Harrop MPTS thread 2

[Personwithrage]

Starting the new thread

@SoniaFouler

That's not why I'm saying it's "innocent" as you put it. It's not about sides or some kind of purity claim. It's just about the logic of the sentence itself. It literally can't mean what AH claims it means, and therefore he is being dishonest in making that claim. That's all.

He claimed it to be a homophobic slur against him(?), didn’t he? If I was not black and used “my” deleted phrase and “my” example of Marcus Rashford said I had used it explicitly because he was black and knew that he would see it, and people said that he was just making a big deal out of it because I clearly used it in a context that had nothing to with his race, but simply because in the text of the conversation I was tweeting publicly, it made sense and should be seen as apparent in the sense I was using it, the same level of plausibility should apply, should it not? (Except not, because: deleted posts and “an offensive post” comment). I’m not defending the usage of either word or phrase but pointing out the double standards as others have raised.

It's not a useful analogy. The N-word has a very specific, not to say unique, position in the language and as far as I'm aware, doesn't have any double meaning (the phrase I think you quoted is racist because it depends on a racist slur for its meaning.) There are people who have lost their jobs for saying words that sound like the n-word but aren't. So it's a special case where as a society we've decided that this particular word usage has rules we don't apply to anything else.

I think the analogy with 'bitch' is better. It has an established and well-known meaning which is a female dog. It can also be used as a misogynist slur. You could use the word in such a way that it can only take the first meaning, such as saying to your pedigree dog friends, "my Labrador bitch has been spayed." If someone took offence at that because the word "bitch" can be used as a slur, it would be considered strange for them to do so. Clearly the context in which the word was used shut down other possible meanings of the word. Even if we had evidence that the person who said this was a misogynist, it doesn't change the fact that there's only one meaning conveyed in that sentence. That is the case with the tweet we are talking about also.

There is an argument that I think you and others are making, which is that the use of any word that can be used as a slur in any context is wrong and indicates that the speaker holds beliefs that would be commensurate with the use of the slur. So to say "faggot" even when talking about wood is homophobic. To say "bitch" when talking about dogs is sexist. In other words, the word itself has a power which overrides context, meaning and intention, and that any slurs should be treated the same way as the n-word and should become unsayable in any context. I'm pretty sure that's what people on this thread are arguing for, but they haven't articulated it in this way so I could be wrong. I do think the fact that it's been such an involved discussion points to the fact that there's an underlying philosophical/ideological divide here between what I would characterise as the "woke" position, that words mean what the most oppressed person in a situation claim they mean, regardless of context etc, and others who are trying to hold on to a more classically liberal framework of looking at the evidence, i.e. the actual thing that was actually said.

Anyway … to get back to Harrop’s little outing yesterday and appearing on Twitter wearing his Terf Repellent badge.

I would also hope that the original outing for his oh-so-funny badge on his Insta account and the subsequent reporting by the Express is also on the GMC / MPTS radar?

www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1438754/nhs-news-transgender-terf-feminist-doctor-woke-political-correctness-lgbtq

Lot of discussion here about E’s intentions on a tweet

Not enough on Adrian Harrops continuing to wear an extremely offensive pin that encourages violence towards women who disagree with him

Mind you bitch is not used as as an undercover slur. Nobody has to restrain any invective when it comes to women. And the defendant in question had no compunction using it on twitter to directly refer to a woman (politician).

Terf is also being used as a slur by the chappies, isn't it? With the defendant wearing a badge depicting cheeky 'fun' references with a picture of a spray bottle of chemicals (presumably to be used on 'terfs' as it says term repellent) only very recently.

Not term repellent. Terf (sic) repellent.

Quite.

Shall we for example unpick for hours whether that publicly signalled reference of a spray bottle is wholly and entirely innocent fun and referencing insect repellent, (against female people with political views he personally doesn't agree with, and who he is employed in a position of trust to treat without favour or prejudice or personal politics being involved) - or might he be questionably referencing for example the acid attacks made by men on women to punish them?

It could easily be either. But whatever he means, the issue is - as a GP he can't behave like this in public without it impacting on his image and the image of the medical profession, it's unprofessional behaviour to put it mildly and his whole suboptimal judgement thing appears to be continuing to rampage on quite unfixed by mentors, warning letters, his mum etc.

Also, as long as the Tribunal members can view the timeline of Harrop and E’s Twitter interactions, they should be able to see the context of any language used and decide whether E was being provocative or whether Harrop is using it as a crutch for his defence.

Also, E isn’t the one facing disciplinary action here.

Because of the subsequent link from Flying Oink and your in the * , everyone knows what term you used. Even if it was deleted. I don't think it has any current or recent uses.

It does, as you pointed out, the link from @FlyingOink is dated 2017, so it is still in use, even if a consequence of punishment for use. And as I said (though now deleted so everyone might not have seen that part) 1: I am black 2: Being so, I felt comfortable using that word and specifically left it uncensored to make the point.

