless you’re intention was to do an owl impression, it’s “to wit”.

Just because a term is gender specific, doesn’t make it sexist. It can be, of course, but it is not *necessarily* so merely because it is gender specific. Sex-specific isn’t automatically sex-ist.

Penny’s problem is limitless grandiosity.

And this deeply silly session of hp troll on Penny the troll has gotten tedious.

Can anyone suggest songs appropriate to Penny?

“Nah, but your truncated the previous word (i.e. potential) raises questions about your depth of sillyness.”

“silliness”

And yes Alec. It was a joke.

I was asked for a link – here are the “anti racists” at Harry’s Place claiming Douglas Murray’s anti-muslim speech was all about equal rights, a few days ago

http://www.hurryupharry.org/2009/11/03/hello-hizbis/ (it is point 2 in the article)

here is Murray’s speech – the Social Affairs Unit have deleted it from their blog, presumably because they were ashamed of it . However, there is still a copy on this very right wing site here :-

http://pedestrianinfidel.blogspot.com/2006/03/douglas-murrays-complete-speech-on.html

http://pedestrianinfidel.blogspot.com/2006/03/douglas-murrays-complete-speech-on.html

Just because a term is gender specific, doesn’t make it sexist.

Brett is just one of the persons of hench to be found at Harry’s Place.

Adrian Morgan – I was’t going to comment again, but I’d like to say that the change was made to correct a change Guardian subs had made to my original copy, in which I made it quite clear that I joined that burlesque troupe of my own free will, as an experiment, an experiment which went wrong.

Plus, the person who wrote the comment you quote knows me personally, and has already apologised for what he said.

I wrote both of those articles for money. I want to make a career in journalism, and the only pitches the Guardian would take initially were the ones in which I offered very personal information. Thanks to that, I didn’t starve this summer, and I’m now getting to write what I want.

Really going now.

What is with Penny Farting?

When i toot i see how far goes my toot

what a hoot hoot hoot

ladiladila

i dream of reaching the sky the sky the sky

with my big toot

Pardon me Brownie – I made an error.

Seems comparatively minor, considering all the other stuff thrown about here.

And did Douglas Murray write that comment on HP, or not?

Can anyone suggest songs appropriate to Penny?

Now you have pre-empted Marcus’ next post: Penny lame.

Thanks Laurie, for your response to my comment.

Good luck with the writing.

What a whiny, self-important nonentity you are, Laurie. And ignorant too, even with all that expensive education … nobody “bullied” you or conducted a “witch hunt” against you. People were responding to your sick and borderline actionable accusation that this site is run by racists.

Now eff off back to your smug little world, you silly nobody.

No, Murray did not write the comment on Harry’s Place – he made a long, revolting speech at the Pim Fortuyn conf in 2006, the one that goes on about AIDs and Islam being an “infection” . However, a recent post on Harry’s place defended the speech and said it was all about equal rights.

So what Harry’s place is saying is that cultural differences make language which is objectively sexually discriminatory (necessarily both gender specific and insulting) OK? Perhaps we should try to ‘understand’ it?

Hypocrisy much guys?

I think amie at 1.19pm hits the nail on the head. Ms Penny can dish it out in a sixth form scattergun kind of way, but she can’t back up her silly assertions. She’s obviously out to make a name for herself and thinks that taking on the big boys and girls at HP will do the trick. It won’t wash darling (whoops!).

ooh, she stamped off and now she’s back again!

So what Harry’s place is saying is that cultural differences make language which is objectively sexually discriminatory (necessarily both gender specific and insulting) OK? Perhaps we should try to ‘understand’ it?

We’d have to understand what you are trying to say first.

So what Harry’s place is saying is that cultural differences make language which is objectively sexually discriminatory (necessarily both gender specific and insulting) OK? Perhaps we should try to ‘understand’ it?

Hypocrisy much guys?

Hypocrisy is sexy. Especially when evinced by a high placed human rights official in an SS uniform and an Iron Cross. Growl!

Is Miss Penny aware that according to Muslim theology, she very much is a ’silly cow’, an unthinking bovine. Unless. ofcourse, she is a Muslim, in which case she is not, as long as she keeps getting down on her hands and knees five times a day and not eating during the hours of daylight for one month of the year. (cf thread on Mahdi Hasan a few weeks ago).

“Thanks to that, I didn’t starve this summer, and I’m now getting to write what I want.”

For Christ’s sake – no one starves in this country – we have a welfare state. Did they teach you nothing at Oxford. This comment really does typify the hyperbolic, self-obsessive, self-pitying crap coming from this person.

Thanks, Ann On

But that statement attributed to Douglas Murray was never made on HP, it was merely quoted in another context.

And in its full original context, from the links you kindly provided, it does make sense without being about – as Hizb intended to portray it – mere ignorant hate-filled bigotry:

“The point here is that the whole deal under which Muslims live in our societies must change. At present we ask “why do they hate us”, “what did we fail to give them”, and suchlike. It is time the West woke up to the fact that the militants in our midst – however large a percentage of the Muslim population – will never like us. And we should not want to be liked by them – so we should stop flattering and playing up to them. Conditions for Muslims in Europe must be made harder across the board: Europe must look like a less attractive proposition. We in Europe owe – after all – no special dues to Islam. We owe them no religious holidays, special rights or privileges. From long before we were first attacked it should have been made plain that people who come into Europe are here under our rules and not theirs. There is not an inch of ground to give on this one. Where a mosque has become a centre of hate it should be closed and pulled down. If that means that some Muslims don’t have a mosque to go to, then they’ll just have to realise that they aren’t owed one. Grievances become ever-more pronounced the more they are flattered and the more they are paid attention to. So don’t flatter them.”

