New Anarchafeminist Magazine from Dublin

215 posts / 0 new
Last post
AndrewF's picture
AndrewF
Offline
Joined: 28-02-05
Oct 26 2006 13:30
revol68 wrote:
See being a prole who has no desire to be respected for my work, or feeling that it deserves respect I take issue with this. I've got news for you, most proles get no respect for their work and never expect to. Your post reads like typical middle class "annoyance" that all your hardwork and intelligence is fundamentally pointless.

Revol this is the stupidest thing I have seen you write in some time and quite disgraceful in the context of the thread and the post you are responding to. It can be quite difficult to go public about sexual harrassement because women often expect to be ridiculed when they do so.

You may be a bitter ex student in a slacker job but your contribution above is far more punk rock than class struggle however much you label yourself a 'prole' and another ex student as 'middle class'. There are hosts of workers who take some pride in their work most often because it has some socially useful element to it. Health workers would be one obvious example but so too are education workers.

In this case you are particularly clueless as your also actually talking about a type of work where getting recognition for work done is central to getting off one year contracts and your talking to someone who has been stuck on those contracts for many years now quite probably due in a good part to the problems of sexist attitudes in the workplace she was trying to outline.

I think an apology is owed!

Joseph Kay's picture
Joseph Kay
Offline
Joined: 14-03-06
Oct 26 2006 13:32
revol68 wrote:
I think i lost it when you tried to twist an analogy of mine, either that or you were unable to grasp it's simplicity?

tbh i don't know what happened, i know i wasn't trying to twist anything.

yep - imagining changing anarchist groups is a blow against sexism is a self-important delusion, but as JDMF says we wouldn't put up with racism so we can't just ignore sexism either. i posted on the reincarnated sexual violence thread about the need to talk about sexual violence as a phenomenon in our social circles/networks in general (which may include political groups), as opposed to solely within self-selecting and lets face it marginalised and irrelevant political grouplets. i also agree that direct action against sexual violence is next to impossible, but that doesn't preclude activity per se.

Anyway i suggest we continue this discussion, if at all, on the thought thread: 'Group Dynamics'; a crock of shit?

AndrewF's picture
AndrewF
Offline
Joined: 28-02-05
Oct 26 2006 15:08
revol68 wrote:
I might owe an apology if I had actually justified his sexist sleazing as opposed to taking issue at soviet pops need to throw his lack of work ethic into the mix, this followed by aload of crap about her amazing effeciency, productivity etc

You need to work on your comprehension skills. She was expressing two seperate points
1. An example of sexual harrassment in the workplace.
2. The general problem of sexism in academia and the impact it has on women workers there.

At the moment you doing a bit of a 'Jack' - take the time to understand what is being said and why it is being said before running off on a rant based on a lack of understanding as to why all this is important.

Ramona's picture
Ramona
Offline
Joined: 19-09-03
Oct 26 2006 15:31

It's like seeing a car crash, i just can't stop reading this thread...

gurrier
Offline
Joined: 30-01-04
Oct 26 2006 15:36

A couple of brief points:

First of all, it is probably fair to say that all anarchists see sexual violence as not being the preserve of evil rapists, but an expression of the position in which women find themselves in our society - often treated as sex-objects, with their work often under-valued or ignored and so on. We also recognise that there are a whole host of small behaviours which serve to reinforce this position in society in general - from sexist jokes, to unequal divisions of labour, to straight out lechery through to violent porn.

From this understanding we know that tackling sexual violence is not a matter of rounding up the rapists and giving them a thrashing. It requires us to address really deep patterns of behaviour in our society which are obviously way too strong for small groups of relatively marginal activists to overcome. However, that's no excuse for doing nothing. If we think that it's a serious issue, then the very least that we should do is work towards overcoming such behaviours from our own circles and from our own personal lives, since that is one area where we can obviously have an immediate effect. If we don't attempt to do this, we're just hypocrites and loud-mouthed poseurs.

Secondly, Revol, you've surpassed your normal standard of juvenile internet posturing here. You are actually trying to defend a boss taking credit for all of the work of his underlings by somehow claiming that he is giving it to the man - what utter bullshit. I suppose that you'd think yourself quite the prole hero if you had a bunch of women working for you and you took all the credit for their hard work while you sat around and did nothing?

