KjK "insane rant" thread 2

[AdamRyan]

First thread filled up just as it was getting interesting

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5036512-kjks-insane-rant

So let's keep it going. My characterisation if the two basic positions are:

1)KJK is a stone cold legend, haters gonna hate but many women will give her cash to bathe in champagne

2. KJK is taking right wing positions for clicks and cash, most recently criticising a doctors conference to stay relevant.

Happy to discuss further. There are some particular posts I want to respond to which I will c&p below

Wrong again. It's the difference between a planned event, and meeting someone to be given an address.

Where are your examples of 'right wing'?

And why are you applying your extrapolations of political positions across the board? Most of us are very much not right wing at all.

You prompted a trip down memory lane. These are joint memories so will of course spark chatter. You can't control the thread.

Please don't try to explain this again. I went round the houses yesterday (and I think I got deleted after my umpteenth frustrated post due to lack of acknowledgement / comprehension, oops!) with this one.

You won't get anywhere with detailed explanations!

We covered this upthread eresh. I had not realised, but the only evidence of that was transcribed from bugs, and it was thrown out of court because it was flawed. The woman who made the transcriptions was sacked.

So for legal purposes that evidence is not real, so although that was stated in 2007, in 2019 when KJK made the video it had been discredited and was not evidence. It's still being spread round though by people who have a right wing agenda. Who knows why KJK posted it but at the least she didn't do her research and relied on an urban myth.

Thanks to @Serenea for posting about it because I hadn't realised the complexities of that case.

Grooming gangs = Asian men

Pedo ring = white men

Same thing, different language used for reporting on

But honestly, the country already had a culture where young people were allowed to be abused sexually by authorities turning a blind eye before people came over ... the fear of racism is just another excuse for something that has been a thing for decades upon decades, ofc groups will operate... don't miss that they already were operating pre 90s... just known as nonces rings not "gangs" and white!

But white English men don't get labelled as Christian grooming gangs when it is reported

Source: lived in care. In the era it began also being poc men. Police gave no fucks about either, nor did plenty of social workers for some children bc the focus actually was on calling children prostitutes and their behaviour being the issue- not the men but the media likes to lie that it's a new problem and oh so tricky to navigate and this country has forgotten how it used to think about teens being sexually assaulted and abused (which isn't a bad thing, but it used to have a really different attitude!)

The gangs exist, they just always have and now we have other nationalities with sick fuckers too

It's all a bit evangelical really. Finding god style public sessions.
Or, maybe it's about enjoying hearing women speak about stuff that matters. And how women speaking up leads to more women speaking up.

Anyway if people really still feel that they need to be out and about shouting that only men have penises, fair play to them. I mean even the prime minister says it now, showing it's not controversial any more.
Women still risk losing their jobs and being shunned for saying TWAW or using correct sex pronouns. This fight isn't over yet.

Unfortunately I don't think refusing to engage with points and shouting at people that they are disingenous/lying/dim is a very effective strategy for changing minds. And in my case it makes me curious about the defensiveness.

It wasn't defensiveness. We were continually pointing out that you'd misinterpreted what you'd read / heard and were posting under a misapprehension as to the content of what you'd read.

Nobody was shouting either. Probably increasingly frustrated at your apparent wilful misinterpretation / lack of understanding about what you'd read and unwillingness to acknowledge you'd read / heard it wrong. There is no discussion to be had with somebody who's started from a false premise, after all. You can only discuss something where both parties are at least on the same page as to what's been said to start with.

You don't want to change your mind, anyway, that is quite clear. It's utterly disingenuous to suggest you do. We're all a bunch of shouty, right wing, cliquey, meanies, of course you don't want to agree with us!

If you really think LWS events just involve women lining up to shout that women don’t have penises, over and over, maybe you should tune in to the Edinburgh event tomorrow @AdamRyan

THIS IS SHOUTING

Nobody has shouted at you Adam

Witchcraft. How do you do that?!

