Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions
Thread gallery
6
Imnobody4 · 19/02/2026 20:55

Saw this earlier. Julie hitting nail on head as usual.
Dear Jane, I doubt you will only say this once,....

RhymesWithOrange · 19/02/2026 20:56

Julie is spot on. JCJ lost the plot some time ago.

catspyjamas1 · 19/02/2026 21:03

Imnobody4 · 19/02/2026 20:55

Saw this earlier. Julie hitting nail on head as usual.
Dear Jane, I doubt you will only say this once,....

🤣

OP posts:
catspyjamas1 · 19/02/2026 21:04

RhymesWithOrange · 19/02/2026 20:56

Julie is spot on. JCJ lost the plot some time ago.

I wasn't sure but a couple of days ago she reshared a post about Musk, Sacks and Thiel that was categorically wrong - and batshit.

OP posts:
TheywontletmehavethenameIwant · 19/02/2026 21:04

Wow, no punches pulled there, well said JB, it's the hypocrisy with the moral cowardice that pisses me off the most as well.

Pingponghavoc · 19/02/2026 21:18

If anyone is unsure what the issue are, Julie has just recorded an excellent podcast with Winston Marshall. Its worth an hour of anyones time.

HildegardP · 19/02/2026 21:57

catspyjamas1 · 19/02/2026 20:27

Entirely fair.

SionnachRuadh · 19/02/2026 23:25

Seems entirely fair to me. I don't always agree with Julie, but I appreciate that she calls things as she sees them.

I can't be doing with JCJ and her passive-aggressive "I'm not actually comparing you to Hitler, but..." flapdoodle.

TempestTost · 20/02/2026 00:01

SionnachRuadh · 19/02/2026 23:25

Seems entirely fair to me. I don't always agree with Julie, but I appreciate that she calls things as she sees them.

I can't be doing with JCJ and her passive-aggressive "I'm not actually comparing you to Hitler, but..." flapdoodle.

Yes, I am here too.

I will say that I am not sure that JB has totally understood the nature of left wing racism, which is not only about trying to protect their other ideas but I believe is a thing in itself. But maybe it was just outside the scope of her comment.

SionnachRuadh · 20/02/2026 00:08

TempestTost · 20/02/2026 00:01

Yes, I am here too.

I will say that I am not sure that JB has totally understood the nature of left wing racism, which is not only about trying to protect their other ideas but I believe is a thing in itself. But maybe it was just outside the scope of her comment.

Having family ties to more than one disfavoured group, I sometimes think a lot about left wing racism.

But Julie has good priorities and good motives, and I believe she's honest about what she sees. That's enough for me, even if I think there are some things she doesn't completely see.

moto748e · 20/02/2026 00:15

I agree with most of what Julie says, but I'm not at all convinced by

The police are not scared of being called racist

I think that is an undeniable factor. Funnily enough, they don't seem to be at all bothered about misogyny; see the most receent example with their treatment of one of their own, Victoria Tomkins.

WhereYouLeftIt · 20/02/2026 00:26

For me, Julie and Jane are coming from two different places,

Julie is a journalist - she has investigated some fucking horrors and she cannot forget what she has seen and heard.

Jane is an academic - whilst she has examined concepts, she hasn't been at the coalface as Julie has; and whilst sometimes distance can lend perspective, it can also just end in distance.

On balance, I tend to Julie's take on matters.

UtopiaPlanitia · 20/02/2026 00:49

Here's the post on Nitter for those without TwiX accounts:

https://nitter.net/bindelj/status/2024546412063490217#m

HildegardP · 20/02/2026 00:59

moto748e · 20/02/2026 00:15

I agree with most of what Julie says, but I'm not at all convinced by

The police are not scared of being called racist

I think that is an undeniable factor. Funnily enough, they don't seem to be at all bothered about misogyny; see the most receent example with their treatment of one of their own, Victoria Tomkins.