This is the problem with one-line quotations. They make for easy sound-bites, but stripped from their original environment and presented alone, they mislead.

There is nothing misleading about quoting Murray when he says “Europe still has time to turn around the demographic time-bomb which will soon see a number of our largest cities fall to Muslim majorities. It has to. All immigration into Europe from Muslim countries must stop”. That is an anti-Muslim speech. It is misleading to suggest that this is Murray is making a speech abut equal rights.

Hang on a minute….if calling someone a cow is insensitive and sexist, what is calling someone an ass, as she calls Brownie? Is she referring to his (undoubted) sexual prowess, his large, ungainly ears or his stubborness?

So what Harry’s place is saying is that cultural differences make language which is objectively sexually discriminatory (necessarily both gender specific and insulting) OK? Perhaps we should try to ‘understand’ it?

I think this is much more interesting discussion.

And FWIW, Laurie has issued an apology (albeit an equivocal one) for the original article so I tihnk it’s time to lay off, frankly.

Thanks to that, I didn’t starve this summer, and I’m now getting to write what I want.

Another belle de jour! May your blog too yield much royalties from the film rights.

Couldn’t resist that, but you are right Brownie, let the apology be the start of a better relationship.

Shall I tell you all about my time in the Burlesque troupe now?

Ann On
17 November 2009, 1:49 pm

No, Murray did not write the comment on Harry’s Place – he made a long, revolting speech at the Pim Fortuyn conf in 2006, the one that goes on about AIDs and Islam being an “infection” . However, a recent post on Harry’s place defended the speech and said it was all about equal rights.

_________

Yes, but 2006 was a bizarre time in relation to Muslim/non-Muslim affairs. I you cast your mind back, we had Muslims calling for the deaths of cartoonists and across the world, more than fifty people were murdered as a result of cartoons. These included Catholic priest in Turkey, numerous Christians in Nigeria, children killed in rioting in Pakistan, with Indian and Pakistani clerics offering money for the murder of cartoonists and not being prosecuted.

That was at the start of the year. Groups like BMSD at that time were virtually invisible, and almost every visible Muslim pundit happened to be a MCB member or someone from one of the institutions associated with extremism. Dr Zaki Badawi, a leading cleric who had made genuine outreach work between faith communities had died, and the remaining so-called representatives of Muslims at that time were mostly supporters of Islamism.

On August 9, 2006, such “representatives” had written an open letter in newspapers, calling for Britain to change its foreign policy as only that could stop terrorism on Britain’s soil.

The Muslim so-called “leaders” managed to mobilise thousands of people to march on Trafalgar Square to demand an end to our rights to see satirical cartoons of religious figures, whereas none of these leaders had done the same after 52 innocent people had been murdered on July 7, 2005.

And in September 2006, after the Pope’s Regensberg address, there were more killings and more threats around the world, such as Sister Leonella, a Catholic nun shot in the back in Somalia, and three Christians having their throats slit in Turkey.

At that time, what was going on in the Muslim world was NOT something that anyone sane would have wanted to see happening in Britain, and arguments to restrict Muslims from coming in at that time – when these came from communities that seemed so volatile – were not about vilification of some oppressed group, but about protecting our pluralistic society from the minority that could be extremist.

Maybe Douglas Murray’s language was generalised, but I can see why he wrote what he did, when he wrote it. We already had the likes of Yasser al-Siri wandering around Maida Vale, boasting that he could not be deported back to Egypt, even though in Egypt he had been found guilty of a failed assassination that left a six-year old child dead.

If Murray had prefaced the word Muslim with “fundamentalist”, “extreme” or had substituted the word “Islamist”, I do not think you would have been so offended.

Islamic fundamentalists at that time seemed hell-bent on fomenting discord and hatred.

So what Harry’s place is saying is that cultural differences make language which is objectively sexually discriminatory (necessarily both gender specific and insulting) OK? Perhaps we should try to ‘understand’ it?

Rather depends on exactly who is doing the defining of what is “objectively sexually discrimanatory” doesn’t it? The idea that you are “above” people who use the phrase “silly cow” as an everyday phrase and therefore should try to “understand” them frankly isn’t a good start.

What a truly edifying bunch you all are.

And still no answer to the glaring point that if an old middle-class man sneers at and abuses a “silly” young middle-class girl, for being a “silly” young middle-class girl, they are either being sexist, or hypocritical, or both.

Is she referring to his (undoubted) sexual prowess

I’ve always said that Sue R exhibits formidable insight.

I don’t know about “love”, but I when I was knocking around Worksop and Sheffiled in my early twenties it was always “youth”, as in, “alrayt, youth?”

Worksop. It makes Speke look like Juan-les-Pins. Which gives me an idea: someone really ought to write a reverse version of Peter Sarstedt’s 1969 classic “Where do you go to my lovely?” Instead of the young girl rising from the dirt poor streets of Naples to become a fixture on the international jet-set scene rubbing shoulders with actors and singers, it could tell the tale of a privileged, boarding-school-educated, spoiled-rotten princess who thinks pretending to be poor is like, so right on.