JDMF's picture
JDMF
Offline
Joined: 21-05-04
Oct 26 2006 16:20
revol68 wrote:
I'm not sure how good the WSM's internal education is but I would have thought an understanding of bosses would have been standard fare. I mean what do you think bosses do? If they didn't take the credit for your work or bark orders they wouldn't be very good bosses, the fact that this overlaps with gendered discourses is of secondary importance as it only serves as an ideological afterthought to a given power relation. To whinge about your boss being a waster and how unproductive he is seems a rather odd statement, abit like cursing the sea for being wet and the fact that she coached it in terms of her superior productivity and effeciency seemed to be more a plea for the bosses job than the liquidation of bosses.

maybe this is from you being so young and having so little experience in a modern workplace, but this old fashioned view of the bosses is about as accurate as them being overweight wearing funny hats.

I mean i dont know about the top level bosses, but in education the middle management are most often people lumped with big workloads and people whose jobs you rarely want to have. Perhaps this one was from the old school (maybe even wore a funny hat?) but to have your attitude just shows lack of experience in modern office based workplaces.

It rings a bell though for my experience in construction or supermarkets 10-15 years back though...

georgestapleton's picture
georgestapleton
Offline
Joined: 4-08-05
Oct 26 2006 16:53

I couldn't be arsed replying to the crap the your spouting revol beyond telling you to cop yourself on and to notice the hypocrisy in saying that we should offer empathy to anyone in our lives who experiences sexism while being the only one on this thread whose been abusive and tried to undermine people who have experienced sexism.

Jesus you full shit.

JDMF's picture
JDMF
Offline
Joined: 21-05-04
Oct 26 2006 17:04
Jack wrote:
I'm really lost, but want to talk about gender ratios in anarcho groups - which thread would be best for that?

its further down the corridor, take a left after the toilets and through the double doors.

(new thread in organise? would be better to talk about those issues without the sexual violence bit which seems to throw some people off the scent)

Ramona's picture
Ramona
Offline
Joined: 19-09-03
Oct 26 2006 17:11
revol68 wrote:
All I done is question how effective we can be at a) directly confronting sexual violence

No you didn't, you didn't question it, you just outright said there was nothing that could be done at all and so there's no point talking about it cos it's just typical anarcho hero complex yadda yadda fucking yadda.

Jack - gosh you've not been listening, there's no discussion to be had about gender ratios. It's completely irrelevant and unimportant and there's nothing we can do so don't even begin. Ask revol, he got the answers. Oh wait, he's not got the answers because there are no answers, even if everyone else thinks there could be answers. Or something.

Ramona's picture
Ramona
Offline
Joined: 19-09-03
Oct 26 2006 17:32

Fine. But that still seemed to be the overall mood of your posts.

Yr saying it should be taken as a given, well it isn't always, and maybe people (in general, not anarchists per se, I have almost as little faith in that idea as you do as you well know) could do with exploring the complexities of sexual violence a little more. Ok, so we're a bunch of people, anarchism aside we could all do with exploring sexual violence more, so let's have that discussion. I'm not talking about getting anyone's house in order, i just want to have that discussion with some people, can I? Oh please?

And yes, again, as you know I agree with the idea that we're not going to be able to organise to eradicate sexual violence and it needs to be dealt with in the context of wider struggles, I don't think anyone was disputing that either.

Fuck it I don't really see much disagreement at all yet it's all got so agressive, so now everyone takes up their positions and gets set to defend them and effectively just shout at each other instead of thinking fluidly. It's fucking depressing. Or as shoes might say, "so much beef".

Ramona's picture
Ramona
Offline
Joined: 19-09-03
Oct 26 2006 17:42

Good lord why did you not say that a few pages and one thread ago then?! Ok, good. I agree anyway.

