UK Politics Thread IX: The Masses Against the Classes

[Greater vakolicci haven]

People are convicted in the court of public opinion though, before a trial has even happened. Peoples names are published, and despite never being convicted they become exiled from public life; friends won't speak with them, organisations won't work with them, they get disowned by families. The victim is anonymous, the guy who's being investigated is not, and since for some reason women can't rape people, it's always a guy.
You see it in every part of society, people are expelled from political parties for 'aledged' sexual harassment, sportspeople are refused the ability to play based on alegations, businesses fire employees who are accused of it. While the aledged victim is protected, the accused is not: that is feminism, and that destroys lives.

That's a nice rant, but has nothing to do with your original argument being that feminism advocates female supremacy via different treatment under the law.

Most of your examples are societal or organizational responses to these accusations. Not legal.

The aledged victim gets anonymity, the accused does not. That is different treatment under the law, and it is the basis that the rest of the post inges on. Also, it is entirely the fault of feminism.

[Ostroeuropa]

When a white supremacist says white supremacy isn't racism, they basically are admitting to supporting racism, just using a daft definition of it nobody else agrees with. As I've pointed out, when someone claims feminism is about equality, it's like saying the klan is about equality. The conclusion you have to draw is that the speaker is either ignorant as to the activities of the movement, or is openly supporting those activities and denying the harm they do.

Nigel would throw out someone who said that.
The left wouldn't.

Like Gallo said, it's interesting.

Feminism is not inherently a discriminatory idea. (If anything it's so nebulous and variable it's not inherently anything) Trying to equate feminism with white supremacy is a false equivalence of galactic proportions and it's rather pathetic you thought we'd fall for it/have personally fallen for it.)

I disagree both in its historical and modern incarnations, given the way sexism is understood within feminist theories.

When something is calling for different groups to be given different treatments under the law, it definitely favours the supremacy of one particular group. Feminism is female supremacist.

Except not all feminists do that because feminism is not a fucking monolith, it's a goal for a variety of wildly different ideologies. It'd be like me suggesting you'd actually really love to bring in explicitly racially discriminatory immigration laws because you're a conservative and therefore inherently love the National Front.

During Denazification, 80% of Germans said they were horrified by the holocaust and it couldn't be justified. 70% also said they liked national socialism and we should give it another shot.

We do not judge hate movements by the opinions of rabble duped by charismatic psychopaths. We judge them by the impact It has on their outgroup once those psychopaths are given access to power.

You may as well go around claiming genocide is not an inherent part of Nazi ideology because the overwhelming majority didn't want a genocide.

Feminism has been tried in multiple countries and imposed in multiple countries, and the same toxic and nasty results arise in every case.

Don't beat yourself up.
He was going to come back around to it eventually anyway.

It is, if nothing else, an object lesson on why single issue politics is stupid.

Brexit tho. The entire country is getting in on single issue politics, i'm ahead of the curve on that one.

[The Archregimancy]

I can't make a formal ruling in a thread I actively participate in, but can I remind everyone that this isn't a thread about the general pros and cons of feminism.

I'd rather not find myself in the position of having to call in a colleague who can make a formal ruling; so perhaps let's try and focus on the actual thread topic for a bit.

[Selissu]

That's a nice rant, but has nothing to do with your original argument being that feminism advocates female supremacy via different treatment under the law.

Most of your examples are societal or organizational responses to these accusations. Not legal.

The aledged victim gets anonymity, the accused does not. That is different treatment under the law, and it is the basis that the rest of the post inges on. Also, it is entirely the fault of feminism.

Newspapers are only allowed to publish the names of accused rapists and are barred from reporting on any other type or class of suspect?

If so, that's certainly a problem, and one that should be addressed. But I suspect it's not the case.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

I can't make a formal ruling in a thread I actively participate in, but can I remind everyone that this isn't a thread about the general pros and cons of feminism.

I'd rather not find myself in the position of having to call in a colleague who can make a formal ruling; so perhaps let's try and focus on the actual thread topic for a bit.

Would you mind unlocking the proper thread for it then please?

[Alvecia]

I can't make a formal ruling in a thread I actively participate in, but can I remind everyone that this isn't a thread about the general pros and cons of feminism.

I'd rather not find myself in the position of having to call in a colleague who can make a formal ruling; so perhaps let's try and focus on the actual thread topic for a bit.

Would you mind unlocking the proper thread for it then please?

Just make a new one?

