Jean Hatchet, new blog post

[SugarPlumFairy99]

jeanhatchet.blogspot.com/2019/01/why-i-wont-be-standing-up-for-women.html

This blog post from Jean is eye-opening. Working alongside anti-abortion, hard right groups undermines decades of feminism.

Shame on Posie. I agree with Jean, I will also be sitting down for women.

Well, my vote would be that we all say "fuck off, Harrop" in unison.

She said she couldn't produce evidence because the posts covered a number of years and a number of user names.
So she didn't have any evidence?
Do you not see why evidence is so important here?

Suggesting that Tommy Robinson was a lone voice speaking up against grooming gangs is not agreeing with him on one thing

If that’s all a person says, then it’s exactly agreeing with one thing. Only one thing has been agreed on. There is a singularity. A person has agreed with it. Ergo they have agreed with one thing. You can argue they are wrong about that one thing they agree with for those reasons you state, but it doesn’t naturally follow that by suggesting that they are actually his secret disciple.

*And I am expressing no opinion here myself by the way.

Dr H.

No one needs to make any choices hun.

Everyone still agrees the GC stance.

Do be a dear and fuck off.

If that’s all a person says, then it’s exactly agreeing with one thing. Only one thing has been agreed on. There is a singularity. A person has agreed with it. Ergo they have agreed with one thing. You can argue they are wrong about that one thing they agree with for those reasons you state, but it doesn’t naturally follow that by suggesting that they are actually his secret disciple.

Firstly, I haven't suggested anyone is his 'secret disciple'

No, that's not agreeing. That isn't what the word 'agree' means.

SaskiaRembrandtWasFramed
No one hounded a lesbian off this thread. She repeatedly posted her points of view and was repeatedly disagreed with by a large number of other posters. That's allowed and reasonable. It is unsettling when lots of different people disagree with your point of view but that is the nature of this and most other forums. Exchanging views, agreeing and disagreeing.
I think your comments are wrong and that they attempt to divide and silence women. But others may differ - that's the uncomfortable thing about free speech - defending the right of others to speak even when you disagree with their words.

So she didn't have any evidence? Do you not see why evidence is so important here?

My position on this is that without evidence no one can make an informed decision either way, so it's best to keep an open mind.

FWIW, I do remember a poster who had a distinct posting style but multiple user names, who posted thinly veiled racism for a number of years. I'm not suggesting that was Posie, just that such a poster did exist.

So she didn't have any evidence?
Do you not see why evidence is so important here?

Yes, enough people hate Posie you would think there would be a comprehensive database of evidence you could simply link to by now.

This was the film if anyone is interested.

But you have posted in support of a position which advocates for that very thing. read back over this thread. A lesbian has been hounded off for suggesting that alliances with groups that deny her right to exist might be a bit problematic.

Interesting that this false claim was also made by Dr Harrop.

'hounded off' and 'browbeating' are loaded terms.

Did she get "hounded off"? I was reading and I thought she just... left?

But you said that suggesting TR was a lone voice on grooming gangs is an indication of a person being aligned with TR in many other ways. You said it lends him validation. Can anyone agree with ANY point a bigot makes without making them also a bigot?

The irony of Harrop calling anyone else a bully is surely lost on no-one.

And coming back to my original question, where on this thread have people “aligned themselves with bigots” in a way that being screenshot would be a concern?

Is 'thinly veiled racism' a term for criticising patriarchal religions or saying that not all cultural traditions are hunky dory or not observing 'politically correct' lines where you disagree?

feministfairy

A persons sexuality is not a matter of opinion.

I think your comments are wrong and that they attempt to divide and silence women

I am not attempting to divide and silence women, quite the opposite. I have repeatedly said feminism should be about all women, including the women certain groups and individuals under discussion here would seek to disadvantage or even eradicate. Telling a lesbian or a BAME woman that her oppression doesn't matter is silencing and divisive.

The irony of Harrop calling anyone else a bully is surely lost on no-one.

Quite!

Allying with US groups who are racist, homophobic and who are lobbying to remove abortions rights is throwing some women under a bus.

Ahem.

Some women will be racist, some women will be homophobic, some women do believe in no abortions, but all of those women deserve the right to call themselves women and to have the rights that all women [in whichever country they reside] that are separate from the rights that men have.

The issue of womens' rights exists to protect ALL women, not just 'ones like us'. It will be necessary to join with other women, to fight the rights that are being stolen away from right under our noses.

And yes we will disagree on stuff.

Is 'thinly veiled racism' a term for criticising patriarchal religions or saying that not all cultural traditions are hunky dory or not observing 'politically correct' lines where you disagree?

No, it was thinly veiled racism.

Telling a lesbian or a BAME woman that her oppression doesn't matter is silencing and divisive.

Receipts?

I have repeatedly said feminism should be about all women

Apart from the right wing ones (or even far right ones) who should be treated as if they are carrying the plague.

Gender Critical Left feminists have been abandoned by the (beardy wokebro) Left. This does not mean we have to abandon our Leftist position. I will never stand with evangelical conservatives - not due to ideological purity but through pragmatic appraisal of their aims. They are no friends to women or feminism. I have always found PP beyond worrying, so her costing up to this bunch is no shock. And yes, if we have to air our disagreements in public I am glad. Look at what harms secretive caucuses / cabals in the Greens and Lib Dems have done. Debate and honesty is our strength.

sackrifice yes some women might be all those things, but I'm not talking about individuals, I'm taking about groups, organisations that exist solely to promote those things. There is a distinction.

WeRiseUp read the thread.

Apart from the right wing ones (or even far right ones) who should be treated as if they are carrying the plague. nope, haven't said that.