Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Flip

1 2 ··· 8 9 10 ··· 13 14

Original poster

Harry the Owl

341 replies

slycooperatemysocks · 15/05/2019 15:45

Please can Harry be dropped from the Fair Cop campaign. Having an overt racist involved will just damage it. Thank you

OP posts:

Thread gallery

R0wantrees · 17/05/2019 13:26

I mean apart from the quite sinister lack of empathy, he seems to be saying that if we can desensitise women to rape, by making jokes about it, it's better for them?

Absence of empathy can be a key indicator in narcissistic control pattern behaviour.

EweSurname · 17/05/2019 13:40

Hope Joss is taking note

Joss has accused Sarah Ditum of being Datun on Twitter so I'm not sure I have much confidence in Joss's notes.

clitherow · 17/05/2019 13:43

I am sickened by the blatant attempts on this thread to smear someone by association - which is a nasty, sneaky and insidious thing to do.

The person who is the subject of this thread has never to my knowledge shown himself prone to coercive control, blatant misogyny or lack of empathy. To post a video of a clearly unsympathetic character(who has shown evidence of these traits) in an attempt to conflate the two makes me sick to my stomach.

R0wantrees · 17/05/2019 13:47

To be clear I have been responding to points made in the last page.
I have made no comment nor is there implied comment about Harry.

Please do not mischaracterise what are good faith and specific posts.

ThePurportedDoctoress · 17/05/2019 13:59

Someone thanked "Sargon" and said they don't know who he is. R0wan showed who he is - nothing wrong with that.

BernardBlacksWineIcelolly · 17/05/2019 14:04

it's the old 'UKIP are GC, why don't you vote for them' thing, isn't it? UKIP don't give a shit about women's rights, you'd be stupid to vote for them thinking that it's going to help women in any way.

but if some 'kippers want to donate to Harry's crowd justice fund

he can't stop them
he's in control of how the money is used. he's not according with their agenda, they're according with his.

but R0 is right we need to guard against the 'UKIP are GC' trope.

clitherow · 17/05/2019 14:06

I have made no comment nor is there implied comment about Harry.

subtle conflation is only ever truly effective without direct comment.

Anyway, I've said what I think - I stand by it.

R0wantrees · 17/05/2019 14:08

Anyway, I've said what I think - I stand by it.

As is your right.
You are however very wrong.

teawamutu · 17/05/2019 14:46

he's not according with their agenda, they're according with his.

I think this is a really important point.

borntobequiet · 17/05/2019 15:12

Oh, thanks, reminded me to donate.

teawamutu · 17/05/2019 20:45

15,471

MsMcWibble · 17/05/2019 21:41

I just wanted to say that my opinion of men has plummeted so far in the last year that I really don't care if I have any of them in my life any more apart from my husband.
I do support Harry though. I've followed him on twitter for a long time now - way before his police visit. I think he's been on a learning curve and so have I.
I am pretty sure that he is a really decent man. His tweets from the House of Lords meeting are a really good sign of this - he gets the issues. He's an asset.
I have been terrified of the police about this for a while. I've had nightmares about it. I'm glad someone is doing something and Harry, with his background, is a good person to do it.
I support him all the way. I may be wrong about him (I doubt it)- but what he is doing is great and necessary.

Genderfreelass · 17/05/2019 22:31

MsMcWibble I agree, Harry seems to be doing a good job, his tweets from Lord Ms meeting were excellent and his handling of the police over their attempted intimidation has been fantastic.

I commented about Sargon as someone commented that he had directed them to donate to Harry. I didn't know who he was and he's clearly an unpleasant person but that is nothing to do with Harry as far as I'm aware. I have supported Harry and am pleased to have done so.

Ereshkigal · 18/05/2019 09:03

Joss has accused Sarah Ditum of being Datun on Twitter

Janie143 · 18/05/2019 09:12

I can't much on this via Google

Janie143 · 18/05/2019 09:14

The campaign I mean

LangCleg · 18/05/2019 09:43

Joss has accused Sarah Ditum of being Datun on Twitter

The temptation to Spartacus the fuck out of that is almost overwhelming!

LangCleg · 18/05/2019 09:51

Here's the thing with this fundraiser: clear all the noise away. Then think: what is its aim? Do I support its aim? Is the destination for my money clear?

The aim is to test the lawfulness of the definition of "hate incident" the police are currently using - that it is based solely in the perception of the victim and has nothing to do with the motivation of the perpetrator and does not need to meet a criminal threshold for police action.

The fund is set up on Crowdjustice, which transfers monies directly to legal practitioners. It is the most reliable of crowdfunding websites for this reason.

So, if you want this specific aspect of police practice tested in law - as many of us here do and have been asking for since forever - it really isn't relevant who is bringing the case or who else is supporting it. What matters is the testing in court of what a wide variety of people see as state/police overreach.

Clear all the noise away.

The question is: do you support the case?

The question is not: do you support Harry himself? Nor is it: do you support any particular donor to his fund?

Datun · 18/05/2019 09:55

The question is: do you support the case?

Precisely, Lang. Which should be self evident. Which I suspect it is really. (And I'm sure Sarah Ditum would agree).

Janie143 · 18/05/2019 09:58

Thank you Lang Clear explanation as always from you

Ereshkigal · 18/05/2019 10:00

Well said Lang.

LangCleg · 18/05/2019 11:42

That said, I will add that I also agree with what R0 has been saying about making sure we understand motivations and power relationships - our enemy's enemy is not always our friend.

It's just that it's not relevant to a decision about whether or not to support the crowdfund. That should rest solely on whether or not you believe these police guidelines should be tested in court as possibly unlawful.

I do believe they should be tested in court. Crowdjustice provides a trustworthy platform for fundraising. Therefore, I have donated and will again if it needs more to reach its target.

teawamutu · 18/05/2019 12:11

Lang, if we had that clapping hands icon here, and it wasn't the Mark of the Wokey Twat on Twitter, I'd use it. Brilliantly incisive.

theOtherPamAyres · 18/05/2019 12:19

The aim is to test the lawfulness of the definition of "hate incident"

Yesterday (17/05/19), Deputy Chief Constable Julia Cooke, let something slip in a brief piece to camera (43 seconds) about the police's commitment to tackle hate attacks.

The slip wouldn't register with those who aren't up to speed on policy and regulatory capture, or mission creep by the police.

The slip came when she described herself as the lead Chief Officer on matters relating to LGBT PLUS. I assume that she means other letters in the alphabet soup. I don't remember Parliament directing the police to pay attention to the injustices against the Q and the A and the P, do you? Why are the police including the alpahabet soup then?

How soon before it is phobic to criticise Queer theory?

That's why I support the Judicial review.

twitter.com/DCCJulieCooke/status/1129322271062089730

(43 seconds video of DCC Cooke)

Thingybob · 21/05/2019 13:44

I've noticed that a Dr and his legal sidekick are making thinly veiled accusations on Twitter. Is it a replay of the ploy they used to goad CF?

Flip

1 2 ··· 8 9 10 ··· 13 14

Swipe left for the next trending thread