The Winston Marshall podcast interview mentioned above clarifies that, I paraphrase; the police don't care about being called racist, they care about the potential for race riots, about the inconvient possible effects of thoroughly investigating the abuse of these girls, because they don't much care about them either.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 20/02/2026 03:52

Well said, Julie.

teawamutu · 20/02/2026 07:25

WhereYouLeftIt · 20/02/2026 00:26

For me, Julie and Jane are coming from two different places,

Julie is a journalist - she has investigated some fucking horrors and she cannot forget what she has seen and heard.

Jane is an academic - whilst she has examined concepts, she hasn't been at the coalface as Julie has; and whilst sometimes distance can lend perspective, it can also just end in distance.

On balance, I tend to Julie's take on matters.

This is so brilliantly put. Nailed it.

TheCriticalThinker · 20/02/2026 07:30

Totally agree with Bindel.

JCJ is so obsessed with being seen not to be racist that she's lost the plot and now says things that are clearly untrue.

GenderlessVoid · 20/02/2026 07:33

NB: I don't know either of their positions well. I'm getting my info solely from X. I don't read X often so I've missed most of the controversy.

Jane posted that
"Fear of being labelled racist was one factor. The other major factor that is being consistenly erased in the way then populist right are weaponsing this story, is that the justice services deal terribly with sexual violence in general, because our society doesn't gaf about it."

https://x.com/grace_hawthorn/status/2024485445803909282

https://nitter.net/grace_hawthorn/status/2024485445803909282

Julie posted that
"The police are not scared of being called racist, contrary to popular belief, but they ARE scared of having to deal with what they would refer to as "race riots", and any fallout that targeting particular sections of hardline Islamist populations provokes. This is because these men are scary, and the police don’t give a damn, in the main, about the victims."

I can see some disagreement here but it seems to me that both broadly agree that (1) in general, the police, social services, etc don't GAF about the girls who were abused, whether the perps were Pakistani or British and (2) right wing political parties are using the scandal to stir up racism. The main disagreement seems to be

"Leftists capitulate so hard to these extremists ("because Imperialism, my enemy's enemy", yada, yada) that the default position has been to ignore the evidence and defend the indefensible." - Julie

Is that a fair summary?

Just to be clear, I think it was vile if Jane accused one of the grooming gang survivors of being a racist, as Julie said. But I also agree with Jane that it's despicable and counterproductive to call those who enabled the abuse or looked the other way "evil cockroaches", as Rupert Lowe tweeted.

Grace Hawthorn Poundshop Prefect (@grace_hawthorn) on X

@janeclarejones @uberman21 all of this, it was also about the class of the victims & about the entire failure to care about them. or to care about the victims who were not white. it's the perfect storm of intersectionality, actually. the *only* rea...

https://x.com/grace_hawthorn/status/2024485445803909282

WarriorN · 20/02/2026 07:45

HildegardP · 20/02/2026 00:59

The Winston Marshall podcast interview mentioned above clarifies that, I paraphrase; the police don't care about being called racist, they care about the potential for race riots, about the inconvient possible effects of thoroughly investigating the abuse of these girls, because they don't much care about them either.

@ POWeast (can’t remember full mn name) has made good points about this before; hope she swings by to elaborate; there haven’t been race riots in the NE and prosecutions for local grooming gangs has been quicker and more effective .

WarriorN · 20/02/2026 07:46

Too many ; sorry, still blurry eyed!

Pingponghavoc · 20/02/2026 09:02

JCJ demonstrates JB theory.

JCJ own prejudices allow her to assume that any right winger talking about the grooming gangs is motivated by racism, not disgust. It means that every time the gangs are talked about she switches it to talking about racism against these communities, and not the rapes.

I believe her when she says she's horrified, and want the perpetrators in prison, but she trying to stop people to talk about it freely. This attitude means that people are unaware of the extent of the crimes, the crime rings and the clanish attitudes and just how many people allow this to happen.