I’ll start…

You talk like Barbra Windsor,
You dance like me Ma when she’s pissed,
Your clothes are all made my Primark,
And you’re thoroughly disestablishmentarianist, yes you are.

How’s it looking?

This reminds me of a post I made on a certain web forum, which I’ll paraphrase here for old time’s sake:

Context is everything. I’ve called people bastards despite having two younger relatives born out of wedlock, I’ve called people a**eholes despite being the proud owner of a digestive tract and I’ve called people utter c**ks despite myself being male.

…Adults should at least be given the benefit of the doubt in the use of language unless there’s strong evidence otherwise – don’t you think?

Carrying this on, terms for stupid people – idiot, moron, imbecile, policeman – have remained in the insult arsenal but their original context, namely the denigration of the mentally disabled, has been tossed out. Instead these are terms applied to those we hold in contempt because of their actions.

A similar process is currently happening to the insult ‘retard’, at least online, which is slowly losing its more bigoted meaning, but still retains the ability and the potential to abuse or objectify the disabled.

The ultimate example of this remains, however, the word ‘gay’. Now, for all those middle aged Guardian readers choking on their cornflakes whenever young Jocasta or Timmy refer to last night’s television as ‘utterly gay’, I have an anecdote. Back in 1996 I found myself on holiday in Cuba (don’t ask) with my father, who’d been drinking and was now in the ’spouting bollocks’ phase on the inebriation cycle.

Notwithstanding the fact that we were two unrelated-looking men sharing a room together, complete with funny stares from the staff, he then began a long-winded rant about why all those ‘poofs’ were stealing ‘his’ language by appropriating the word ‘gay’ for their own use, and that this was just another example of their moral bankruptcy. Which was just gay, if you ask me.

“So what Harry’s place is saying is that cultural differences make language which is objectively sexually discriminatory (necessarily both gender specific and insulting) OK? ”

Hasn’t the entire conclusion of this thread been that there is no such thing as “objectively sexually discriminatory” language? Objective according to whose lights? If a woman in Leeds market calls me duck or love is that culturally ok but objectively sexist? I say bollocks to that.

“let the apology be the start of a better relationship.”

Yes, as in the penny finally drops.

Mrs A is a great fan of Adam Smith Ricardo Maynard Keynes.

She says

all this feminist hoo ha we have here. It was only the need to get women working and exploit them you know Abdul. (I didn’t).

2 world wars the welfare state and a consumer society to support, there was no way these gals were staying at home.

So what did they do ? Instead of marrying them off at 14 like me they put crazy ideas in their heads about fulfilment choice and other mullarky.

Make them think it was their idea in the first place.
Then when there are working their faces off to pay the 2 salary mortgage on an overpriced rabbit hutch, there comes this credit crunch.

And they think they are so smart here Abdul.

Haha Abdul . This is why I keep coming back.

A Muscovite maiden her lone vigil keeps
‘Neath the light of the pale polar star,
And the name that she murmurs so oft as she weeps,
Is Ivan Skavinsky Skivar.

I can play that on the banjo. Nearly.

Firstly, taking the time to proofread your article properly makes it look a lot less like you’re throwing your toys out of the pram.

And secondly, put your toys back in your pram, and give it a rest. If your first rebuttal didn’t look childish, selfish and vindictive (which it did, by the way), then this one definitely does. The more you say, the worse you come off. Haven’t you ever heard the expression “To turn the other cheek?”

“I’m going to do my work now.”

I thought this sort of thing was her work..?

If a poncy writer like you was in the pub and called this Mancunian girl a ’silly cow’ you’d get a glass in the face.

Don’t assume things about my hometown, and don’t misuse my hometown to write your pointless article. You’re in the wrong. Get over it.

“And still no answer to the glaring point that if an old middle-class man sneers at and abuses a “silly” young middle-class girl, for being a “silly” young middle-class girl, they are either being sexist, or hypocritical, or both.”

I’m a young(ish) middle class woman. Can I call her a ’silly cow’ without being sexist or hypocritical?

And still no answer to the glaring point that if an old middle-class man sneers at and abuses a “silly” young middle-class girl, for being a “silly” young middle-class girl, they are either being sexist, or hypocritical, or both.

Isn’t the answer to your question contained in your own sneer at “an old middle-class man?”

I’m sure she’ll make a lovely wife for some lucky man, though.

Laurie Penny

“I haven’t seen conclusive evidence that HP calls ALL muslims involved in politics bigots.”

Yes, Laurie, you don’t know much about HP. I have already made this point, but maybe I should repeat it. There is one sector of HPers which continually complains that ‘moderate’ Muslims aren’t political enough, even – contrary to evidence – that there are vitually none who show political muscle against fundamentalism. I have thrown quite a few gender-specific anti-male insults at them and told them to unstitch their macho tight arses.

It’s all HP’s fault, in my real life I don’t hurl about such insults, except in extreme cases.

If you count up all the male-gendered insults flung about on HP the percentage aimed at women would be very small. So Judy, knows really that she has to be a tomboy here -but you can also play archly with your femininity, as I do with my gayness. Judy can be so utterly grim that she positively provokes the reactions she gets.