So for legal purposes that evidence is not real, so although that was stated in 2007, in 2019 when KJK made the video it had been discredited and was not evidence. It's still being spread round though by people who have a right wing agenda.

Who knows why KJK posted it but at the least she didn't do her research and relied on an urban myth.

Like lots of people do about all sorts of things, including the pious righteous ones. Most TRA propaganda is fake news, after all. And lots of people are really quite incurious about it. So I don't think KJK is alone in making the odd mistake with things which turn out not to be true. My point is that she didn't actually make it up herself. It was evidence in a trial.

But I'll post as I see fit thanks. You should read that Bindel article.

🤐

Oh for goodness sake. Here we go again.

1. agreeing with far right conspiracy theories, such as that there are gangs of grooming Muslims roaming the North, putting girls in kebabs and being facilitated by "people in power who rape children", who are probably lefties
2. saying its fine to "fear and loathe" people on the basis of their religion (now deleted)
3. defending CPAC as "not conservative because some leftwing politicians joined them"
4. thinking Jordan peterson is great and people who don't like him have been sucked in by MSM
5. saying "the left" need to take some responsibility for Tommy Robinson

Just a few examples of the top of my head.

Of course not all posters are like that, but a lot do appear to be, and certainly a lot more than there were historically.

Exactly, not all posters are like that. So stop suggesting we are.

Please.

I did thanks. I didn't draw the same conclusion as others.

You do realise, don't you, that if evidence is withdrawn like that it's as if legally it never existed? So it can't be treated as any more likely than any other random speculation?

And, as I think I said eleventy billion times upthread, it was the conflation of things in her video I had a problem with. It's straight out of Q Anon and exactly the sort of thing far right people say. But apparently I just don't understand YouTube. People just say sentences, it's unreasonable to think they might be connected to a point.

This is what's so bloody annoying, taking a random selection of posts, or parts of posts, from people who disagree with you, and applying them en masse to everyone who disagrees with you.

Not cool.

And you wonder why people call you disingenuous?

But why is your interpretation right? I don't think it is; it was a list, IMO.

There's a fair few misrepresentations of what was actually said in this list. Again, again, again.

It's like trying to nail jelly to a bloody wall with you.

Well same. I get annoyed with people blanket going "KJK is just a victim of slurs/misrepresentation/haters" when posters are raising valid points. That's why I joined the thread in the first place.

How come it's OK to tar "lefties", people who don't like KJK and people who aren't ultra GC with the same brush (e.g. repeatedly saying "you harm children, you harm women" to posters with different opinions, you won't let women speak) yet you can't deal with the boot being on the other foot.

And you asked me remember. It's a bit rich to now complain about the answer. How else would someone establish the political position of FWR, if not by going by what posters say?

You do realise, don't you, that if evidence is withdrawn like that it's as if legally it never existed? So it can't be treated as any more likely than any other random speculation?

Missing the point I was making, but I'm not interested in a back and forth with you.

How come it's OK to tar "lefties", people who don't like KJK and people who aren't ultra GC with the same brush (e.g. repeatedly saying "you harm children, you harm women" to posters with different opinions, you won't let women speak) yet you can't deal with the boot being on the other foot.

Can you expand on this please? I'm not sure exactly what point you're making.

Suffice to say, there's no obligation on me to agree with you on KJK and I don't. We'll just have to agree to disagree.

Not really. Because you were missing the point I was making. KJK was at best sloppy with that video. At worst she believes what she said. It's spreading misinformation and conspiracy theories. That's the sort of thing that enables Tommy Robinson and his ilk to thrive, not "lefties".

So when people say "why don't you like her" there's an example. She doesn't fact check her content. And so she makes videos that support the far right. (Or she knows that and doesn't care).

Posters however are adamant that to say that is a smear. It isn't. It's a consequence of her actions.

I think I've finally worked it out, any poster who doesn't agree that KJK is a far right conspiracy theorist, who believes that groups of Muslim men abused working class white girls, has no business on this board, because the op believes all those things make them unworthy of posting, unlike their long term ownership of the board.