People are disgusted at the crime, and want the authories to put a stop to it. Putting the perpetrator in prison isnt enough to stop this. The attitudes and the crime rings still exist

Its as if JCJ thinks that recognising this is racist rather than an attempt to stop the crimes.

Sammidge · 20/02/2026 09:04

Thanks for posting that, catspj.

But damn - I always have to make a conscious effort to remember that "it's BINDEL. Not the other one! BINDEL!"

KitWyn · 20/02/2026 11:05

I'm not particularly concerned about the in-fighting. Without Stasi-esque control and punishment of anyone who dares goes off message, some people will disagree loudly and in public. It's fine.

But it's very disappointing of JCJ. I agree with her, that the average UK police constable/sergeant isn't particularly 'woke'. Most will be annoyed by preferred pronouns etc. and strongly disapprove of a policy where searches on trans women are carried out by female officers. A minority will be regrettably captured and behave twattishly accordingly, but these are vastly outnumbered by the indifferent/active eye rollers to the latest DEI initiative announced by a dutiful Chief Superintendent.

But at higher police ranks, there IS great emphasis placed on 'Diversity & Inclusion'. There are expectations as to what must be said in public and to junior officers, and what can never be uttered. To become an inspector or higher there is a script here which must be followed exactly.

And even at the lowest ranks there's a powerful desire to do what makes their life/job easiest. Policing areas with high Muslim populations is a challenge. Cousin marriages mean these are typically very clannish and no-one talks to the police. Some suspects or potential witnesses will not (or claim not) to speak good English and require an expensive interpreter.

There will be a small number of Muslim community 'leaders', always men, who may agree to talk with the local police. But it's usually very much on their terms. Their information is unreliable/biased and they will expect to get something in return for their cooperation. Not ideal, but for the police it's better than nothing at all.

And the Police are very aware of the nightmare that racial tensions can cause. In 2022, there were terrible clashes between Hindus and Muslims in Leicester that started because of a cricket match. It's that fragile.

So when desperately worried parents/teachers/social workers reported their fears or even the actual behaviours of the Muslim grooming/rape gangs, the Police did not want to hear it. They firmly closed their ears, eyes and mouths.

Investigating these child rape & torture gangs would require massive amounts of very difficult and very expensive police work. And their bosses would hate it. Nothing good would come of this for the rank and file police officers.

They were fearful of dealing with this issue primarily BECAUSE the child rapists were British Pakistani/Bangladeshi Muslim rather than British White. White child gang rapists would be much easier to investigate. Some people within families/community will likely co-operate/give evidence, no interpreters needed, and rioting is very unlikely. And their promotion prospects will not be damaged, may even improve.

So the rapists & torturers of thousands of mainly young white girls were given a free pass because the child rapists were British Pakistani/Bangladeshi Muslim and not white.

Which is all very much racist, so JCJ is horribly, stupidly and cruelly wrong on this.

JB is right.

Sammidge · 20/02/2026 18:45

I think so too. Excellent posts here.

HildegardP · 20/02/2026 20:35

Pingponghavoc · 20/02/2026 09:02

JCJ demonstrates JB theory.

JCJ own prejudices allow her to assume that any right winger talking about the grooming gangs is motivated by racism, not disgust. It means that every time the gangs are talked about she switches it to talking about racism against these communities, and not the rapes.

I believe her when she says she's horrified, and want the perpetrators in prison, but she trying to stop people to talk about it freely. This attitude means that people are unaware of the extent of the crimes, the crime rings and the clanish attitudes and just how many people allow this to happen.

People are disgusted at the crime, and want the authories to put a stop to it. Putting the perpetrator in prison isnt enough to stop this. The attitudes and the crime rings still exist

Its as if JCJ thinks that recognising this is racist rather than an attempt to stop the crimes.

The most effective organised crime structures are those rooted in clan & family networks. If bien pensants in the UK can grasp that about the 'Ndrangheta, Camorra, Brise de Mer, Los Zitas, & so on, why do they insist on feigning incomprehension when faced with the same thing but with a little more melanin?