I have been bad-temperedly called a faggot and a drama queen, whch is both anti-male and anti-female at the same time. Who cares? I know HP is not a convent.

I don’t agree with those who say that the emancipation of women has already been achieved. There is too much evidence to the contrary, but this would require another thread. I generally get on better with women than with men and I avoid anything that resembles a father-figure like the plague.

Brownie brilliant

“I remember the mews of Belgravia
Two children dressed in Chanel
Both torched with a flaming ambition
To slowly descend into hell

So look into my face Laurie P
And remember where you came from
Then go and forget me forever
With your feckless working class scum, ah ha ha ha etc.

You know, I feel a need to observe here that Penny Dreadful is actually a typical creation of ‘the Left’.

So, this ‘blue on blue’ incident is not without its amusing side…

Carrying this on, terms for stupid people – idiot, moron, imbecile, policeman – have remained in the insult arsenal but their original context, namely the denigration of the mentally disabled, has been tossed out:
Not at Guardian Weekend, it hasn’t. A few weeks ago there were several offended letters at a headline quote from an interview with some celebrity who has said she was going bonkers about something. This was regarded as offensive to people who were genuinely bonkers. I did raise the issue of Laurie’s use of the term loony bin, but she ignored that, along with the other issues I raised.

What would have happened to a man called Mr Cook living in Tel Aviv using similar insulting dismissive words as “silly cow” to a Jewish female blogger in Israel?

Penny’s tribe went to Jihad many times to enjoy what they have, and I don’t think they will allow or need anybody telling them what they should say or not.

So look into my face Waynetta
and remember just who you are
then dissapear with my giro forever
and you know I’ll still bear the broken buckie bottle scar
yes you do, yes you do.

“Affirmanti, non neganti, incumbit probatio”.

The burden of proof lies with the person making the accusation, not the person who denies (the accusation).

I’ve been collecting variants of this brocard, and I’ve wondered if there is an original version.

ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non que negat

necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit

Demanding proof of non-existence is a form of the argument from ignorance fallacy. Maybe these days even an Oxford education isn’t enough to avoid such elementary errors.

whereas the insults thrown at her were simply vile invective with no basis in anything other than the ego and/or bad mood of whoever uttered them.

Bollocks. She accused people of being racists.

“I will have you know that in my country of origin, South Africa, brown cow is a beverage well loved by all- milk mixed with Coca Cola.”

I would just like to point out that this sounds like the most digusting drink ever.

Looks like Penny is censoring out my posts too. Oh dear.

I am alerted to this hilarious Samosa account of a one of their contributors demanding the deference that he feels is his due at Brixton tube station by an HP reg.

It really is funny.

http://www.thesamosa.co.uk/index.php/comment-and-analysis/society/146-inverted-thoughtcrime-and-the-invention-of-racism.html

“an everyday phrase used without incident by literally millions of people on a daily basis”

What, like “paki”, a few years ago?

Flawless logic, mate. Hats off.

qidniz
17 November 2009, 2:59 pm

“Affirmanti, non neganti, incumbit probatio”.

The burden of proof lies with the person making the accusation, not the person who denies (the accusation).

I’ve been collecting variants of this brocard, and I’ve wondered if there is an original version.
____________

The version above came from Black’s Law Dictionary – 8th Edition, Appendices > B > Legal Maxims – “Show me the accusation”.

But it had no quoted source. I expect it originated in the writings of someone like Cicero, or from Medieval Latin.

What, like “paki”, a few years ago?

No not quite. “Silly cow” is used by many people in a very lightly perjorative or even affectionate way. It is quite plainly not the equivelent of “fucking bitch slag whore.”

But you knew that and just chose to be a knob didn’t you?

Didn’t Ben Elton – yep, Ben Elton! – write a play called “Silly Cow”?

Ben Elton wrote Silly Cow and Nell Dunn wrote Poor Cow, filmed by Loach. Obviously it was ok for Dunn to use the title because she was a a woman, thus not objectively sexist.

There was a film called Poor Cow directed by Ken Loach

I would just like to point out that this sounds like the most digusting drink ever
We also used to drink brandy and coke.

re the Tube station account: I once asked the man behind the glass screen in his cubicle at a tube station to repeat what he had told me. “Are you deaf!” he yelled angrily, refusing to repeat it. Yes I am, I said. (I have impaired hearing where there is background noise.) He then accused me of trying to be funny, and refused to repeat the information. Should I have had him prosecutied under the Disability Discrimination Act?

Is it sexist to reveal that a nameless person that I know always tried to put dates off drinking brandy and babycham because I (sorry he) knew he was going to want to kiss them at some point?

Captain’s Blog: Stardate: 2009/11/17

Continuing: The Big Great Penny Spat. From Ignoble prize winner to Brownie playing a Russian ballard on the banjo.

Progress: Some. Partial apology tendered by the Heiffer and partial acceptance thereof by the Swarm.

Other: No aliens.

When I was a kid coming out of Brixton Tube Station late at night we used to gang up so we could all jump over the barriers mob-handed and prevent the one member of staff who was there catching us.

Kids today eh? They’d rather intellectualise excuses for their snobby racism than do a bit of exercise.