JDMF's picture
JDMF
Offline
Joined: 21-05-04
Oct 26 2006 17:45
revol68 wrote:
humilation

you should be able to say a few things about that wink

georgestapleton's picture
georgestapleton
Offline
Joined: 4-08-05
Oct 26 2006 17:59
revol68 wrote:
the only person i'm being a cock to is Soviet Pop and it's hardly came out of nowhere.

Yeah it came out of you and your over inflated sense of selfworth and indignation.

Jesus, do you not understand that its not acceptable to be offensive to people for two pages and then justify it on the basis that what we should really be discussing is x and not y. If you really think that what we should really be discussing is x and not y the write a post saying 'well actually i think y isn't what nedds to be discussed, what i think the core issue is is x. and here are my thoughts on the matter ......' You shouldn't write

Quote:
no offence but if i want to talk to people about stuff and have support I go to my mates and family, i don't go to a bunch of politicos i barely know for empathy, if i talk to them about the issue i'm looking for something more than "being listened to". I mean people should be doing that kind of thing on a very basic human level so it pisses me off when I see folks painting it up as of political relevance, as if we are great peeps cos not only do we listen but we listen and are anarchists, and hence we are building a new world in our hearts.

Because it doesn't make it any less offensive to post that in reply to someone whose just after posting up 'to a bunch of politicos i barely know for empathy'.

And you shouldn't write:

Quote:
yeah imagine not being professional or really giving a fuck about his productivity, what a shit!

or

Quote:
See being a prole who has no desire to be respected for my work, or feeling that it deserves respect I take issue with this. I've got news for you, most proles get no respect for their work and never expect to. Your post reads like typical middle class "annoyance" that all your hardwork and intelligence is fundamentally pointless.

or

Quote:
forgive me if I don't put the doss house that is social sciences academia in that sphere, it's a decent job if you can get into it, and a relatively good way of earning a living but ultimately it's about getting by and getting to read some theory with it. I mean I work 40 hrs and then go home and read critical theory, i unfortunately don't get paid for it though. I'd love to get a job in academia as a means of getting by but i'd never get on a hight horse about such shit, especially not in such petty bourgeois terms as "productivity".

becasue it of little to no relevance to the thread and if you think it is then make that point in a way that shows a bit of respect and isn't deliberately offensive and agressive.

----------

Anyway glad to see we are down to the imporant job at hand; discussing revol's ego.....again.

Well I'm sorry to say that I think we have even less chance of solving this problem then we do of solving the problem of sexism.

Joseph Kay's picture
Joseph Kay
Offline
Joined: 14-03-06
Oct 26 2006 18:10
revol68 wrote:
And I suppouse the flow and nature of those discussions was all one way?

I'm glad you've take it upon yourself to speak out for all my victims, you self righteous cock, and if you had any clue you'd realise that the "beef" between me and "soviet pop" started when she posted on about how terrible i am and how i shut down discussion. I mean are youse made out of china? Is my rhetoric so violent that children weep in Bolivia? If my posting style is really that problematic for people i'd love to see them deal with the real world. I mean this is suppoused to be a website for libertarian communists/anarchists, you'd think they'd be used to having to take shit for their politics and furthermore have enough character to not be intimidated by a short arse on the internet.

what, comrade, you say i should stop hitting you? but we are proletarians, we should be used to being beaten ... roll eyes

Ramona's picture
Ramona
Offline
Joined: 19-09-03
Oct 26 2006 18:10

Oh fuck's sake I thought we just got over this one.

JDMF's picture
JDMF
Offline
Joined: 21-05-04
Oct 26 2006 18:15
revol68 wrote:
p.s. if you can find where i've actually changed my positions i'll send you a leg of lamb.

i'm sure you would never change a position since you are always right.

I could point out, like it was done above, several places where you have behaved in uncomradely and generally like a cock - not to mention having the insensitivity to grasp the slightest philosophical faults in peoples posts about sexual or gender based oppression they have experienced. Time and place and all that...

Even after it being pointed out to you million times over the years of enrages/libcom you still dont seem to understand or have any empathy towards people who are in the receiving end of the undeniable creative barrage of abuse, humiliation and insults. You dont need a PHD to see the power play and abusive behaviour, but thats probably just the fault of the recipients being too weak, thin skinned and not really able to face the real hard world out there.

hey, dont underestimate your power, you have a way with words and you could probably talk pope out of catholism, you are way smarter and educated than for instance me. Thats why we dont play on a level playing field to start with if i would play it by your rules of shoutdowns and creative ways of trying to hurt and humiliate the other person.

