Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

When did any view expressed make you 'genuine' and not bigoted

259 replies

Brokenme · 07/09/2017 21:13

I'm really struggling to get my head around people saying Jacob Rees-Moggs views are ok because he is being 'genuine' and expressing himself. Where do we draw the line? Is it ok for politicians to be racist as long as they are 'genuinely' expressing their views. AIBU to be completely appalled by this stand point?

OP posts:
BoysofMelody · 07/09/2017 21:45

Believe it or not, I genuinely believe that women have a right to a safe and legal abortion and equal marriage is a fucking great thing.

The people who praise bigots like Rees Mogg think that 'He says what everyone is thinking' or he's, genuine' are working from the presumption that everyone shares his and their base prejudices.

Rees Mogg is just sincerely base, mean spirited and cruel and I see nothing praiseworthy than that. I can't work out whether than say Johnson who spouts xenophobic crap he doesn't believe in the cause of personal advancement.

MaidOfStars · 07/09/2017 21:46

Also, I am firmly against censorship of personal beliefs (as long as you don't incite hate crime).

If someone effectively sticks their hand up and asks for a 'Cunt' badge, let them wear it.

JRM. Nick Griffin. David Irving. And so on. Give them a mouthpiece, let them tell you who they are, openly and loudly, then relegate them to where they belong.

Original poster
Brokenme · 07/09/2017 21:47

boys I agree but what scares me more is people who say they don't agree with him but like him because he says what he thinks. A very dangerous route to follow. In my view

OP posts:
minoandolphin · 07/09/2017 21:47

Hey, I'm all for bigoted politicians being open and honest about it. I know who not to vote for then.

treaclesoda · 07/09/2017 21:47

I do understand the appeal of him being 'genuine' even though I find his views abhorrent. Frankly it's better to know what you're dealing with.

Crumbs1 · 07/09/2017 21:48

He is being 'genuine' because he isn't attempting to appease voters with half truths. He is a committed practicing Catholic and upholds the teaching of his religion. You might disagree with it but religion is a protected characteristic just as much as sexuality. He has as much right to openly state his beliefs as the trans people who want to remove all indications of gender. Thankfully we have a country that allows freedom of speech except where it incites hatred.

Crumbs1 · 07/09/2017 21:48

He remains a hypocritical Tory who has no concept of living on a low wage though.

MaidOfStars · 07/09/2017 21:48

and we would praise him for that?
In context, the act of any politician appearing to be sincere in a personal belief is to be praised.

Conviction is, IMO, a desirable trait in people.

Original poster
Brokenme · 07/09/2017 21:48

maid I don't disagree with that. Give them enough rope etc what I find scary is people saying they totally disagree with him but like him because he's expressed his opinion.

OP posts:
Tinycitrus · 07/09/2017 21:49

Well he's Roman Catholic. Many people have similar views -it's part of Catholicism and other religions too.

You don't have to agree or like his views and you don't have to vote for him.
Don't know what racism has to do with it...

MaidOfStars · 07/09/2017 21:49

I can recognise his genuine conviction but manage perfectly well not to admire or like him Hmm

Original poster
Brokenme · 07/09/2017 21:51

tiny As a lapsed catholic (who went to catholic school from 5-18) I know the religion well... Yes religion is a protected characteristic but so is sexuality

OP posts:
MissHavishamsleftdaffodil · 07/09/2017 21:52

At least he's open and honest about the fact he holds those views. There's absolutely no chance in hell now that I'd ever consider voting for him because of them, but that's marginally better than twats like Blair and Cameron who are smooth in suits and say only what the focus groups and their adviser of the day has told them to say.

Cameron used to say one thing to one group in the morning and then contradict it in the afternoon to another group because he said whatever was most useful to him for his agenda in that moment with no integrity or conscience. God only knows what he actually thought or intended. At least Mogg isn't that kind of a slippery, professional sod.

Original poster
Brokenme · 07/09/2017 21:52

tiny And racism comes in to it because not that long ago expressing racist views would be seen as expressing yourself

OP posts:
Freshprincess · 07/09/2017 21:53

You can be genuine and a cunt
I think this about sums it up for me.

Original poster
Brokenme · 07/09/2017 21:53

miss I totally despise the spin of Blair and Cameron but that's what scares me that now we accept outdated bigoted views because they are not spun?

OP posts:
cakeandcustard · 07/09/2017 21:54

Its better that he holds those views and states them than he holds those views but says something different to get votes.

This is essentially freedom of speech, he is perfectly within his rights to express views you disagree with. That's then your opportunity to debate them. Once you decide he's not allowed to express his views then you have to decide what people are allowed to Think/Say and what they aren't.
Now that is a slippery slope.

SmileEachDay · 07/09/2017 21:55

It wasn't just that he's against abortion. He said that even in the case of rape abortion was "morally indefensible"

If he "genuinely" holds those views he has no place in any position of power. How dare he suggest that a rape victim is morally corrupt for having an abortion.

Angry
MaidOfStars · 07/09/2017 21:55

we accept outdated bigoted views because they are not spun
We accept that people are free to hold those views. I've seen about three people here who agree with the view itself. Hardly accepting the viewpoint?

Original poster
Brokenme · 07/09/2017 21:57

cake whilst we do have freedom of speech we also have laws that protect individuals. You can't just say what you think, especially if you have a position of power - that isn't how it works.

OP posts:
MaidOfStars · 07/09/2017 21:57

If he "genuinely" holds those views he has no place in any position of power. How dare he suggest that a rape victim is morally corrupt for having an abortion
Oh, I could not agree more. And hopefully, his position might be a little less tenable after this episode.

But he hasn't said anything illegal. If he had, he'd be gone by now.

Tinycitrus · 07/09/2017 21:58

I don't think 'protected characteristics' extend to what you can/can't say in public unless it's hate speech.

He wasn't attacking anyone, he was just expressing his religious views which are held by many other people who are catholic. He has a right to do this.

CaoNiMartacus · 07/09/2017 21:58

He's going to be our Trump. I can feel it in my waters.

Original poster
Brokenme · 07/09/2017 21:58

maid I'm not saying they are and in a way that's worse. Why aren't we saying his views are outdated / dangerous to individual in today's society

OP posts:
MaidOfStars · 07/09/2017 21:59

But he hasn't said anything illegal. If he had, he'd be gone by now
By this, I am not defending him, nor his right to be an MP. The only way to remove him is to vote him out.