www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25413704
I heard the original interview - whilst the argument was a rational and reasonable one, Caroline Criado-Perez came across as the most irritating of people. Whilst the trolling that went on afterwards was disgusting and horrendous and totally indefensible, she appeared on the radio yesterday afternoon following the much publicsed Court Case, she complaind about everyone and anyone and her extreme trauma - Seems she was too traumatized to log on to her Twitter account for some considrable time. Maybe as a journalist she should spend some time investigating the abuse of women and children in places like Syria and Afghanistan....I think she needs to get out a bit more.
|
She came over as a militant feminist speaking in feminese. The Private Eye 'Wimmin' feature came to mind. Still a legitimate point of view though.
I thought it a graphic and thought provoking demonstration of how 'cyber-stalking' can affect the victim.
She described some of the threats made but appeared to be constrained by other cases that are still ongoing. Once you believe 'they' might really get you it's easy to see how she became traumatised.
The fact that worse happens in Syria or Afghan is neither here nor there.
|
>> She came over as a militant feminist speaking in feminese. The Private Eye 'Wimmin' feature
>> came to mind. Still a legitimate point of view though.
>>
>> I thought it a graphic and thought provoking demonstration of how 'cyber-stalking' can affect the
>> victim.
>>
>> She described some of the threats made but appeared to be constrained by other cases
>> that are still ongoing. Once you believe 'they' might really get you it's easy to
>> see how she became traumatised.
>>
>> The fact that worse happens in Syria or Afghan is neither here nor there.
>>
>>
+1
(Reading some accounts the woman stalker appears a bit short iof mental capacity.)
|
|
If she is going to stick her head up and campaign publicly, she should be prepared to debate and fight her corner not whinge like a spoilt little kid. She is a pretty poor example of womanhood and should shut her trap because she does more harm than good.
|
>> should shut her trap because she does more harm than good.
Oh come on Zero... what's she harming exactly? The cluster of feminist causes we all know are so dear to your heart?
All she wanted was to see Jane Austen's mug on banknotes in addition to Britannia's. What's wrong with that? You surely don't agree with the nasty Facebook/Twitter bullies. So why should she 'shut her trap', even if we don't want to hear what the bullies said? Tchah!
|
>> If she is going to stick her head up and campaign publicly, she should be
>> prepared to debate and fight her corner not whinge like a spoilt little kid. She
>> is a pretty poor example of womanhood and should shut her trap because she does
>> more harm than good.
I doubt she'd be restrained from debate. OTOH repeated threats of rape etc are another issue altogether.
|
When I was at Safeway we had a CEO called Carlos Criadez Perez who was fondly known as the mad Argentinian!! Had some crazy ideas on how to improve sales........
Wonder if they are related
EDIT - just checked Wikipedia - she is his daughter!
Last edited by: BobbyG on Wed 8 Jan 14 at 16:11
|
>> I doubt she'd be restrained from debate. OTOH repeated threats of rape etc are another
>> issue altogether.
>
So she is not bright enough to realise its just on-line talk and not at all actually likely to happen and therefore nothing to get frightened about? Too stupid to remain calm and focussed to use those comments and further her cause?
Last edited by: Zero on Wed 8 Jan 14 at 17:07
|
>> not bright enough
>> Too stupid to remain calm and focussed
Doesn't seem to be an absence of intellect as such, more a question of panic which doth sometimes make headless chickens of us all. I too thought she had put herself a bit in the wrong by taking that stuff too seriously. But Herself, who is far from stupid and terrifyingly steady under fire, sympathised with her, adding: 'Of course, to you she's only a woman.'
It's a dog's life sometimes for a reasonable man.
|
>> So she is not bright enough to realise its just on-line talk and not at
>> all actually likely to happen and therefore nothing to get frightened about? Too stupid to
>> remain calm and focussed to use those comments and further her cause?
Similar issue as the cyber bullying in schools that's been in the news today, the message is relentless.
Even if irrational, the fear of what might happen can leap up and take hold. At that point it becomes reality and distorts logical thought.
|
>> Similar issue as the cyber bullying in schools that's been in the news today, the
>> message is relentless.
