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.

20 years ago as a young woman I worked in a similar environment to the writer and I can say with certainty that not only would she not have been believed then, she would have lost her job and any chance of any other media job. And it is traumatic to have a boss or person in authority grope you while other people are present as a power show.

But she can’t possibly have been traumatised by it, and if she were she would have spoken out at the time, despite the impact on her career... apparently.
🙄
How some women are such misogynists I’ll never know.

Plus I think that men lie more than women

There are probably studies on this.
However, even if it's true, it doesn't help you in individual cases.
Clearly there are cases where women lie. Fiona Onasanya is one MP who immediately springs to mind as she was convicted.

I don't know how many people have read the article, but she doesn't say she was traumatised. She just mentions that it happened, and puts it in the context of the rather sexist, old-fashioned, very male environment of the Spectator magazine was it was in 1999. This is the man we have as PM: someone who thinks of young women as "totty" and there to be groped. All good fun, no doubt. But not someone I'd want as my boss, let alone running the country.

Nobody said David Cameron's alleged dead pig fucking shouldn't be brought up because it was years ago.

Women should disclose at the best time for them: and if that involves inflicting maximum damage career-wise to a pervy, groping ex-Etonian who's never suffered a meaningful consequence in his life - I'm not going to do anything else but cheer her on.

Nobody said David Cameron's alleged dead pig fucking shouldn't be brought up because it was years ago.

But plenty of people didn't believe it happened (me included).

But plenty of people didn't believe it happened (me included).

Do you believe this woman that she was groped by Boris Johnson?

I hadn't actually read the original allegation. Thigh squeeze to me made me think they were sat in an interview position, and whilst talking he placed her hand on her leg and gave it a fairly avuncular squeeze, like someone testing a joint of lamb. I didn't picture it at a long dining table with him sleazily copping a feel up someone's skirt just because he could reach. Have to admit the second scenario gives me the creeps a whole lot more than the first.

Yes, I believe her. I know a couple of other women who, if they step into the light, will tell similar and even worse. Women hold just as much internal misogyny as men do, we are socialised to hate each other, and that socialisation works.

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

Your understanding of what trauma is and how survivors react to it is sadly lacking. You made an arse of yourself and then doubled down. You have a perfect right to do this, but, by the same token, everyone else has the right to understand you're ridiculous. And you are.

Do you believe this woman that she was groped by Boris Johnson?

You asked me that earlier in the thread and I answered yes.
I don't believe DC fucked a pig, though, I think it was made up to sell a book and smear him. And that's coming from someone who can't stand him.

Some really great feminist arguments on this thread. You’ve changed my mind about this, thank you

^Because it's more complicated than that.
I think if you go around believing other women because they're women you are going to end up being wrong a lot of the time.^

This.

I can believe it happened, but I don't see the logic in giving somebody more credibility solely because their share your biological sex.

Interestingly, I remember reading a study which found that men were less biased as regards gender when selecting job applicants, whilst women were more likely to be biased in favour of other women (although this is admittedly slightly different with women being underrepresented in some roles and also because it makes sense to choose the person you'd rather work with).

Interestingly, I remember reading a study which found that men were less biased as regards gender when selecting job applicants

Huh. That’s funny because the majority of people in leadership positions are men, and continue to be men. Great lack of bias there.

deathgrip

There have been studies that have shown that men tend to hire men and women tend to hire women

I assume this would still account for the lack of women in ‘top spots’ and the push for positive discrimination

I agree Rufus, but PP said that men show less gender bias, which would surely mean the gender gap closing over time, especially if the women they hire are more likely to hire women?

Yeah

But i think the pp is talking bollocks

And i dont know about the women hiring women bit

Id like to think it was the case but im really not sure its the case

Your understanding of what trauma is and how survivors react to it is sadly lacking. You made an arse of yourself and then doubled down. You have a perfect right to do this, but, by the same token, everyone else has the right to understand you're ridiculous. And you are

The woman in question did not see herself as a traumatised victim. Read the report.

And you know nothing about me, at all, or my life experiences, in your bid to virtue signal about your own feminist credentials. Women are not virtuous just by the fact of being women, as your rather nasty, self righteous comments go to show.

You ,and a few others, have managed to twist and distort the thread to reflect your own rather narcissistic self absorption, and turn it inti a bit of a bitch fest. If anyone disagrees with you then they must be misogynists, right wing or something else which it is customary to dismiss other people as . Hive mind.

I believe it probably happened but having now read her (badly written)Times article I'm struggling to have much sympathy.

She writes about The Spectator in a very sneery, derogatory way but knowing full well that The Spectator could be useful to as she puts itpneumatic twentysomething interns with posh degrees.

According to her No one minds calling these clean-skinned, shiny-eyed girls “totty”, even to their clean-skinned, shiny-eyed faces. They are not Bambis in the forest exactly. They are smoking, drinking, knowing. They witness the back-room mischief of the political classes. Which is fun

Oh and as she doesn't seem to need glasses in every day life sticking on a pair of glasses on her by line photo makes her look as if she hasn't quite abandoned the idea of being totty with a posh degree.

Bitch fest. Women saying that you really shouldn't dismiss a woman's disclosure of a powerful man touching her without consent is a 'bitch fest'.

It's not about being 'virtuous', it's about saying a woman has the complete right to set her own boundaries, full stop, and she can talk about those who break those boundaries whenever she wants to. Whether you like her or not doesn't matter.

I just don't think that anyone really doesn't think he did it. I think they don't think it is that big a deal. And that is so fucking depressing.

So many men managed to negotiate the 20th century without sexually harassing anyone. But apparently this was just an 'avuncular' squeeze made ok by different times - by which people really mean a time when there was no prospect of any consequences.

It is fucking sickening that anyone is excusing it.

I need to understand the rules of entry into this club. As a woman, do I need to believe absolutely everything another woman tells me about anything, or just the sexual misconduct stuff? Will I be asked repeatedly whether “I believe”, like a kind of feminist Spanish Inquisition?

I need to know so that I can rid myself once and for all of this pesky “internalised misogyny”.

I believe it probably happened but having now read her (badly written)Times article I'm struggling to have much sympathy.

Why? Are particular women fair play for being groped? What are your criteria? Wearing glasses for photos? Writing insufficiently well for your standards?

Virtue signalling? Triggered? Bitch fest?

For someone so offended by being called a misogynist, you’re cettainly enjoying playing MRA Lingo Bingo...

I've decided all women who are insufficiently feminist - and I am the only arbiter of sufficiently feminist: it's all up to me - deserves to be groped. When they are groped, and when they disclose said groping, I'm going to fill up threads on feminist boards telling everyone how they did not sufficiently meet my standards of feminism so I don't give a flying fuck that they were groped.

Them apples sound good to you when you get groped and are hoping for some support?

No. Didn't think so.