I smell the stench of Hundal behind all of this, he’s just using proxies to have a dig at HP, check out his take on it on Pickled Politics

Clearly, issuing a swift “silly cow” appears to be beyond the pale and wholly disproportionate.

Well, in the light of her response, I think it needs an upgrade to ‘bitch from hell’!

That thing about O Terry is really stupid, and shows that The Samosa is a home for fuckwits. First class degree or not (and my, does anyone write for The Samosa who isn’t inordinately proud of their degree?), most people would regard “initials” as either (a) the short form of one’s Christian, whoops given, names (A. E. Housman, W. H. Auden, W. G. Grace) or (b) the letters for one’s entire name in a memo. In neither scenario is “Terry, initial O” anything other than “O. Terry”. Unless you’re writing for The Samosa, of course, and have a degree from Oxbridge.

If you can’t be bothered reading the Tube station stuff you can have enormous fun playing “spot the white rasta” here:

http://www.thesamosa.co.uk/index.php/news-and-features/politics-and-policy/142-exclusive-video-afghan-war-demonstration-london.html

This seems like a very long-winded way of saying that you don’t think the phrase “silly cow” is misogynist. That’s a ludicrous position. I scarcely know how to explain something so obvious, but the phrase is an insult directed at women by virtue of their being women. If you respond to Laurie’s original piece by “issuing a swift ’silly cow’” then you’re dismissing it on the basis of the writer’s sex. Brownie’s comment evidentally approved this course of action and was thus misogynist.

I disagree with many things Laurie says. “VIOLENTLY MISOGYNIST, DEHUMANISING INSULT” is hyperbole (although understandable in the circumstances). I don’t agree her apparent assertion that only women can determine what is sexist. But really, you can’t credibly conduct this argument while still maintaining that “silly cow” is an acceptable usage.

My sister is always calling me a silly cow.

“Scatty sexist mare” I reply.

This girl, laura, penny or whatever is boring.

This thread is boring.

Couldn’t give a toss about her. Couldn’t give a toss that she thinks this is some sort of ‘anti-muslim’ website.

Would rather this site did what it has always done; expose nasty and hypocritical people, many of whom don’t like jews.

I’m not interested in attempting to discredit some young lady who seems to write a load of smug self satisfied drivel and who im unlikely to ever hear of again (unless I was to read The Guardian, or the Samosa (??)).

I mean look at her website FF sake. I just wasted 3 minutes of my life on it. Really…who gives a shit?

So, she insulted this blog making some rather lame and simplistic analysis of it. Its a bit like being told to shut up by my 5 year old. Its just funny.

Time to move on.

mattG

I smell the stench of Hundal behind all of this, he’s just using proxies

Nah. The Grand Panjandrum is too stupid.

It is perfectly true, however, that blogging is a male-dominated, testosterone-infused virtual world and it’s all the worse for it

Yes…we DEMAND more posts about kittens!

It is perfectly true, however, that blogging is a male-dominated, testosterone-infused virtual world and it’s all the worse for it

Catherine B! You have returned! – let me pour you a brandy and babycham!

I note that Laura begins her piece by refering to HP as “anti islamist” – listed maybe as something she’s against. Can we make an assumption that she’s “pro-islamist”?

Amie

We also used to drink brandy and coke.

Really! Just as long as you didn’t drive a Cortina …because I never had you pegged as a 123 type, as in ‘een liter Coke twee litres van brandewyn en drie liter Cortina!’

I feel an Ian Dury lyric coming on…

Brownie’s comment evidentally approved this course of action and was thus misogynist.

Jaysus, get it right, Bub.

Brownie didn’t comment on the (un)acceptability of “silly cow” as a term of reference; he suggested someone hurling unfounded allegations of racism who in turn receives a “silly cow” in response ought to pause before claiming victim status. I certainly think that accusing someone of racism – wrongly – is far worse than using “silly cow”. You’d better believe I do.

Laurie then accused me of calling her a “silly cow”, something I clearly did not do.

What is it with critics of HP that they can’t even be arsed to read the primary source material?

My wife has cervical dystonia and our GP refuses to prescribe diazepam, so she has at least one large brandy and coke a night at the moment.

She also drinks port and brandy – yes, in the same glass, together. I still get funny looks from the barman in my local when I order this. As does my wife from me given it’s £4.50 a go.

And still no answer to the glaring point that if an old middle-class man wibble bibble etc

I’m an old working class poof, can I call her a silly cow?

Brownie, I have your comment in front of me now. You plainly did comment on the acceptability of “silly cow”. The thrust of your comment was that the term was neither beyond the pale nor disproportionate, whereas in fact it is both. By approbating the term in this way, you adopted it. It’s mere equivocation to rely on the distinction between use and reference.

I’m completely unable to agree with you about the relative merits of calling someone a racist (even wrongly) and calling someone a silly cow. The former genuinely is part of the cut and thrust of debate; the latter is just misogyny.

Graham

I feel an Ian Dury lyric coming on…

Naah…not a chance.

How can accusing someone of racism and then deciding that the term “silly cow” is dehumanising be hyperbole (although understandable in the circumstances) when the original objection to the charge of racism is not understable at all?

These rather silly children want it both ways.