I hope you could just behave like you would if you were facing the people you are attacking.

But enough arse kissing. Self denial is a beautiful thing. Keep up the good work comrade!

Joseph Kay's picture
Joseph Kay
Offline
Joined: 14-03-06
Oct 26 2006 18:18
revol68 wrote:
well jack i think i've offered more to this discussion than you have, and furthermore the thread was moving back onto the topic when George decided to valiantly stand up for the oppressed masses of libcom.

revol stop being a cock. why the fuck should anyone have to deal with this kind of hostility just to get to your often valid points? at least keep it to the 'group dynamics; crock of shit?' thread which was spun off especially for you.

IrrationallyAngry
Offline
Joined: 23-06-05
Oct 26 2006 18:25

I picked up a copy at the Erase Errata gig in Dublin last week. How come they were selling it, by the way? Did someone just ask them to put it with their merchandise on the night or have they been selling it for a while?

Getting to the point, it's good to see a publication on the left in these parts with a particularly feminist angle. Most of the articles are well written and easily accessable. The cover in particular is great and despite a somewhat "zine" aesthetic, the design and layout is better than most stuff on the left and looks like some thought went into it. Many of the articles were interesting and I particularly liked "Just a Laugh", "Women and Anarchism" and "Rape Culture" (which isn't to say I agreed with everything in those pieces).

More negatively, the alternative remedy stuff made me cringe, while I thought the article on childbirth with its emphasis on what is or isn't natural was one-sided at best. The single biggest criticism I'd have of the magazine's content is the near total absence of the concept of class. Women's role in the workplace is alluded to only briefly, unless you count the inevitable piece on unionising sex-workers. There are (justified) complaints made in the magazine about male leftists thinking of women's oppression as something that can be dealt with after capitalism is gone, so it's to put it mildly disappointing that the first issue of the magazine largely deals with gender issues as if they don't intersect with and are unrelated to issues of class.

I mean the above as constructive criticism, and don't want to discourage anyone who was involved. I liked the first issue enough to guarantee that I will pick up a second one, I just hope that second one improves.

merryragster wrote:
I think it would be great if other anarchist publications published more anarchafeminist stuff and I hope they will. For now and the forseeable future there is a need for a seperate women's group I think. I dont think that because we are seperate has to mean we are sidelined. I hope not.

The issue here is the difference between self-organisation and separatism. A self-organised group of people who suffer from some particular form of oppression can have the effect of pushing those issues centre-stage. Far from sidelining an issue, it's in part a way of bringing attention to problems which are already sidelined.

An ideological separatism is a different and much more problematic thing. One of the problems faced by self-organised groups can often be a defensive attitude on the part of some of the people in the dominant side of a movement (men, white people, straight people) which conflates the two. Part of it is an egotistical thing - people who are used at some level to being central to proceedings being unable to avoid jumping to the conclusion that a desire for a separate "space" (I hate that fucking word) isn't about them, isn't about badmouthing them and isn't about implying that they are sexist, racist or homophobic.

rkn wrote:
This is interesting because me and z (and a bunch of people within our 'scene') know of a particular person who has repeatedly and unconnectedly (allegedly ) sexually assualted women. But nothing has been done about it, afaik. And no i dont know what to do.

This sort of talk and the article in the magazine about rape and sexual assault in anarchist "communities" makes me a bit nervous. Small groups of activists are not really equipped to deal with this sort of thing, don't have much in the way of coercive powers and don't have rehabilative experience. In the case you are talking about and in the case in the magazine, we are talking about men who are serially involved in sexual assaults. The "solution", imperfect and all as it is seems quite straightforward to me: Go to the cops.

georgestapleton wrote:
Yeah I think in Ireland it's pretty much universally accepted that the (A) movement is pretty shit on questions of sexual assault. That said we're so infinitely better than any other left wing movement

I suspect that sexual assaults are more likely to happen within the anarchist movement than within other left wing movements, at least in Ireland. Not because anarchists are inherently more prone to such acts, obviously, but because the "movement" overlaps heavily with a social scene or set of social scenes.