“Readers may not know that you connected the phrase to a famous black person as an example of someone who might take umbrage to it. That artifice of doing that and use of a word that has no other current associations in English was very disingenuous”

So says YOU (and the other poster). But it does have another meaning and if i used it, as a non black person, specifically in a conversation that I knew said (black) celebrity and people jumped to my defence saying “well it does have another meaning and it’s entirely obvious it wasn’t meant in the racist sense because it doesn’t even make sense in the running of the conversation that was being tweeted about and anyway, where I’m from that’s a common phrase and growing up, it was used all the time and not in a racist way at all” , people would disregard it as being completely disingenuous, given the race of the person who raised it as a complaint. Which is why I deliberately used that word and nobody so far has explained why one is plausible but one definitely is not.

Also, it is interesting you go straight to racism to compare the use of faggot. The use of bitch may be a better comparison. Female dog to refer to and dehumanise women. Actually, I think the use of queer may be even more similar. Like faggot, one meaning of this is as a homophobe slur, but there are other current and historic meanings. The use of queer would be a better equivalence for double meanings of which one is a homophobic slur. Other meaning being odd

Bitch is that commonplace that it’s left uncensored in television programmes before the watershed and queer has been adopted by the gay community so neither words would have been a good example to make my point about what is deemed offensive to some and not to others.

@WomenTalkingAboutARevolution

Lot of discussion here about E’s intentions on a tweet

Not enough on Adrian Harrops continuing to wear an extremely offensive pin that encourages violence towards women who disagree with him

Agreed. Point taken. I shall bow out.

I suspect AH is just wildly arrogant. He thinks he can't be touched and that he's going to get away with everything. I really, really, really hope he's wrong about that.

There is an argument that I think you and others are making, which is that the use of any word that can be used as a slur in any context is wrong and indicates that the speaker holds beliefs that would be commensurate with the use of the slur. So to say "faggot" even when talking about wood is homophobic.

No. That is not the argument that I’m making. At all. I was agreeing with the posters that said it’s disingenuous to wide-eyed claim that it’s a load of nonsense to try and attribute even the possibility of deliberate usage of a word used as an insult to a particular group and such a complaint is just seeing things that aren’t there.

It's not a useful analogy. The N-word has a very specific, not to say unique, position in the language and as far as I'm aware, doesn't have any double meaning (the phrase I think you quoted is racist because it depends on a racist slur for its meaning.) There are people who have lost their jobs for saying words that sound like the n-word but aren't. So it's a special case where as a society we've decided that this particular word usage has rules we don't apply to anything else.

There are people that have lost their jobs due to using the word word faggot. And in a few weeks time, we’re due the obligatory annual 10+ page “The song Fairytale of New York has been BANNED because it contains a certain word, AIBU for thinking this is not right?” thread. The phrase does have another meaning and the use of that particular word it uses does not form part of the context when used with the particular phrase. Just like faggot doesn’t in the bundle of sticks context.

Sorry for derailing. I’ll leave it there. Put across my point but argued it too much.

In terms of what can be done about Adrian defiantly out and about wearing his TERF repellent spray badge, I would suggest that those caused outrage or made to feel unsafe or concerned ought to submit a complaint via the GMC’s reporting process.

Adrian has done this to provoke and be inflammatory, knowing that his Instagram post was unable to be considered by the tribunal.

It was another public two fingers to the process.

He can of course claim that he had no knowledge that Joss Prior, who has a significant following among the trans community and who takes great pleasure in being as provocative and offensive as possible, would post the photo and he has no control over what others do.

However in the light of his statements that he is a public figure championing the trans cause, he is just as aware of what he is doing as any other public figure who wears an Adult Human Female t-shirt. The difference being that an AHF product does not indicate violence or hostility towards others. It’s a statement of fact.

Anyway. I ramble. It seems to me that it has yet to dawn on Adrian Harrop that he has a choice between being an NHS doctor or a controversial trans-rights activist. The two activities are not compatible with each other.

Medics can of course express a political view or publicly come down on one side of a certain issue. But they should not do it in such a way that intimidates others and undermines public confidence in the profession.

Medics can of course express a political view or publicly come down on one side of a certain issue.

I'm not sure that they publicly can.

Certainly when I was working in a public service role it was made extremely clear to us as employees that we had a responsibility for the general public not knowing our private and personal politics, upto and including not having stickers on cars, key rings on bags etc. As soon as you declare your affiliation and make it part of your job you affect the way the public will see you, and that message you send out takes away your impartiality, the ability of all to approach you equally without fear or favour.

That's the bit where it is necessary to choose your career in public service with all the responsibilities involved, or to choose a different line of work in which you can signal whatever politics you like.

If it's pinned down, beyond all doubt that that particular word was used absolutely intentionally, with purpose to offend, with a whole lot of homophobia and other nasty intent.... what does this actually change and how is it relevant

It’s not relevant to Harrap and his hearing, but in broader terms it gives credence to the argument that both sides are as bad as each other.

It makes me feel embarrassed to be ‘gender critical’ if this is the kind of thing we say is OK.

This thread in particular would stop me suggesting Mumsnet as a resource to help people inform themselves on the debate.

it gives credence to the argument that both sides are as bad as each other.

