Why do women not believe other women (Boris Johnson story)

[Annasgirl]

I came on to see if there was a thread on this, and there is a similar thread on the topic but it is based on giving out about George Galloway (I'm not in the UK so no real opinion on him except that I don't like him).

However, watching the Channel 4 news last night I was amazed at the number of people (women) who asked why the journalist did not raise this allegation earlier and questioning her integrity.

Now, these kinds of comments square with my impression that the greatest achievement of the patriarchy was to get women to compete always and ever against other women for the crumbs from the man's table. So, women have never been each others allies in the way that men were (war etc) and they instead belittle and criticise the woman in these scenarios instead of the men (see also, the constant criticism of the other woman and never of the married man; the lack of belief of women in rape trials; the lack of belief of women in MeToo; the list of senior female actresses who still defend Weinstein, and Polanski; the madams who procure women for creepy men - and on and on ad infinitum.

Until women put other women first there really will be no better future for our daughters and I find this incredibly sad. I grew up in a matriarchy and I have always encouraged and supported other women and girls throughout my life - I am just always saddened that this is the exception rather than the rule.

Are you saying that the abuse that happened to me as a child wasn’t damaging or traumatic because I kept it to myself for years?

For goodness sake......I've no idea about your childhood abuse or trauma. So why would I be commenting upon it. Clearly, I'm not.

Yes, I understand what trauma is; and having one's thigh squeezed doesn't cut it.

This is one of the most ignorant sentences I’ve ever seen

And that is one of the most-over-blown and mis-placed posts I've read on here. Launching upon posts which have nothing to do with you, and making it about you. Sorry for you suffering - but people cannot be expected not to post their thoughts on this particular topic because of it.

Nope. PP said

if it was so damaging and traumatic for her she should have brought it up at the time

Which is entirely ignorant of the effects of trauma on victims of sexual assault. Trauma makes women less likely to “bring it up at the time”, not more.

Yes, I understand what trauma is; and having one's thigh squeezed doesn't cut it.

You have absolutely no right to pass judgement on what someone else does or does not find traumatic.

And although of course you weren’t specifically talking about me or any other woman reading this who’s experienced sexual assault, comments like yours have an impact. You need to own that if you’re going to say such ridiculous things.

Which is entirely ignorant of the effects of trauma on victims of sexual assault. Trauma makes women less likely to “bring it up at the time”, not more|

Having your leg squeezed doesn't constitute trauma in most people.
This thread is not about the trauma you personally have suffered.
It was about some women not believing other women.

I believe the woman, but do not agree/or approve of the way she has gone about this.

I believe it might have happened but I don't think it matters at all

IME people always defend those they agree with.

It really doesn't matter whether it is traumatic or not, it's not OK for a prime minister to do it.

You have absolutely no right to pass judgement on what someone else does or does not find traumatic

But I do have a right to comment and voice a view on this topic. I'll not have my speech policed just because some people may be 'triggered by it'. The reason i came to Mumsnet, in the first instance, was because I was outraged at the policing of speech when it came to trans issues.

This is not a therapy thread, it is a thread on the Women's Rights Board - and a full range of views and expression is normal and acceptable. It I have posted anything personally abusive or offensive, I'm sure the moderator will remove it.

IME people always defend those they agree with.

Truth. I remember a friend defending the Tory politicians involved in affair scandals in the early 90s (Gummer, etc) , but then roundly condemning Paddy Ashdown for exactly the same thing.

if it was so damaging and traumatic for her she should have brought it up at the time

This point of view is all over facebook.

I guess they would say exactly the same thing to Jimmy Savilles victims, the footballer victims, those in the church, Rotherham, those affected by Weinstein. It really shows how far we haven't come that people are still saying that.

Truth. I remember a friend defending the Tory politicians involved in affair scandals in the early 90s (Gummer, etc) , but then roundly condemning Paddy Ashdown for exactly the same thing.

Yes, and it happens on both sides of the political divide as well. Lefties (of which I am one), are all over Boris Johnson (quite rightly) on this sort of thing. I would be interested to see their response if, say, Jeremy Corbyn were accused of similar.

Oops, Mellor not Gummer.

I don't think the allegation is that an enormous deal.

We know he's a sleaze bag, we know he's unfit for public office, we know that he's probably done a lot worse...

If I were him, I would just apologise and shut the thing down.

It's the lying and the disgusting misogynists who are trying to defend it that make me sick.

But I do have a right to comment and voice a view on this topic. I'll not have my speech policed just because some people may be 'triggered by it'.