Even the language used ("our communities") in the magazine article and in parts of this thread reflects that. It's a description which doesn't resonance for a socialist, who might think of him or herself as part of an organisation or a wider labour movement but is very unlikely to think of his or her "community" as being composed of a bunch of other lefties. If a socialist is going to sexually assault or be sexually assaulted the victim or perpetrator is I would guess less likely to be another socialist activist.

In practice I'm not aware of the issue arising amongst other groups on the Irish left. In England I'm aware of it coming up twice in Trotskyist groups. The WRP is the most obvious example, but that organisation was such a madhouse that it is difficult to draw parallels - not only was the organisation the focus of members social lives, it was the focus of pretty much every aspect of their lives. Another smaller group ended up splitting after an alleged sexual assault at a party.

ticking_fool wrote:
which also wouldn't explain why the Trot groups leave it alone

I'm not sure about rape or rape culture, but Trotskyist groups have been very active at various stages around the issue of domestic violence. The Socialist Party in England for instance founded the Campaign Against Domestic Violence, while the same issue is currently one of the main campaigns of its sister organisation in Pakistan.

pingtiao wrote:
There seems to be something about the 'male' socialised role that favours an autistic collecting mentality (records, subcultural music genres, political sect information...) that to me partly accounts for these sorts of people dominating political groups outside times of mass engagement in politics

Although you've annoyingly hit on three of my main interests, I don't think your explanation really works. As other's point out there are plenty of geeky hobbies with larger or equal or even majority female involvement.

This isn't something peculiar to anarchist groups. While the Socialist Party has a healthier percentage of women members than the WSMs figure, it is still way too low. It isn't even something peculiar to left wing groups - the mainstream parties are male dominated too. There is, in other words, a bigger objective problem. Women are socialised to avoid putting themselves forward and to be less confident in expressing an opinion in front of a group. They are also, as one of the other contributors noted, generally under greater time pressure as a result of the additional burden's a sexist society places on them.

Those are not things which we can change easily as small groups, but we can do things to partially compensate for those problems. Like making our meetings as inviting as possible, by avoiding a testorone laden boy's club atmosphere. Like paying specific attention to recruiting women and encouraging their participation. Like orienting towards issues which do attract the involvement of women - whether that's something specifically gender related like abortion or something which isn't but which does involve many women like the bin tax.

Some of revols points do have a certain resonance though. Changing big objective factors is about changing the world and you don't change the world through changing behaviour patterns on an individual basis. Some of what has to be done to make sure women are better represented in left wing movements is internally focused, but the single biggest thing is the external orientation.

georgestapleton's picture
georgestapleton
Offline
Joined: 4-08-05
Oct 26 2006 18:33
revol68 wrote:
And I suppouse the flow and nature of those discussions was all one way?

I'm glad you've take it upon yourself to speak out for all my victims, you self righteous cock, and if you had any clue you'd realise that the "beef" between me and "soviet pop" started when she posted on about how terrible i am and how i shut down discussion. I mean are youse made out of china? Is my rhetoric so violent that children weep in Bolivia? If my posting style is really that problematic for people i'd love to see them deal with the real world. I mean this is suppoused to be a website for libertarian communists/anarchists, you'd think they'd be used to having to take shit for their politics and furthermore have enough character to not be intimidated by a short arse on the internet.

Surely it has occured to you that maybe, maybe, maybe the fact that you are known by half* of the anarchist movment in britain** and Ireland as 'that prick who posts on libcom' might have more to do with the way you post and treat people on libcom than with the internal dynamics of the irish and british anarchist movments. It may be that you actually are a prick on libcom and if you treated people the way you do on here in the real world then somebody would stop you in a way that can't be done on the internet***. Of course you don't act this way in the real world and in the real world are quite a nice bloke.