Nothing like. Cyber bullying in school is directed at vulnerable kids who try not to be a target, and have insufficient life experience to cope.
This woman has life experience, and more made herself an obvious target by courting publicity. She is a dish it out merchant but can't cope when it comes the other way.
|
>> She is a dish it out merchant but can't cope when it comes the other
>> way.
Edit: to late to add, Its not so much the things that were said on line, they are indefensible, its the way she is now handling it, whining like a tiny child that the police are not doing it her way, ignoring legal process, and generally behaving like a spoilt brat. Completely unsuited to furthering anyones cause.
|
>> Even if irrational, the fear of what might happen can leap up and take hold.
>> At that point it becomes reality and distorts logical thought.
>>
She's used this to further her cause...milked it to the nth degree.
Those two tits deserved something for being so unpleasant...but the recipient hasn't handled it at all well either.
|
>> She's used this to further her cause...milked it to the nth degree.
And in her position you'd not do the same?
Putting a woman on a banknote's not exactly cheering for the IRA or even at a soccer level of tribalism. If the oafs insulting her didn't see that she might milk it as patriarchal wot not they're even more stupid than they look.
|
>> >> She's used this to further her cause...milked it to the nth degree.
>>
>> And in her position you'd not do the same?
>>
>> Putting a woman on a banknote's not exactly cheering for the IRA or even at
>> a soccer level of tribalism. If the oafs insulting her didn't see that she might
>> milk it as patriarchal wot not they're even more stupid than they look.
All she's done is prove their scorn was justified.
|
>> Putting a woman on a banknote's not exactly cheering for the IRA or even at
>> a soccer level of tribalism. If the oafs insulting her didn't see that she might
>> milk it as patriarchal wot not they're even more stupid than they look.
>>
Personally, I think that if you are a 'minority'...and...are under represented....you fight hard to prove your worth, not have more of your 'minority' turn up for free just to up the numbers.
That insults those that have achieved (either the 'minority' that made it, the 'majority' that have made it, or the 'majority' that was not put forward because an unqualified 'minority' took their place).
If Jane Austen was deserving of putting on a bank note and a load of men sidetracked her unnecessarily..and this was pointed out..fair enough. If however there were plenty of more worthy male contenders and this lady's campaign has usurped a few, then she's plain wrong and the protesters had a point (albeit they were very wrong in how they expressed it).
Last edited by: Westpig on Thu 9 Jan 14 at 09:38
|
>> If Jane Austen was deserving of putting on a bank note and a load of
>> men sidetracked her unnecessarily..and this was pointed out..fair enough. If however there were plenty of
>> more worthy male contenders and this lady's campaign has usurped a few, then she's plain
>> wrong and the protesters had a point (albeit they were very wrong in how they
>> expressed it).
I don't see how you could create some sort of league table ranking those more>less deserving of being put on a banknote. Is Telford more or less worthy than Brindley? Ralph Vaughan-Williams or George Butterworth? Are engineers or composers more or less worthy than soldiers; Haig or Montgomery of Alamein?
There are four English banknotes and designs change maybe every ten years so it'll take a century or more to get past the top 20.
Instead you surely have to go for some sort of cross section which should be representative of society. It's unreasonable for that not to include a woman. At some point we also need a person from an ethnic minority. I nominate local hero Walter Tull en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Tull.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Thu 9 Jan 14 at 11:16
|
I suspect the problem is the full stop. Let's try again:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Tull
|
>> . I nominate local hero Walter Tull
>> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Tull.
So you're saying there ought to be a female and someone from an ethnic minority ..automatically... just to represent society....rather than select someone for their merit(s) regardless of their background / gender/ race/ etc.
Are you not being 'ist'?
You are selecting people by gender/race...why not consider them all equal in the first place..and just select those you think are most suitable for the banknote..regardless of any other factors...and...
...as for many, many years it's been a man's world and that has only fairly recently begun to change....and as the population of this country is mostly white, (over 90%)..then there's agood chance it'll end up being an oldish white bloke.
If Walter Tull had been a local white man..and had achieved in his life what he did..he wouldn't be anywhere near the running..so why should he just because of his skin colour or background.
|
I'm saying that given the number of candidates and the massive field of achievements in the history of the UK it's impossible to decide purely on merit. Not necessarily that the £10 note be reserved in perpetuity for women but that as broadly 50% of society they should be represented.