[An Alan Smithee Nation]

Feminism has done a lot for equality. Nan Winton died recently, when I was a child she was the first woman to read the national news on the BBC. She was quickly removed as the BBC executives thought women were too frivolous to read serious news. We've come along way forward because of it. Something that might be lost on young people who didn't see the process at work.

[Ostroeuropa]

The aledged victim gets anonymity, the accused does not. That is different treatment under the law, and it is the basis that the rest of the post inges on. Also, it is entirely the fault of feminism.

Newspapers are only allowed to publish the names of accused rapists and are barred from reporting on any other type or class of suspect?

If so, that's certainly a problem, and one that should be addressed. But I suspect it's not the case.

In the UK, the papers can publish in general about criminals and victims of criminals, except in certain circumstances where it's a sexual crime and the victim is protected, or a child is the victim and/or criminal. I think only the "Don't publish childrens names in relation to crime" is mandated by law, and the former is just a practice adopted after being lobbied on the issue.

[The Rich Port]

Would you mind unlocking the proper thread for it then please?

Just make a new one?

And what, prove that chasing that point is a black hole of misogyny and cockamamie stories? Not likely.

Next thing you know we're gonna have an incel thread and that's going to be somehow more pointless.

[Alvecia]

Just make a new one?

And what, prove that chasing that point is a black hole of misogyny and cockamamie stories? Not likely.

Next thing you know we're gonna have an incel thread and that's going to be somehow more pointless.

Didn't we already have one of those?

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Just make a new one?

And what, prove that chasing that point is a black hole of misogyny and cockamamie stories? Not likely.

Next thing you know we're gonna have an incel thread and that's going to be somehow more pointless.

Ostro's posts are not more misogyny and false stories, he makes a lot of good arguments. He just makes a few bad arguments as well.

[Selissu]

Newspapers are only allowed to publish the names of accused rapists and are barred from reporting on any other type or class of suspect?

If so, that's certainly a problem, and one that should be addressed. But I suspect it's not the case.

In the UK, the papers can publish in general about criminals and victims of criminals, except in certain circumstances where it's a sexual crime and the victim is protected, or a child is the victim and/or criminal. I think only the "Don't publish childrens names in relation to crime" is mandated by law, and the former is just a practice adopted after being lobbied on the issue.

Thanks for the clarification.

I assume you have information on inequalities or inconsistencies in British law with regards to female-on-male sexual assault/rape vs the opposite? I'd very much like to learn more, since I know that's a problem in America.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Yes, as we all know, that was considered to be violent harassment. That's why Meechan was charged with and convicted of making grossly offensive communications in breach of the Communications Act.

It was the video of him saying "Gas the Jews!" and "Seig heil!" that was the problem, you see, not the training the dog.

Context is everything.

"Your Honour, I seriously meant no harm when I called for the extinction of millions of people by the most abhorrent method imaginable, for You see, I meant it as a joke Your Honour."

[Greater vakolicci haven]

In the UK, the papers can publish in general about criminals and victims of criminals, except in certain circumstances where it's a sexual crime and the victim is protected, or a child is the victim and/or criminal. I think only the "Don't publish childrens names in relation to crime" is mandated by law, and the former is just a practice adopted after being lobbied on the issue.

Thanks for the clarification.

I assume you have information on inequalities or inconsistencies in British law with regards to female-on-male sexual assault/rape vs the opposite? I'd very much like to learn more, since I know that's a problem in America.

Sure I have a journal article on this somewhere, I'll try and find it.

[Ostroeuropa]

Context is everything.

"Your Honour, I seriously meant no harm when I called for the extinction of millions of people by the most abhorrent method imaginable, for You see, I meant it as a joke Your Honour."

If your ideology has prevented you from being able to communicate effectively with other people and understand them, and furthermore convinced you that deliberately refusing to understand them is a morally righteous act, That's not a good sign.

He is creating a humorous situation where the context of those words produces humor. He is not engaging in the act of calling for the genocide of Jews. Like performatism. When you say "I promise", you aren't just saying you promise, you are in fact giving a promise. In this situation, he is saying "Gas the jews", but he is not calling for the gassing of Jews, and that is obvious from the context of the situation, much like Iffreann hasn't just done a Meechan by saying those words, and nor have I.

This is how we can interpret some words as a threat against someone, even if the literal content of those words is not a threat. Through context. That works in reverse too.

