Owen. Not getting it or goady? Sometimes it’s hard to tell.

[viques]

Article in the Guardian about why homophobia against straight men needs to be addressed. Apparently straight men are at risk of homophobic abuse if they “violate the boundaries of masculinity”, which according to Owen include, being kind and empathetic and “ by not objectifying women or treating them as equals”. Blimey, that will put the frighteners on the guardian readership even faster than news that quinoa is in short supply.

He also challenges ( if that is the word) “perceptive discrimination” when people are treated unfairly on the grounds that they are ‘perceived’ to have a protected characteristic, he gives as an example Sikh men( not, you notice Sikh women, or even Sikh people) who are abused because they are perceived to be Muslim. Not sure where “perceptive discrimination” leaves women, but am pretty sure it is low down on the pecking order as usual, though also in todays guardian interestingly enough is an article by a transwoman who is apparently astonished at the unwarranted verbal sexual harassment she gets, which apparently didn’t happen at all when she wasn’t a transwoman. Maybe she ought to get together with Owen for support.

Anyway good to know that straight men have such a champion in their midst. I hope they can all breathe a little easier knowing that OJ is on their side. He has done such amazing things for gay and transitioning men after all.

Okay, read the article. It's not as blatant as I thought it would be, but he does bind misogyny to the idea that straight men might experience homophobia, and that this perceptive homophobia is the bastard child of misogyny.

Only in some surrogate sense, I guess, because homophobia does have something to do with the policing of the boundaries between male and female people in hierarchical systems though it also has other causes.

100% this. I actually know a couple of gay men who are like this.

I hope that tweet has been archived.

Julie Bindel is in touch with the school girl OJ is trying to get dirt on.

twitter.com/bindelj/status/1526599080591429632?cxt=HHwWgMC4kdHxyK8qAAAA

Imagine a man in his late 30's behaving like this. He is truly vile.

I hope Suzanne Moore has something to say, she has experience of Owens mysogynistic bullying, its bad enough to attack an articulate professional woman who can fight back, quite another to deliberately set out to undermine a teenager who has already had to deal with peer bullying and really doesn’t need her vunerability dissected by Owen and his bridge dwelling cronies.

cronies.

Re. OJ's article today, someone tweeted if he'd spoken to the homophones bullies to get their side of the story.

I actually think the article is okay. I'm worried that it's more work to advance the idea if straight men can be subjected to homophobia, tw can be victims of misogyny.

This is what he said in the thread that followed his article.

You are absolutely right this tells you everything about OS

what a vile man he is

#OwenJonesIsABullys has been trending all evening. Currently at No. 2

Some very amusing OJ limericks on Twitter at the moment.

Okay, I take back my hedging. He is, indeed, trying to argue that sexism and misogyny are forms of genderism. They are not. They are based on biological sex and have historically been one way to keep the female reproductive and sexual resources subjugated.

Does he want to give the bullies a (louder) voice?! WTAF!

The man is digging in.

Owen: Let me be very, very clear: I'm not going to be silenced, ever, under any circumstances, on LGBTQ rights. t.co/PIvuuY1vKi

He's paired that comment with a little video of himself.

Owen on twitter

He also challenges ( if that is the word) “perceptive discrimination” when people are treated unfairly on the grounds that they are ‘perceived’ to have a protected characteristic, he gives as an example Sikh men( not, you notice Sikh women, or even Sikh people
I read the article. It was a good and thought provoking one calling out toxic masculinity.
So why would it be talking about Sikh women!

That was supposed to be a question mark, not exclamation mark at the end

This is what I don't get.
Why?
Why are you a bully for trying to get both sides when it comes to a newspaper article?!
That's the way it's always been.
That's what journalism is.
Or used to be before people say bully for doing exactly that.

It's not that he is trying to get the other side or perhaps both sides of the issue. It's that he goes to Twitter and asks his enormous followers to start digging for him! That is unethical, because the school and the girls will be doxxed and possibly the girl in the story harassed.

Journalists do their research not by loudly asking for help on social media, but by following the obvious clues even I, an amateur could see exists in this story. Those would allow him to get to the school, but it's not good to use a foghorn in the manner he did.

It is quite upsetting because of the online mobs and what we know they do. Sometimes individuals with the same name as someone that is hated by a group on Twitter get harassed in real life. Sometimes the person they wish to harass lives with vulnerable family members who end up being harassed instead. And so on.

He's not even a journalist. Just a shrill opinion columnist who has abandoned critical thinking on this issue. It's a bad look for him and the Guardian.

Last time he was on Jeremy Vine he said his mum lives in Edinburgh. I now can't watch JV when he's on (and I've gone off JV too).

Why has he still got a platform after an investigation found him to be a bully, which actually didn't state the word bully so it was ok.

Why are you a bully for trying to get both sides when it comes to a newspaper article?

I may have missed it, but did OJ try to get both sides of the WIspa incident, or Maria MacLachlans assault, did he try to speak to Rosie Duffield or JKR to hear both sides, I could go on but you get the drift.

OJ isn't interested in both sides he is interested in discrediting women he disagrees with.

That's terrifying! Witchfinder central. Against a fucking child!

Fucking hell.
A Man trying to contact young girls. That certainly looks dodgy as fuck. Even if hes trying to reach the parents, presumably for the story he would need to talk to the girls.
Does he have any DBS or other safeguarding certificates?

Exactly this!

Perhaps what you think was missing from the coverage of the Stephen Lawrence case was the perspective of the men who killed him?

Similarly, in the case of 16-year old Lauren Lelonek, who killed herself after being bullied at school, journalists inexplicably neglected to ask the people who bullied her for their side of the story (uk.news.yahoo.com/family-teen-killed-herself-bullied-high-court-school-police-125057900.html). They really should have put Owen on the case.

Maybe the next time a young person is destroyed by bullying, journalists should seek out the all-important perspective of the people who bullied them.

He is trying to identify a child who has been horrendously bullied in order to discredit her. Viner should sack him on the spot. He's been identified as a bully already because of his behaviour on Twitter and instead of stopping, he's doubled down.