So. George Galloway really is a vile misogynist isn't he?

[AskBasil]

In case anyone missed it, George Galloway accused the Labour candidate for Bradford West, Naz Shah, of lying about her forced marriage.

The Guardian coverage is here

I did a quick post about it yesterday but haven't quite finished getting the outrage out of my system.

One of the most obnoxious things that was said by his spokesman, Ron McKay, is that if she'd really been being abused, she would have got on a plane or reported it to the police or SS.

I can't even. Where to start with that? The sheer denial that women are trapped by domestic violence, the sheer pretence that going to social services and the police are effective in dealing with DV.

And then of course they're in touch with the man in question, who denies that he was violent. So that's all right then, because his word is obviously worth more than the word of a mere woman.

And this man is supposedly left-wing. What does that tell us about lefty-boy's use as a feminist ally?

George "bad sexual etiquette" Galloway is a skid mark.

Oh god. Shame on him. Repeating all the myths about rape, domestic abuse and forced marriage as well as hanging his supposed 'case' on the difference between being forced into an abusive marriage at 15 or 16. And he mansplains Islamic marriage for good measure. Disgusting.

"“If Naz Shah has any document then she should produce it and we will have it checked for authenticity with the Mirpur register office.”

How very entitled.

He is utterly vile. But local opinion is not in her favour either. She has used every negative stereotype to garner sympathy and favour with voters. The point he was trying to make was that she had claimed to have been underage when she wed and she wasn't.

I'm not from the area but live in a neighbouring area. Both these candidates have used appalling tactics and have lost the respect of many. Ms Shah came bottom in the selection and had recently tweeted in support of odious gg. She has also been accused of fabricating elements of her life story and ignoring constituents concerns relating to policies.

At a recent gathering they both acting appallingly slandering each other and making personal attacks. She seems to have enough strength of character and vigour without needing to resort to these measures.

yes. yes he is.

I understand that the point he was making was that she might have lied about what age she was when she was forced into marriage.

It was obvious from his triumph that that's the point he was making.

I'm just staggered that he thinks it's actually a point worth making. What difference does it make when she was forced into marriage. It just doesn't matter. If she was forced into marriage, then she was forced into marriage and it's irrelevant if she was 15 or 16 or 20 or 30. There was someone on Twitter tweeting about how she was forced into marriage at the age of 24, all her family were there, her mother threatened to commit suicide if she didn't go through with it. GallowayTheRapeApologist knows this sort of thing happens, he must do, he must know about coercion and social control and emotional blackmail and family pressure and yet he pretends none of it exists.

It's absolutely loathesome. It's throwing women under the bus to get votes. I know I shouldn't be surprised that this horrible misogynist would do this but unsurprising or not, it's pretty vile.

Just found this by Louise Mensch

What a vile excuse of a human. I told him so on twitter. He blocked me. George Galloway. The champion of free speech until it comes to criticising him.
I abhor the "man".

"Her mother attended the marriage in 1990 as well as other family members and many witnesses did also, signing and giving fingerprints, so if it was forced presumably her mother and the others were part of that coercion?”"

Um, yes.

Good for Louise Mensch.

Agree about Galloway. And I hate agreeing with Mensch, who is usually awful. I suppose everyone has to be correct once in their lives.

Shocking! But good for Louise Mensch indeed.

Galloway is indeed a skidmark (adding another word to the auto cucumber dictionary)

That is the best thing I have ever seen from Louise.

I hope Galloway sues Mensch and loses badly.

Horrible, hateful man. Don't know where to start with how wrong this is.

GG is suing quite a bit at the moment, mostly in Northern Ireland for reasons I don't understand, and has threatened to sue various people over things said on Twitter.

Reminds me of another former MP who liked to sue, especially for libel, at first with great success and lots of lovely tax-free damages, and then coming a massive cropper.

Just musing that if history were to repeat itself in that way, it would be very apt.

Oh, Buff, you are a twit!

He is vile. A long time ago, I used to admire him, but he either hid his megalomania well or he has since had a serious mental episode. Or I could have been delusional of course!

His Senate committee speeches were, honestly, inspiring. But after that he has been almost nonsensical, like a male Katie Hopkins on the attention seeking front. 'Bad sexual etiquette" would be one of her terms too ( not of curse like having sex in a field or being a sexy moggie on BB)

Anyone who supports the sort of politicised tendency to extremist Islamicisist [word?] fundamentalist religio-politics really can't be anything but a misogynist. Any religion where at its base, women are considered unclean, is misogynist.

Galloway has had his moments of greatness in the past but he's a very odd individual. He was very involved in the No campaign in Scotland on an independent, non-aligned basis. He appeared at at least one public meeting with Ruth Davidson which was intriguing. For me it said- how bad an idea can independence be if it can unite those 2 against it but no doubt others thought the same about No.

I didn't attend any of his lectures but know a fellow No who took his 2 swithering to Yes teenage daughters to hear Galloway speaking in Edinburgh and who were persuaded to No by hearing him.

Oh everyone's known he's the biggest scumbag for years.

Still can't get the him and Rula Lenska cat-thing out of my head. Terrible.

My partner was recently asked to work with him. I said he should turn it down.
I'm interested in MN opinion on this actually. Dp is a comedian and was asked to do a benefit where GG was also speaking. He wasn't sure what to do and in the end chose to do the gig but spoke criticising Galloway as part of his set and then gave his fee to Rape Crisis. Is this better? Or would not doing it have been better and been vocal about why?