You’re accusing me of being triggered? Says a lot about you and the type of people who throw that language around as an insult.

You can comment whatever you like - I responded to the ignorance in your statements, which I’m also entitled to do. Your definitive comments about what does and doesn’t constitute trauma and what traumatised women do and not do are ignorant.

You may not be traumatised by a man in a position of power of you touching you in a sexual way. You have no right to say that other women could not possibly find this traumatic.

I think it's a great thing she told the world about his nasty behaviour.

And this is the perfect moment to tell it.

We have "grab em by the thighs" Prime Minister, the world should know and it does now.

It really doesn't matter whether it is traumatic or not, it's not OK for a prime minister to do it.

Exactly so. It always fascinates me in these cases that people yammer on about what the victim has supposedly done wrong - been too compliant, or worn provocative clothing, or been drunk, or reported it when it was only something trivial, or not reported it when it was something serious, or waited too long to report it or reported it to the wrong person. The question is: do we think this is an acceptable way for a man to behave, let alone our prime minister? No, it certainly isn't. That's the beginning and end of it.

You can comment whatever you like - I responded to the ignorance in your statements, which I’m also entitled to do. Your definitive comments about what does and doesn’t constitute trauma and what traumatised women do and not do are ignorant

You are not one for nuance or subtlety of argument, are you - let alone actually reading what someone has written. Your style seems to be to leap on to 'trigger words' and get out-raged.

You know nothing about me, because I don't splash personal, intimate stuff all over every conversation or thread - unless in the context of a genuine shared discussion on that issue.

I'll not engage any further with you, so you can continue to scream & shout in self righteousness as much as you like. And i'm sure you will.

Why does she have to have been traumatized by it before being allowed to mention it when ever she pleases? Why can she have not just found it an intimidating thing to do by a powerful man, who has now got more powerful, so she has chosen to mention it to illustrate that charming buffoon Boris is actually creepy fucker Johnson? Like we don't have enough evidence of that any way.

I get it, you say you're a feminist and you're here to talk about women's rights. But you're not all in, and some women being assaulted isn't as important to you. Feminism lite, innit. Much less bother than having to prioritize women when it's not as comfortable with the rest of your views.

I mean seriously, if a woman told you her boss had squeezed her thigh a few years ago, would it even occur to you to say "Well, it was a while ago, and it wasn't that bad, keep your counsel" and think that was a feminist perspective?

"Having your leg squeezed doesn't constitute trauma in most people."

Thankfully, this hasn't happened to me, but thinking about it, if it had, I think I would find it extremely traumatic. If one of my ex-bosses had done such a thing, I would go immediately from thinking I was a valued colleague, to not. If it was done in the presence of others, but under the table, that makes it even worse, but then he is saying, I can do what I like, and no one else will believe you. But maybe as a lesbian, I don't expect any man to lay hands on me in this way. To do so would say to me, you're just a piece of skirt and I can do whatever I want (because no one will believe you anyway). And look, so many don't, all he has to do is deny, deny, deny. She only mentioned it for the political advantage is akin to she only made the accusations for the money.

Plus I think that men lie more than women, because they have been taught they can get away with it, men in positions of power have been doing it for ages, and we have more men in such positions of power. Goodness, even male footballers on the pitch in effect make a career of lying about things. Seems for these competitive men, the truth is just something else to be adjusted as required.

I'll not engage any further with you, so you can continue to scream & shout in self righteousness as much as you like. And i'm sure you will.

Interesting that you complain about me policing you, and yet you’ve repeatedly tried to shut me down because you don’t like my response.

Scream and shout? I forgot women can’t be emphatic without being deemed hysterical by some.

Have you not figured out yet that “freedom of speech” does not extend to insulation from the consequences of that speech?

Your words have been vile and damaging. You go right ahead and say them, but don’t play the victim when someone points it out.

Having your leg squeezed doesn't constitute trauma in most people

This is just more misogyny from the same school as she should have brought it up at the time

I've only seen really women-hating types come out with this crap.

I believe it might have happened but I don't think it matters at all
I’d rather a decent human being represent the country. Not a saint, not even someone necessarily much more decent than the average person on the street. But I wouldn’t vote for a party led by someone with Johnson’s morals and past behaviour, so it matters to me.

The key point to remember is that it is the disrespectful behavior of an asshole. For some on the receiving end it might be very traumatic, for others not a very big deal. The perpetrator of such actions doesn’t care either way. I’ve heard Johnson described as a sociopath a few times, and the more I learn of him the better the term fits.