*the other half not knowing who you are, or what libcom is
**well, I can't really speak for britain but I assume it's the same as over here
***that's not a threat just a statement of fact.

p.s. I'm glad you noticed my knight in shining armour routine. Really I'm only calling you to task cos seeing as its a thread on feminism I'm hoping I can get a shag out of it. roll eyes

jef costello's picture
jef costello
Offline
Joined: 9-02-06
Oct 29 2006 16:44

georgestapleton

openly leering at women is not necessarily a simple expression of desire. Why do men wolf whistle? How many women have turned round after being wolf whistled and said "I was hoping someone would like my arse enough to whistle at me, would you like to go out sometime?" ? The wolf whistle is obviously not a method of getting a woman, so there is something else there. All of these kinds of actions have further significance. Incidentally I had a turkish Friend who was pathologically afraid of wearing skirts due to the harassment she knew she'd get and she wasn't alone in this. She also told me that she and her friends found the looks intimidating and felt them to be deliberately aggressive.

Vanguard actions: Joseph K. its not a vanguard action if the person comes too. If someone I cared about wanted me to help them break their rapists face I'd be happy to lend a hand. It's about power not about who actually does it. Although I see your point, it's not about the boys going off and sorting it out.

LW: I don't mean to be rude but you do play up victimhood, you play it up front the standpoint of a woman expected to be strong and being treated in a certain way. To be honest I thought you were patronising towards John. and I think your response was unnecessessary.

With regard to the shirtless guy, I'd have to say context is all-important but I change in front of people I know. Is this something that generally bothers people, cause no one has ever said anything. Apart from an ex who was sitting in my room and sat there when I walked in earing nowt ut a towel (she knew I was in the shower) and sat there staring at me. I changed behind the door, she'd had her chance smile

Martinh, thanks for reminding me to bring up HSG. It is still male dominated in terms of numbers though. The best thing I found with HSG was not that there were more women but that there was a genuine feeling of equality. The weirdest thing was at the first meeting people kept asking me my opinion, I hadn't a clue about anything, it was the first proper political meeting I'd been to and I just had nothing to say. The other important thing is that although we sometimes went off topic there was a unifying aim, class struggle. And that brought us back on track a lot of the time, we could all agree to disagree on minor points (45 page threads) if they weren't too relevant. I also found the group to be very egalitarian, I ended up facilitating a meeting a few months in, something I couldn't have done previously. I'd recommend HSG organising meetings/workshops etc. I found that the group empowered me and I imagine that it had done the same for others. Although I still prefer taking minutes to facilitating (except when peope dictate to me. angry I do remember once being stuck with someone who used to show up occasionally who was going on and on about how he'd like to shag a female member and how he wished he'd had sex with her when he'd had the chance previously. It really pissed me off because I expected a lot from the group and they usually delivered. And the thing about people being late for meetings etc is really frustrating, although the worst HSG culprit is female wink

>Basically stop referring everything back to "what do we do as activists/anarchists" and start thinking of "what do we do as brothers, sisters, friends, boyfriends, girlfriends etc"
Is this what you've been trying to say all along Revol because this I agree with, of course I think most of the people you argued against would have too. There's a lesson here somewhere.

>However, that's no excuse for doing nothing.
Exactly

>rip off my arm and batter me to death with it
Revol you cock this is my metaphor for JDMF's strength (I didn't steal it honest wink )

>I argue with people and am more than willing to take what I give, i mean i'm prepared to sit and have a pint with anyone from Libcom (doubt that's a two way thing though) even if we have spent two years calling each other cocks and cunts and ripping to shed each others posts, I just put it down to an argument over politics and I as such i'm amazed at how properly anal people can be, i mean my violence is purely rhetoric and mostly theatrical, it's meant for emphasis and comic affect more than anything else
Revol, it's not an issue of whether you "can take it" the issue is whether other people should have to. By your logic as long as your rapist didn't complain about getting raped there wouldn't be a problem. IF your "verbal violence" is theatrical then why not drop it and let your arguments speak for themselves. IF you're too bored with them then take a break from libcom. If not then you might want to wonder why you use such unappealing rhetoric against people who are generally on the right track. I disagree with JDMF for example, but I still consider him a comrade.