This is all pointless theoretical posturing in a desperate manner. Even if we agreed (just to shut up a bunch of spoilt children from Woking and suchlike) that “silly cow” was a terrible insult (just because they say it is) we would then have to return to the real world where people call each other silly cows all the time and nobody objects in the slightest.

This silly argument is just a lot of old bull.

A load of cock and bull?

“silly cow” is misogynistic or inappropriate, unless among friends, or in a social situation which has slipped beyond rational discussion (and perhaps not even then).

It is inappropriate with complete strangers and in a social context which you want to keep within the bounds of acceptable discourse. It’s like resorting to obscenities.

It’s not a rational argument or criticism.

It was also stupid, since it gives Penny grounds for complaint instead of addressing perfectly legitimate countercriticism levelled at her.

You should apologise, instead of trying to defend the indefensible.

This must be the pizzle-end.

Marcus, it was outrageous of you to defend Brownie’s sexism.

What were you thinking? You should issue an apology, now, if you’re a man.

People are right: discourse here is far too unself-moderated.

People come here to let off steam (OK), then let it all hang out.

I approve of the freedom of speech in the threads. But, above board sexism or excuse for sexism is unacceptable.

APOLOGISE, PUBLICLY, NOW.

Actually, I’m for banning Brownie, for a while, to teach him and others a lesson.

Yes, Penny’s article was ridiculous. But Marcus responded in patronizing and de facto sexist way.

He is a complete idiot.

The indefensible was the accusation of racism in the first place.

Anyway. have a look at this silly cow:

http://www.funny-games.biz/images/pictures/803-cow-rant.jpg

David T really ought to exercise more discretion in these matters.

Which thread is it exactly that has a reference to “council house scum”?

Not that it really justifies sneering at people of the wrong class anyway.

Try More Media Nonsense’s thread about Islington from last week.

The Bull’s Pizzle Whip: “The penis is cleaned, salted and dried. By stretching and sometimes twisting during this process, it becomes a highly flexible rod-like whip of 3ft overall length (actually, it can be stretched much longer, becoming increasingly thin). ”

From the Agony and the Ecstasy blog at http://www.ecstagony.com

There is something incongruous about certain moderators routinely censoring homophobic remarks, but letting through sexism like this.

HP might get the reputation for being a bit queeny.

Why?

Hmm Zkharya and Mr Danger arrive at the same time and start demanding bans for leftists.

Funny that.

I mean,

Why, you silly cow?

How dare you call me a silly cow.

I’m completely unable to agree with you about the relative merits of calling someone a racist (even wrongly) and calling someone a silly cow. The former genuinely is part of the cut and thrust of debate; the latter is just misogyny.

Are you sure about that, you big racist?

How dare you call me Mr Danger.

Oh dear…..speaking as someone who, in a sleep-deprived, early-morning haze popped the teabag in the toaster and the bread in a cup and then declared myself a ‘daft cow’, I’m probably self-misogynistic – if such a term exists.

To be honest, ‘daft cow’, ’silly cow’ etc., were pretty common terms bandied about between girls I have known. They were very rarely meant as an insult – it’s all in the tone of voice, surely?

How dare you call me Mr Danger.

The insult has about the same pejorative value as being called a silly cow.

Brownie, I have your comment in front of me now. You plainly did comment on the acceptability of “silly cow”. The thrust of your comment was that the term was neither beyond the pale nor disproportionate, whereas in fact it is both. By approbating the term in this way, you adopted it. It’s mere equivocation to rely on the distinction between use and reference.

I love it when people say “the thrust” of your something is something or other. This is basically them admitting that you haven’t done what they’re about to accuse you of doing.

Given Laurie had made and then repeated baseless allegations of racism against us, a repsonse of “silly cow” – which if you scroll to the top of this thread (something I’ll wager you haven’t done) I’ve already agreed is sexist and wasn’t uttered by me – is indeed neither beyond the pale nor disproportionate. It’s entirely proportionate and some would agree she’s getting off lightly. Some blogs would be suing her ass.

I’m completely unable to agree with you about the relative merits of calling someone a racist (even wrongly) and calling someone a silly cow. The former genuinely is part of the cut and thrust of debate; the latter is just misogyny.

I’ll live with you not agreeing. Maybe you are not a conviction anti-racist and therefore such a slur means nothing to you? Maybe you haven’t spent a good chunk of your student and adult life in local politics fighting all forms of discrimination and marching and organising agianst genuine racists? I would see how a false accusation of racism against someone like that might be water off a duck’s back. Take it from me, however, that genuine anti-racists get a pissed off with this particular flavour of defamation.

Oh, I think there is considerable legal precedent, by the way, that shows it’s not just conviction anti-racists who regard false accusations of racism as rather more sinister and significant than you do.

I also think you and others need to stop using ’sexist’ and ‘misogynist’ as though they were interchangeable. They’re not, you know?

You should apologise, instead of trying to defend the indefensible.

Who’s the “you”, zkharya?

You’re an idiot, Brownie. All you had to do was admit you had gone too far. Penny’s article was absurd.

It takes a real genius to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

Now you’ve brought the blog into disrepute.

Another Penny,

in colloquial banter, it has, or might have, a place. But not in an above thread post defending HP to its detractors.

Marcus, it was outrageous of you to defend Brownie’s sexism.

oh dear, I think zkharya has gone off half-cocked. Is someone going to tell him, or shall I?