We've had Florence Nightingale and Jane Austen is lined up for the future. Plenty more out there, Amy Johnson, Rosalind Franklin, the Pnkhursts or even (god forbid!) Maggie T.
A white man from an orphanage background getting to the top of professional football and being a field officer in the Army before dying in service would be worthy. To have achieved that as a black man in the early years of the twentieth century, when racism was not just institutional but formalised, means the bar was even higher.
|
>> I'm saying that given the number of candidates and the massive field of achievements in
>> the history of the UK it's impossible to decide purely on merit.
Why? Give me a list of candidates, I could decide in an hour. Put five of us in a room and we'd have a consensus in three hours.
>> Not necessarily that
>> the £10 note be reserved in perpetuity for women but that as broadly 50% of
>> society they should be represented.
Why? Why not have the highest achievers, whoever they are.
If women had a bum deal in history and for the time being are not that well represented as the highest achievers...so be it..that's historical fact. I've no problem with changing things to ensure equality for the future..but I do have a problem with pretence..and putting someone in falsely.
>>
>> We've had Florence Nightingale and Jane Austen is lined up for the future. Plenty more
>> out there, Amy Johnson, Rosalind Franklin, the Pnkhursts or even (god forbid!) Maggie T.
You should have said earlier....I'd agree with Maggie being on there..but there again she was a very high achiever.
>>
>> A white man from an orphanage background getting to the top of professional football and
>> being a field officer in the Army before dying in service would be worthy. To
>> have achieved that as a black man in the early years of the twentieth century,
>> when racism was not just institutional but formalised, means the bar was even higher.
He did very well...but his achievements as good as they are...are eclipsed by many others. Fact.
|
|
Why not have a currency without pictures of people on the bank notes . We could adopt a currency that just has pictures of fictitious buildings. Problem sorted. :-)
|
>> Why not have a currency without pictures of people on the bank notes . We
>> could adopt a currency that just has pictures of fictitious buildings. Problem sorted. :-)
We could also use organisations instead of people. The Air Transport Auxiliary or the Women's Land Army would be excellent examples to honour women.
|
>> Put five
>> of us in a room and we'd have a consensus in three hours.
Three of them are women.....
Seriously, the consensus thing is presumably more or less what the BofE do now, albeit with a group likely to be larger than 5.
|
>> >> Put five
>> >> of us in a room and we'd have a consensus in three hours.
>>
>> Three of them are women.....
Hmm...are you hinting that the three women would be less than objective?...that they'd want 'one of their own' in, rather than sticking to any criteria?
I do hope not.
|
>> Hmm...are you hinting that the three women would be less than objective?...that they'd want 'one
>> of their own' in, rather than sticking to any criteria?
I read it to mean that if you put three women in a room, you'd get about 27 opinions and 0 decisions.
|
|
... and I read it as a humorous throw away.
|
>> ... and I read it as a humorous throw away.
In part it was but in doing so of course I displayed the unconscious sexism or even mysogony that potentialy affects the sort of selection process we're talking of.
|
>> in doing so of course I displayed the unconscious sexism or even mysogony
Bromptonaut is an example to many here, generally careful and considerate in his use of words but prepared to admit to being influenced by prevailing bigotries.
It does make a change from seeing women who aren't tarts and are plainly very capable being described as 'stupid tarts' who ought to 'shut their gobs'. One wonders sometimes whether people are aware of the impression they give with this sort of language. They may think they 'don't care' one way or the other. But do they understand how stuff like that reads? Somehow I doubt it.
|
>> Bromptonaut is an example to many here, generally careful and considerate in his use of
>> words but prepared to admit to being influenced by prevailing bigotries.
Chhrrriiiissssttt...some of you Lefties are unreal.
We ALL have our moments..we are human beings.
Stop moralising, then making the same mistakes yourselves.
|
Come on, cut Bromp some slack, Guys...he's missing the stimulation of full time work at the moment and we're getting the fall out;)
Pat
|
>> Come on, cut Bromp some slack, Guys...he's missing the stimulation of full time work at
>> the moment and we're getting the fall out;)
No, no..give him his due..he came out with a damned good angle.
|
>> Chhrrriiiissssttt...some of you Lefties are unreal.
