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

Hahaha yeah that's right, well done. I'm also IW, cervix and all. And jealous of KJK nails.

Not really. Because you were missing the point I was making.

Exceptionally easy to do, as it's often really not very clear.

You pick and choose bits of what you've read and create a whole fictional narrative about it. So many incorrect interpretations and representations.

Thank you for this.

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!)

This is so true. I was abused by a prolific paedophile as a teen (who was part of a ring of white men) and it was very much dismissed by everyone and took years for him to be prosecuted. Heard some disgusting things, like "everyone knows teenage girls lie" and "well we needed someone for the job, there was no one else else" from someone being asked why they reemployed a man they'd dismissed for suspected CSA.

We didn't even know what grooming was then. I remember feeling relieved there was a name for what he did to me.

Times are so much better now.

If you do podcasts, you should listen to Samantha Morton on Louis Theroux. She is very interesting on what it's like growing up in care and the way girls are treated.

Will you just stop needling me. Its really quite unnecessary and unpleasant.

Adam so for you to like or appreciate or respect or just generally not diss a person do you need to agree with everything they say?

Because I don't. I don't expect people to be perfect or to always present fully-formed and well-articulated thoughts.

So, when I assess KJK's contribution I look at the bigger picture and can see that she's done a lot of good stuff, sometimes flying solo but often alongside others (Venice and Julia among many others).

Some of her output (the billboard, the speakers corner events, the Harrop interview, for example) have been standout moments of this 'movement'. It is churlish to suggest otherwise.

Pointing out your inaccuracies is needling you?

Maybe don't misrepresent what I'm saying almost all of the time and I won't come back at you to point it out. I'm sick of you doing it to me also, frankly.

Pots and kettles spring to mind.

Yes. I've reported her as having misrepresented and goaded me throughout the entire thread.

No, I don't need to agree with everything. But I reserve the right to not like someone, even if they've done amazing things. It's like that show "evil genius" where they debate if people like Roald Dahl were evil, or genius.

I don't like KJK. Before these threads I didn't like her because she posted one of the few things I've seen on here that I felt was genuinely transphobic and it shocked me and has stayed with me. Long before all the Let Women Speak stuff.

Now I can also add "regurgitates far right conspiracy theories" and "is funded by American right orgs who also support Trump, Bannon and Truss" to the list, thanks to some posters on here. Despite the best efforts of people to shame those people into shutting up.

She can choose to do that but I don't have to like it. And I can choose to say that's why I don't like her.

That's the sort of thing that enables Tommy Robinson and his ilk to thrive, not "lefties".

She didn't say it was 'lefties' who did that, did she? She said it was the failure of the police to take action against the abusers, and the failure of the media to cover it, which led to people like Robinson speaking about it and making it into a race issue.

Julie Bindel said much the same thing.

Well over a decade ago I was interviewing these “deniers”, and being fobbed off by social workers, police officers, and some newspaper editors who refused to accept the scale of the abuse I and other campaigners (including the mothers of some of the victims) had uncovered.

Many years before the award-winning journalist Andrew Norfolk wrote his first piece about the grooming gangs in northern towns in England, I was investigating this phenomenon. But despite the quality of material I had amassed, it took me until 2007 to get my first piece published because some editors feared an accusation of racism. In this particular geographical area, many of the members of grooming gangs were of Pakistani origin. As a feminist who has always gone after the men who abuse women and girls, whichever social class or ethnic group they belong to, I was concerned that the story would only be told by racists. The British National Party (BNP) had been already been claiming that nasty Muslim “paedophiles” were preying on innocent white girls.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/three-girls-drama-child-sexual-exploitation-rochdale-blackpool-pimping-a7739006.html

She doesn't fact check her content.

I think saying she sometimes speaks without thinking or without checking before repeating what others have said is a fair criticism. But a lot of people do that, including lots of MPs who then look like utter muppets when their idiocy is recorded in Hansard.

But if she had come across one of the old news articles about Charlene Downes she might have just thought that repeating what was said in court at the time was a reasonable thing to do. There's a limit to how much fact checking someone's going to do for something as trivial as a youtube video. It's not a peer reviewed research paper, evidence before a court or a speech in parliament.

We did this before. Just scroll back, read it again

No thank you. You refused to engage with my arguments. Why would I need to read that again?

But if you think we 'did this before' you obviously didn't read my entire post.

Please ignore

I'm not interested in discussing the ins and outs with people desperate to prove to me that Muslims are more likely to be groomers. I find it islamophobic and right wing, and you are unlikely to persuade me otherwise unless you find actual statistics to prove the case.

It was covered extensively up thread, I'm not wasting any more of my time discussing my perspective on that with people who don't want to hear it.

But if she had come across one of the old news articles about Charlene Downes she might have just thought that repeating what was said in court at the time was a reasonable thing to do. There's a limit to how much fact checking someone's going to do for something as trivial as a youtube video. It's not a peer reviewed research paper, evidence before a court or a speech in parliament.

This.

There wasn't even really a failure to take action imo

No action was intended to be taken historically- this country genuinely believed children sold themselves and brought it on themselves (especially if you were in care, that was for the naughty kids not "vulnerable children")

Children were promiscuous or prostitutes or simply had older boyfriends or made poor choices in their company kept

When grooming began being language used for it... that's when the blame started shifting to the adults abusing

We'd had it for 20?? Ish years happening with poc groups before I saw and experienced that shift to blame adults not children and I felt that- bc I remember how ordinary folk used to look at me, and girls I lived with.

For some TR etc will be heroes, my view would be completely different if I witnessed it within one particular group of people only - I get pissed off with that. Bc ordinary folk didn't have different attitudes towards it or need it being spoken about and alarms raised to miss it happening actually...

I don't hold it against kjk but it irks me when people dismiss that no the problem isn't just sick fuckers from any nationality or religion- it just was not a problem for plenty of folk to let it happen to children.

From authorities down to Joe fucking bloggs. People who now go on protests over it... would not have given a shit, they didn't ... go back a few decades and children were always being exploited and the majority just accepted it

Who raised the alarm before the muslims getting here?

If you think I'm "desperate to prove that Muslims are more likely to be groomers" you obviously haven't understood my posts at all, so it's totally pointless for me to try to have any sort if discussion with you.

I certainly haven't said that I think that Muslims are more likely to be groomers and I honestly can't work out how you could possibly infer that from anything I've said.

She's alleged that we've been saying that throughout the thread. I've told needled her a few times that she's the only one saying that. But it's fallen on deaf ears again.

Lack of understanding, wilful misinterpretation or simply a bad faith actor?

I'm so sick of this constant claim we are all right wing on here.

It's lazy.

Unless the Conservatives have taken to making their membership cards look identical to Labours, even down to writing Labour on them!

You have to do the pee dance three times and then pray to the bigly letters god.

Dunno whether the Tories have...maybe UKIP / Reform? 🤔

I'm not a god! Yet!😏

I'm envious of bigly letters! 😭😩🤣

Adam doesn't think that. It's just deliberate straw manning. And nobody else would infer anything like it from your posts.