Nigella Lawson apologizes for 27 year old column

This is a sign of the times. Nigella Lawson has apologised because to not do so would elicit a Tsunami of outraged Twitter fanatics demanding she be cancelled. Most celebrities would do the same. Presumably that is the motive behind these archaeological excavations. To force celebs to publicly recant previous heresies. Or face the consequences.

Even if she could have worded her column more sensitively, and acknowledging that Nigella has never claimed any expertise in this area, the problem is that in many cases Nigella was right.

Sugery is being used to treat problems that can't be solved by surgery, and this is the subject of a current legal case.

"But behind the desire for self-mutilation surely lies the most troubling self-hatred (she made no bones about her disgust at her femininity) and that’s not the kind of thing you can excise with a surgeon’s scalpel"

There's a very clear lesson here about paper trails - or SM trails - that everybody, woke and critical, young and old, activist or resistor, needs to take to heart.

Your words will outlive your memory. Your opinions will come back to bite you. You can never disocciate yourself from your former utterances. You may be forced to wear them around your neck like a rotting albatross.

All those people who tweeted barbed-wire-wrapped baseball bats with rape and kerb- stomping threats can confidently expect them to surface, stinking horribly, at every job interview, promotion application or business venture they essay for at least the next forty years.

There will be ample time for reflection when trans ideology has gone whatever way it's going from here.

Very disappointing. She is old enough to know better.

If you say 'per and perself' instead of 'her and herself', what do you say instead of she or he?
Surely not pe?

But even if I didn't, why is a cookery writer publically apologising for something she wrote over a quarter of a century ago?

She wasn't a cookery writer then.

I’d have considerably more respect for Lawson if she’d stood by what she said 23 years ago.

There's another one where people "identify as disabled" and go and get perfectly healthy limbs removed. They call themselves "transabled". 🙄

You couldn't make this shit up! Perbollocks.

[quote WhoWouldHaveThoughtThat]@saiditbetterthanme

I knew it was you who left the door open.
All these years and you lied and your brother... well he never really got over it.
I suspect you have slept easily over the years whilst it ate away at the rest of the family. You know your cousin emigrated to Canada as a result, and Doris (I don't suppose you even remember her) ended up in that home for the disturbed.
At least you've finally apoligised and I think we can all forget the matter. Even your brother who is still in Dartmoor Prison.[/quote]

That's the kind of response that is needed to such self-outings. Calmed, reasoned with no OTT-ness whatsoever. The poster can sleep easy now knowing there was no repercussions from her utter foolishness

On the topic of questioning something someone wrote a long time ago, I think it's fine to ask if they still hold the same opinion. I am sure lots of us are waiting for Tatchel to comment on his letter to the guardian from 1997.

The fragrant Nigella has gone way down in my estimation. Clearly too chicken to stand by her article.

I can understand those women who fear losing their job if they speak up, but I doubt Nigella has to worry about putting food on the table.

There is a whole bag full of misogynist issues round "non-binary" waiting to be unpacked, IMO. Round "male bodies = default human" and one rule for the penis people, another for the vulva people.

IMO, Nigella was spot on with the original article.

What we need to ask is why "non-binary" and "androgynous" are always framed as "just being human", where "just being human" seems to be "like a human man"?

Male non-binary - bit of mascara, high heels, dress with a bit of swish. You're good to go.

Female non-binary - lop off perfectly healthy body parts. Then you might be good to go (but we'll still pay you less, because... we know you're actually a vulva person under that shapeless top and shapeless trousers).

Some time in their mid forties I expect all these be-vulvaed non-binary people with double mastectomy scars will realise they've been had.

I agree with Lawson's column.

But even if I didn't, why is a cookery writer publically apologising for something she wrote over a quarter of a century ago? I don't want to sound melodramatic but it really does seem as though free speech is being threatened, not by fear of being locked up, but by fear of losing one's career or being shunned by 'polite' society.

We're getting to the stage that if anyone holds an opionion which deviates even slightly from woke dogma, they'll keep it to themselves. That of course doesn't mean they won't continue to hold those opinions, in fact they'll likely believe in them even more firmly. I see a massive backlash brewing.

Ooh! I didn't even post anything gendered but am being held by the moderating team

They are being very careful with this one.

Yes Errol I think that’s right - it came across my TL briefly yesterday

Also the use of the word harm gives me the rage!!

Stop equating peoples hurt feelings when you say something they don’t like with the removal of healthy body parts

Women are harmed every single day in their millions across the world - murdered, beaten, raped just for being women and yet somehow they are less at risk of harm than the ‘bring me my fainting couch’ brigade? Fuck off

@saiditbetterthanme

I knew it was you who left the door open.
All these years and you lied and your brother... well he never really got over it.
I suspect you have slept easily over the years whilst it ate away at the rest of the family. You know your cousin emigrated to Canada as a result, and Doris (I don't suppose you even remember her) ended up in that home for the disturbed.
At least you've finally apoligised and I think we can all forget the matter. Even your brother who is still in Dartmoor Prison.

First. Do. No. Harm.

Ok where do I start?
When I was 6 I said mummy look at that funny woman. So very sorry funny woman.
When I was 15 I was a foul tempered jerk and pissed off lots of people , very sorry blah blah......

Let's just break this down.

NL perfectly reasonably, in my opinion, described the removal of healthy body parts for no medical reason, as self-mutilation.

Yet her comments on it now are while I certainly meant no harm, unfortunately that doesn’t mean I didn’t harm.

Her words "harmed"? Yet a doctor can do unnecessary surgery and that's just fine?

I can't stand either of them.