That's a bit of a massive stretch. Line up and compare the evidence. Take a look at terfisaslur.com. Google the penises and punch a terf t shirts and scrawls on the pavements. This is one debatably dodgy tweet, I don't think that does much really.

It makes me feel embarrassed to be ‘gender critical’ if this is the kind of thing we say is OK.

The word 'we' there is doing a huge amount of heavy lifting. There isn't group think. There isn't a 'side' or a 'gang' or a 'we'. Or a flag. If you're embarrassed by a potentially dodgy individual you don't have to agree with all of what they say or any of what they say, you're free to work out what you think and draw your own decisions. You don't have to always align yourself to the pure and re think all your decisions on current affairs based on other people's decisions.

In terms of what can be done about Adrian defiantly out and about wearing his TERF repellent spray badge, I would suggest that those caused outrage or made to feel unsafe or concerned ought to submit a complaint via the GMC’s reporting process.

I must admit, AH wearing a badge which appears to endorse spraying chemicals on women because of their mainstream view of humans and biological sex, would make me err on the side of caution and decline any treatment by him/her/furry.

i don't agree with the claim that queer and bitch are fine because they are used with impunity. That just goes to show that nobody gives a toss about invective against women. I think we'd find out it is not fine if you said something like "hey bitch, how are you?" to Queen Elizabeth in a receiving line. Just using her as an example of a famous woman. Also queer seems to be newly used word in a different context. And doesn't seem to really apply to gay people in that context. So the other meaning as a homophobic slur would probably still smart. As used for odd probably out of use because of the homophobic slur associations.

So maybe many women and gay people aren't fine with the widespread use of these words a slur (or pretend they are retrieved from being a slur); despite many excuses on how these uniquely are fine now. Not many of the new uses are referring to female dogs or oddities. This is where it differs with faggot. That is still being used in the primary meanings. I wouldn't use them for slur purposes. As I wouldn't use bitch or queer. Actually I wouldn't use faggot for any purpose. I have no everyday acquaintance with special firewood or minced innards .

Minced innards.

I do hope that the GMC don’t have that available as a sanction.

My mum used to talk about having guts for garters !

It’s not relevant to Harrap and his hearing, but in broader terms it
gives credence to the argument that both sides are as bad as each other.

Seriously?

So we may be able to scrounge up a couple of possibly/maybe nasty tweets on the gc side, but there are uncountable tweets on the other side, so many that websites were set up to document them all. And they state how they want us to die (in a grease fire) how they will fuck us up (pictures of men in bloodied tops holding barbed wire covered bats) they want to force us to suck their lady dick and rape us
But this one tweet , or possibly if we looked hard enough a few tweets shows we are all as bad as each other?

queer has been adopted by the gay community

Really? All the LGB people I know hate it. It seems to have been mostly adopted by the 'straight, dull, and desperate to seem more interesting' community, as a way of showing how stnnng and brv they are without having to do any of that icky homosexual stuff.

@aliasundercover

queer has been adopted by the gay community

Really? All the LGB people I know hate it. It seems to have been mostly adopted by the 'straight, dull, and desperate to seem more interesting' community, as a way of showing how stnnng and brv they are without having to do any of that icky homosexual stuff.

Agreed, it was useful as a shock tactic in protests twenty or thirty years ago (actually more like thirty or forty years ago) but I don't think everyday, non-activist, not-on-a-protest-just-picking-up-some-milk-at-tesco LGB people have ever been big on calling ourselves queer.

Personally I hate it.

I can't remember the projected outcome date, was it Wednesday we were likely to know Harrop's outcome?

Q-word is generally used (in my observation) by young straight folx, or rarely by older gay people among their friends (in the a woman may call a female friend bitch or c*). If someone else used it it would be a declaration of war.

I can’t stand the word - it was flung around back in the day as an insult and generally as a precursor to violence.

De lurking. (Usually, on BMN) but have followed this saga for a number of years.

Former patient at Brownlow surgery. We moved to another GP.

This badge bothers me so much. Incitement to violence and a nod to acid/corrosive fluid attacks against women, from a man who has sworn "first do no harm". (But, allegedly, agrees with Janssen it's ok for certain young black girls to be forced to have sex - because "culture" FFS?)

Wearing it in a City with a recent violent event around a Women's hospital. Not far from this hospital and his places of work. The arrogance, and the hatred of this man, for women and girls, is evident.

I'm appalled. Who makes these badges?
Who is producing them? Did he make it himself?

Yes, you could say he had no idea the photo was going to be shared....

You could also ponder that it looks like he's specifically unzipped his jackets and turned back his hoodie so that his badges are more clearly seen...

It very much feels that he's making a point, sending a message, and altogether enjoying the whole thing.

For me, the Terf repellent idea and graphic upsets me more than almost anything else. The association with acid attacks is unforgivable.

I can't remember the projected outcome date, was it Wednesday we were likely to know Harrop's outcome?

Wednesday midday at the earliest

BlackandGreen etsy is full of that stuff, I've seen that pin in a few shops.

I sew and like quirky fabrics, there are a lot of very ugly "die terf" prints available online. Presumably misogynists like to quilt too.