>> We ALL have our moments..we are human beings.
>> Stop moralising, then making the same mistakes yourselves.
Ow! Yaroo! Leggo! Heh heh... quite right Wp, quite agree, nothing worse than a whinging hypocrite of a lefty, no sense of loyalty, no principles, in fact let that be a lesson to you Bromptonaut.
:o}
|
>> >> Chhrrriiiissssttt...some of you Lefties are unreal.
>>
>> >> We ALL have our moments..we are human beings.
>>
>> >> Stop moralising, then making the same mistakes yourselves.
>>
>> Ow! Yaroo! Leggo! Heh heh... quite right Wp, quite agree, nothing worse than a whinging
>> hypocrite of a lefty, no sense of loyalty, no principles, in fact let that be
>> a lesson to you Bromptonaut.
>>
>> :o}
>>
ROFLMAO!!
|
>> Hmm...are you hinting that the three women would be less than objective?...that they'd want 'one
>> of their own' in, rather than sticking to any criteria?
>>
>> I do hope not.
I'm saying women might view the criteria differently.
Women's contribution to Science for example is consistently underplayed.
The elucidation of DNA is attributed to Crick and Watson. Yet much of the legwork, particularly X-ray crystallography, was done by Rosalind Franklin.
|
>> I don't see how you could create some sort of league table
>>
>> There are four English banknotes and designs change maybe every ten years so it'll take
>> a century or more to get past the top 20.
Well, if you insist on positive discrimination....and think a selection process is unrealistic, how will you choose between:
- LGBT
- female
- BEM
- disabled
...or should they all be represented? If not, how do you rate who is more important than the other?
Trouble is, with only 4 categories, that leaves behind the heterosexual, white, non disabled, man..of which there are a fair chunk of us in society...and historically, for whatever reasons..and to date.....they are a fairly high percentage of the ones in the achievers pool that would be considered for the note..
..because:
- LGBT is about 10% of the population
- female about 50%
- BEM about 9%
- disabled (varying degree, but world figures are about 15%)
There should be no positive discrimination, it is as morally wrong as negative discrimination. Discrimination is discrimination, full stop.
|
"...its just on-line talk and not at all actually likely to happen..."
That's a pretty dangerous argument.
One guy threatens another. That's illegal. His defence is, it wouldn't have happened, I wasn't going to do it. Yeah, right.
Makes no difference that it's online.
|
|
If some drunken six foot ape came up to me, nose to nose, in my local and threatened to beat me within an inch of my life I would be far more concerned than if a similar threat was made online.
|
It seems it's not just you Rob. And I agree she sounds like the most irritating person.
But to honest I think I would be peed off if the CPS were tweeting stuff like that. They shouldn't be tweeting at all IMO, but in any event when they release stuff that is likely to have a personal impact on individuals they should have the courtesy to tell warn them.
Quite a few here seem to think the threatening messages were trivial. I disagree strongly.
This woman received literally hundreds of threats of physical harm or death.
.*******
There is a revolution taking place, in case anybody hadn't noticed. Domino's Pizza's trading statement recently revealed that 65% of its UK delivery orders now come via the internet, mostly from mobile phones. Criminal behaviour is moving online too, and just because 99% of twitfacers are just keyboard warriors doesn't mean the real thugs aren't there too.
|
John Nimmo and Isabella Sorley both got short custodial sentences. Nimmo 8 weeks and Sorley 12, hers was longer on account of her previous form and drunkenness.
www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Judgments/r-v-nimmo-and-sorley.pdf
Stella Creasy MP was subjected to similar abuse.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Mon 27 Jan 14 at 09:06
|
>> Stella Creasy MP was subjected to similar abuse.
Which case has now come to court as well.
www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/may/19/twitter-labour-mp-stella-creasy-court
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Mon 19 May 14 at 14:54
|
Man who sent offensive tweets re Stella Creasy found guilty:
www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/02/stella-creasy-rape-threats-a-joke
When will they ever learn.
|
Is it just me again ? - Bromptonaut