Joseph Kay's picture
Joseph Kay
Offline
Joined: 14-03-06
Oct 29 2006 16:49
jef costello wrote:
Vanguard actions: Joseph K. its not a vanguard action if the person comes too

agreed, and i'd do it for a friend too

Lone Wolf's picture
Lone Wolf
Offline
Joined: 1-03-06
Oct 29 2006 21:10
jef costello wrote:

LW: I don't mean to be rude but you do play up victimhood, you play it up front the standpoint of a woman expected to be strong and being treated in a certain way. To be honest I thought you were patronising towards John. and I think your response was unnecessessary.

Jef

Oh dear!! sad

For the record, I posted once in disagreement with something John said and once in disagreement with something Revol said. I have since pmd them both and there are no worries as far as I am concerned. I am saying this just to clarify that you are the only one who is currently saying anything I disagree with.

To clarify first when you said "play it up front" this did not make sense. Is this not a footballing term??? smile I am assuming you meant "play it up from"?

I am curious as to why on the extremely rare occasion I have to say anything critical to a male poster in relation to a sexual issue (the other example being the Brazilian/football/Jaycee thread) this is met with the need to defend the person being criticised even though:

a)They can defend themselves y'know and it is you who are being patronsing to feel you have to "swoop in" and speak for them

b) My criticisms are NEVER aimed at the person but what they have said. Aren't we supposed to disagree on a discussion board?? I can understand you being upset if I was attacking a person but I am not. In both the earlier cases I gave detailed reasoning.They were a critique of the views not the person. And to be honest if I didn't think so highly of the people involved I wouldn't have bothered. You are not responding to my views and expanding the debate. You are attempting to close down the debate and close me down.I am not saying this because I feel victimised but because I feel - as you rightly suggested - this is rude behaviour. You want to be heard, even when you are being negative and accusatory. Therefore you must also expect others to want to be heard even when - gasp!!! - they disagree with you. Yours is an accusation that I " play up victimhood". It is not an attempt to open up debate. It is a judgement, an accusation, an opinion. One you are not qualified to make and even if you were and it were accurate this would hardly be the best means to communicate it...

c) And also the original debate is in the past and you are the one who feels the need to stir it all up again. This happened with the Jaycee thing. I made my peace with him and Alf pretty much straight away - I am not one to bear grudges. So why pick at the corpse Jef?

What I find particularly interesting is that as a person allegedly mired in victimhood, I am pretty much the only person who has attempted to mediate/encourage a constructive posting style in these threads. Being constructive, useful and positive is hardly the hallmark of a victim!!! roll eyes

The most interesting thing I find is that out of all my posts on these threads in which I mention eg mediation, communication, gender ratios, violence in the workplace, sexism in society- this is your only response. No interest at all in the topic of violence/assault in the workplace. No interest in learning from someones actual experience. Or even of my description of the ways in which the company denied its actions/covered its tracks. How corporations practice abuse and manage it "within the ranks" is surely a fasinating topic and would affect a lot of posters on different levels. I started a twin topic on shite managers who are unproductive to the company and damaging in the workplace. Any contribution from you??? Nope. It is quite ironic really cos you have painted me as the victim and you are the one being negative and I am the one being constructive. tongue

As Lazy Riser used to say "The proof of the pudding..."

And as George said to Revol "Catch yoursel' On".

IMHO (my opinion, not an accusation tongue ) this is pretty appalling behaviour. There is more than this to you Jef. A lot more.

Love

LW X

Jason Cortez
Offline
Joined: 14-11-04
Oct 29 2006 21:48

Aw, shut up and stop being a such a wictim wink

Lone Wolf's picture
Lone Wolf
Offline
Joined: 1-03-06
Oct 29 2006 21:57
Jason Cortez wrote:
Aw, shut up and stop being a such a wictim ;)

roll eyes tongue Better that than a disorganised person who forgets to advertise their own film night!! wink Actually, bizzarely, at the exact moment you were posting this I was sending you a pm on the very subject of the film night and yer prior forgetfulness in this regard. They say great minds think alike, Jason, so I guess neither of us can be THAT bad. wink

Love

LW X