I’ve spent quite a bit of my professional life working with research on abusive people and survivors of physical, emotional and sexual abuse.

One of the things that’s so striking about this thread, and about the whole HP Collective self-congratulatory tolerance of misogynistic and other wholly gratuitous personal abuse is that you have amongst the comments all the classic abuser self-justifications:

1. The person abused caused the abuse (you shouldn’t have said….)

2. The person abused deserves the abuse (you said x, which I think is disgusting, therefore …..)

3. The person abused is the real abuser (look what you said–you’re the abuser)

4. It’s for you to put up with the abuse, otherwise you have no place here
(if you can’t stand it, get the f*** out)

5. Everyone wants to abuse you because you’re so awful

6. I’m going to show you just how much I despise your accusations of abuse by ridiculing you for complaining

7. I put up with abuse, so you should too

And of course there’s always the bystanders:

those of the HP Collective who are in a position to stop the abuse (including that coming from members of the Collective) but choose to do nothing, congratulating themselves on being the champions of free speech and “liberty being the right to tell people what they don’t want to hear.

I’ve spent quite a bit of my professional life working with research on abusive people and survivors of physical, emotional and sexual abuse.

One of the things that’s so striking about this thread, and about the whole HP Collective self-congratulatory tolerance of misogynistic and other wholly gratuitous personal abuse is that you have amongst the comments all the classic abuser self-justifications:

1. The person abused caused the abuse (you shouldn’t have said….)

2. The person abused deserves the abuse (you said x, which I think is disgusting, therefore …..)

3. The person abused is the real abuser (look what you said–you’re the abuser)

4. It’s for you to put up with the abuse, otherwise you have no place here
(if you can’t stand it, get the f*** out)

5. Everyone wants to abuse you because you’re so awful

6. I’m going to show you just how much I despise your accusations of abuse by ridiculing you for complaining

7. I put up with abuse, so you should too

And of course there’s always the bystanders:

those of the HP Collective who are in a position to stop the abuse (including that coming from members of the Collective) but choose to do nothing, congratulating themselves on being the champions of free speech and “liberty being the right to tell people what they don’t want to hear.

Someone should organise a protest march with banners that say “We are all silly cows now.” That would certainly prove something or other.

Thank you, Judy.

Actually, I think the in-thread freedom of speech important. But above thread is a different matter. There have to be certain critera met.

And, again, I stress, there is something incongruous about the zero tolerance of homophobia, but allowance of sexism.

You’re an idiot, Brownie.

Well until you turned up, the accusation against me was that I had defended Marcus’ sexism, but you managed get this arse about face:

Marcus, it was outrageous of you to defend Brownie’s sexism.

Given you couldn’t even get this right, is there any reason why anybody shouldn’t just ignore you completely?

You don’t have to answer that.

Speaking of racism, which race (or races) was she talking about? It’s beyond tiresome now to see apologists (or ostriches) for Islamism constantly relying upon their nuclear option of levelling allegations of racism against their opponents.

And for somebody who complains about people not addressing her points her emotional appeals for support from neutrals are rather gauche. Anybody who has suffered from mental or nervous breakdowns has my complete sympathy but I can’t quite see the point of bringing it up. It’s a bit Gloria Gaynor, isn’t it?

Brownie,

I understand what you were trying to say. But, it doesn’t matter, you introduced a term in the exchange that was unacceptable, whether intended directly or indirectly (which is what you meant).

Yes, the whole thing is a bit like Viz.

Yes, of course, Penny jumped on it as an excuse to ban you and refrain from a serious response to criticism.

BUT YOU GAVE HER THAT CHANCE.

YOU ARE AN IDIOT.

It’s still unacceptable, and you should still have apologised.

From its website: “The Samosa has received sponsorship of £15K from the Equalities and Human Rights Commission to support new writing and new voices in journalism.”

No comment.

I agree with Judy. The original abuse of HP as racists has had all the classic signs of abusers being used in its defence (including faux-intellectual claptrap.)

Speaking as someone who was once called a silly cow and has needed years of therapy to get over it ( I still can’t see a pantomime or a bottle of milk without bursting into tears) I would just like to say that when a brave Oxford educated young woman calls you all racists you should just take it on the chin and not reply in any way. Because if you do you are all sexists you see. And I don’t like middle aged men much. Just thinking about them has me reaching for the valium.

I have just written a letter to Penny’s Samoosa site, explaining Harry’s Place. I have not seen it go up, but they may want to read it first. I’m sorry I didn’t make a copy of it. It would be VERY BAD if they didn’t publish it and also very revealing, as it is friendly, rational, and impartial.

Basically I explained that HP allows vast variety of views from ideologues of every species who could express their vìews, including Lee Barnes, and people who attacked the very existence of Israel, and that these were not to be confused with the civilised views of the moderators, who are opposed to all forms of bigotry, allowing for a sharp word here and there.

Brownie,

the “cow” Penny jumped on was the first comment on the thread. Not from Marcus.

Yes, it was bogus complaint. She was looking for an excuse to evade serious discussion.

But then you wrote:

‘Clearly, issuing a swift “silly cow” appears to be beyond the pale and wholly disproportionate.’

Which was stupid, especially considering Marcus never used the term.

FFS.