Do you think Meechan was actually calling for the extinction of millions of people in terms of the performative impact of his words, or do you think he was saying the words "Gas the jews" with a different performative impact.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Context is everything.

"Your Honour, I seriously meant no harm when I called for the extinction of millions of people by the most abhorrent method imaginable, for You see, I meant it as a joke Your Honour."

"Gas the Jews"

Was the three words above me calling for extermination of millions of people? If not, neither was Meechan's utterance of the phrase. If so, arrest me.

[Platypus Bureaucracy]

My dad, for the last couple of weeks: "I'm going to vote for the Brexit Party as a protest. I know I voted Remain, but I just want them to get on with it now."

Also my dad, moments before leaving for the polling station: "Oh God, I can't vote for Farage, can I? I just can't. It just feels wrong. It'd be like voting for Gary Glitter."

Anyway, he voted for the Female Supremacist Party, because he's a cuck or summat. I voted Labour in order to further the evil progressive movement and the destruction of society we strive for.

[Ostroeuropa]

"Your Honour, I seriously meant no harm when I called for the extinction of millions of people by the most abhorrent method imaginable, for You see, I meant it as a joke Your Honour."

"Gas the Jews"

Was the three words above me calling for extermination of millions of people? If not, neither was Meechan's utterance of the phrase. If so, arrest me.

"Your honor, according to the logic of the progressive left, I can't be held accountable. I told them to take care of Mr Brown, not drop him in a river with concrete round his ankles. That aint taking care of someone, that's the opposite of that! You should ignore all context to the words i'm giving and the action i'm performing by saying those words though. That'd be bad."

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

My dad, for the last couple of weeks: "I'm going to vote for the Brexit Party as a protest. I know I voted Remain, but I just want them to get on with it now."

Also my dad, moments before leaving for the polling station: "Oh God, I can't vote for Farage, can I? I just can't. It just feels wrong. It'd be like voting for Gary Glitter."

Anyway, he voted for the Female Supremacist Party, because he's a cuck or summat. I voted Labour in order to further the evil progressive movement and the destruction of society we strive for.

The Female Supremacist Party? Is that a thing that exists?

[Platypus Bureaucracy]

My dad, for the last couple of weeks: "I'm going to vote for the Brexit Party as a protest. I know I voted Remain, but I just want them to get on with it now."

Also my dad, moments before leaving for the polling station: "Oh God, I can't vote for Farage, can I? I just can't. It just feels wrong. It'd be like voting for Gary Glitter."

Anyway, he voted for the Female Supremacist Party, because he's a cuck or summat. I voted Labour in order to further the evil progressive movement and the destruction of society we strive for.

The Female Supremacist Party? Is that a thing that exists?

Women's Equality, Female Supremacist. I hear it's all the same.

[Arayas]

Democracy is amazing, if the establishment doesn't get the correct result they can just ignore it and propogandize against it until they get the vote they want.

I'm sure if remain had passed they would have called another vote to leave the EU.

Out of objective fairness ensuring that everyone was properly "educated" on the matter as that is such a common aside to most elections.

[The Free Joy State]

Democracy is amazing, if the establishment doesn't get the correct result they can just ignore it and propogandize against it until they get the vote they want.

I'm sure if remain had passes they would have called another vote to leave the EU.

Possibly not, but Nigel Farage probably would have done.

The question of a second referendum was raised by Mr Farage in an interview with the Mirror in which he said: "In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way. If the Remain campaign win two-thirds to one-third that ends it."

Strange how quickly he decided the vote was definitive when the referendum swung, narrowly, towards Brexit.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Democracy is amazing, if the establishment doesn't get the correct result they can just ignore it and propogandize against it until they get the vote they want.

I'm sure if remain had passed they would have called another vote to leave the EU.

Out of objective fairness ensuring that everyone was properly "educated" on the matter as that is such a common aside to most elections.

At least it's better than Fascism.

[Philjia]

I voted Green, obviously.

[Arayas]

Democracy is amazing, if the establishment doesn't get the correct result they can just ignore it and propogandize against it until they get the vote they want.

I'm sure if remain had passes they would have called another vote to leave the EU.

Possibly not, but Nigel Farage probably would have done.

The question of a second referendum was raised by Mr Farage in an interview with the Mirror in which he said: "In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way. If the Remain campaign win two-thirds to one-third that ends it."

Strange how quickly he decided the vote was definitive when the referendum swung, narrowly, towards Brexit.

He would have wanted it, but he wouldn't have gotten it.