Talk

Advanced search

To want to punch Peter Hitchens in his misogynistic face....

(11 Posts)
SuitedandBooted Sun 11-Feb-18 09:22:26

Because women have nothing to complain about, apparently, we are completely equal, and the Suffragettes were terrorists, who don't deserve a special anniversary. Women are in charge of the BBC, and cruelly inflicting propaganda on the country;

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-5377051/PETER-HITCHENS-Suffragettes-terrorists.html

Yes, there WERE violent acts, which are hugely regrettable, but to pretend that women would have quickly got the vote if they simply waited is beyond ridiculous.

With tossers like him around, is it any wonder the Gender Recognition Act has so many cheerleaders? Don't like women? Legislate them out!

SimonWebb Mon 12-Feb-18 11:32:14

In no other country in the world was it found necessary to plant bombs or burn down churches in order for women to get the vote! New Zealand, Australia, Norway and other countries all had women voting without the need for violence. The violence in this country, mainly the bomb attacks, delayed the vote; not hastened it.

FannyWisdom Mon 12-Feb-18 11:33:50

YABU

He's a protroll, don't give him head space.

NewYearNiki Mon 12-Feb-18 11:35:07

Dont also forget your precious Emmeline Pankhurst campaigned for only middle class women to have the vote. She fell out with her daughters who believed the vote should go to all classes.

PerfPower Mon 12-Feb-18 11:48:59

YABU for reading anything he writes (although I think he's deliberately 'controversial'), but not for wanting to punch him in his smug face. I'll hold him down for you if you like?

Theglobe Mon 12-Feb-18 11:52:25

I can guarantee that Peter Hitchens won’t be a cheerleader for the Gender Recognition Act. You may find you have unlikely bedfellows in opposition to it......

SimonWebb Mon 12-Feb-18 12:01:37

'He's a protroll, don't give him head space.'

Yes, whatever you do; don't discuss this matter in a reasonable fashion! Why not lob personal insults about instead?

SimonWebb Mon 12-Feb-18 12:06:29

The Pankhursts, Emmeline and Cristabel, were opposed to working-class women being given the vote. In the front of all their leaflets and books was the blunt statement;

'The Women's Social and Political Union are NOT asking for a vote for every woman'

They wished only for property-owning and university-educated women like them to have the vote; not ordinary, working-class women.

PerfPower Mon 12-Feb-18 12:07:25

Theglobe that's true. He's a bit old school for new gender laws.

VladmirsPoutine Mon 12-Feb-18 12:45:16

I think your logic is very woolly and disjointed but on the whole I agree with the essence of your argument. They were radical.
Anyway, what do you expect from Peter Hitchens? And the Daily Mail?

TabbyMack Mon 12-Feb-18 16:50:22

He's right about the suffragettes. Sorry, but he is.

The non-violent, peaceful protestors were making immense headway and had a lot of male support. Pankhurst et al were planting bombs and terrorising people which unquestionably had the result of delaying women getting the vote.

Read a history book before you threaten to punch people.

And women do have equal rights in this country.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now