Zharya, what this thread and others like it recently on HP is not so much that it’s sexist, but that it’s misogynist. The former privileges men, assumes them to be the source of real insight and the measure against which women are found to be inferior. There’s certainly no shortage of that–note who “we” is assumed to be here.

Misogyny is hatred and/or fear of women, and particularly of women’s biology (ie gibes about time of month, invoking “cow”, “bitch”); it’s most vituperatively directed at younger women and older women who are not deferential and say things the male consensus finds outrageous. It’s here in spades on this thread; one of the worst I’ve seen for some time. And the extraordinary thing is that the misogynists are at best defensive and most are in denial or celebrating their misogyny.

Ah Xmas is nealry here – the mortgage payments are due and middle-class folks are trying to tell everyone what they can and can’t say and getting increasingly frustrated and offering funnier and funnier self-justifications when it doesn’t happen.

I do love the old traditions – makes me feel all war inside.

Anywa, shall we call Xmas “winterval” this year or what?

Hmm Zkharya and Mr Danger arrive at the same time and start demanding bans for leftists.

Say what?

I agree, Judy. It is a problem Sarah Annes Brown thinks so too, I’ve noticed.

I think freedom of speech is important. But, as I said, I don’t understand why moderators routinely prune some kinds of genderisms, but not others.

The real problem, I think, is that this spilled above thread, with Marcus defending Brownie, who wrote like a sexist idiot.

All completely avoidable, if some simple rules had been observed.

Is David T away at the mo?

I see nothing wrong with being genderist (ie: when someone acts as the stereotype of their gender, you play along with the counterblast). I am happy to separate gender from sex in this respect.

What would Peter Tatchell say?

Misogyny is hatred and/or fear of women, and particularly of women’s biology

Fair enough Judy. On an entirely unrelated note, how would you describe the position of the Abrahamic faiths on female biology?

JP,

I mean I notice that homophobic comments are pruned (quite rightly e.g. some of my schoolboy “jokes” of the past). But often, invariably, sexist one remain.

Frankly, I’m not sure I am for banning anything, in-thread. How do you feel, Judy?

But above thread is a different matter.

Judy is one of the gang. But few seem to appreciate how uncomfortable this behaviour makes her.

WTF is wrong with you?

So I went to the Islington thread and there was no reference to “council house scum” and at most one overly general comment which could have been objected to, although nobody including Graham did actually object to it. On this basis you feel you need to sneer at third parties in entirely different debates for their class and call me a hypocrite even though I didn’t even participate in the thread anyway? Hmmmm…

Interestingly there was one person though who insisted that vandalism on council estates was probably the fault of middle class architects and people from the suburbs who come to council estates to commit crime. Anyone want to guess who?

Mark T, I’m only in a position to speak about Judaism–and I don’t have a problem with orthodox Jewish religious laws that hold women inviolate, that make rape and coercion in marriage absolutely unacceptable, and that deny men the right to touch, ogle, covet, make personal comments on and abuse women at will. All the laws in relation to women have to be understood within the wider reference of Jewish laws on blood, body hygiene, sexual acts, respect for life and for the dead etc. which apply to all human beings, as well as those which apply only to Jews.

My position is orthodox Jewish law in our time gives those women and men who choose to follow it a humane and respect-giving and and inducing framework for life, particularly as the whole framework is humane and generous.

I don’t propose to make further comments on this. Anyone who wants to demand chapter and verse–the sources are available, and it’s for others to inform themselves from reliable orthodox sources.

I don’t see the relevance of a lot of the personal attacks on this woman. But everything is good and right and justified within the Red Mist of Rage that envelops Harry’s Place isn’t it? Because if you’re not for us, you’re against us.

http://politicoassassin.wordpress.com/2009/11/17/harrys-place-and-the-red-mist-of-rage/

The Sheikh woz here.

About the “silly cow” reference: I take the point that within England, (never mind the rest of the Anglosphere) language can vary tremendously.

I guess this shows what can happen when a phrase is taken out of its cultural or sub-cultural context: It can take on new meanings and associations that were never intended in the first place.

Perhaps writing “silly cow” in a political blog was getting too personal.

This wasn’t a rough-and-tumble argument in a working-class pub up north, but rather a political blog read by lots of people around Britain, the US, and elsewhere. Also, it was said in print, so the meaning of the phrase wasn’t qualified by tone, camaraderie, or anything else. It just stood there on the screen, in sterile black and white. So it was understood at face value.

It might be helpful to give examples of typical insults aimed at men in those same working-class pubs, especially those that women would typically mouth. This would show how, in that milieu, women give as good as they get, and both sides sling insults with equal abandon. If this is indeed the case, then a phrase like “silly cow” wouldn’t have the same baggage that Penny assumed.

zkharya,

Penny was complaining about the insults she received. She’d had none from me, but I was being invited to comment on them. I told her that given she’d just called half-a-dozen coviction anti-racsits ‘racists’, I thought her rush to victim status somewhat unseemly. And it was.

So to recap:

Laurie accuses HP authors of being racists.
Marcus responds with a post, in which thread a *commenter* calls her a “cow”.

It’s funny, the charge against HP was that we didn’t address Laurie’s post (false), yet here’s she is seizing on something in the comments box and making this the centre of the discussion rather than addressing Marcus’s post.

Glad that’s cleared up.