Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

“Anti-male” activist faces court in UK

Options
1…6791112

Comments

  • Options
    #242
    Donkey Oaty
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,533 ✭✭✭Donkey Oaty


    darkpagandeath wrote: »
    Why would one worry about colour ? Don't people judge others on actions and alike ? Even white people are not white....

    You'll have to ask Do Me Good that - I think he was just pointing out an interesting change in the demographics of a major city rather than expressing worry.

    I don't think Londoners worry about it at all. They generally seem very proud of their city's diversity.


  • Options
    #243
    stunmer
    Registered Users Posts: 279 ✭✭stunmer


    melissak wrote: »
    True. I am in two minds tbh. I think people shouldn't be able to offend people without consequences but to criminalise something like this? Where would the line be?

    But offence is subjective?


  • Options
    #244
    Do Me Good
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 123 ✭✭Do Me Good


    Donkey Oaty wrote: »
    Overall, "British-born" white people now indeed make up less than 50% of the population of London - but if you add white Europeans and people like Boris Johnson (born in New York), white people still make up a majority as far as I know.
    Not on the London underground!


  • Options
    #245
    melissak
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,873 ✭✭✭melissak


    It is. This is true. It is also relative i suppose. I dont think people should say stupid things. But how would we criminalise this. Where would the line be. I do not know.. People have absolutely the right to give out about her, the university probably have the right to fire her, but hate crime is a bit of a stretch.
    s
    stunmer wrote: »
    But offence is subjective?


  • Options
    #246
    Canadel
    Registered Users Posts: 1,586 ✭✭✭Canadel


    darkpagandeath wrote: »
    A hate crime is a Hate crime.
    A crime is a crime, and all crimes are hate crimes.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #247
    SeanW
    Registered Users Posts: 8,753 ✭✭✭SeanW


    Tarzana2 wrote: »
    Nobody would go to prison for that. The "If this were reversed" stuff tends towards hyperbolic, often with little basis.
    This is false. We know what happens when the reverse occurs. It happened with Dr. Timothy Hunt. He gave a speech calling for more women and girls to go into science, but started it out with the infamous stupid jokes.

    One (Connie St. Louis) attendee quoted just the jokes and the story spread based on an out-of-context quote, a serious mis-representation.

    His career was destroyed without him having had any real chance to defend himself, but even though it was found out that Connie St. Louis lied not only about the content of Dr. Hunt's speech, but also about her academic credentials, she still has her job - TEACHING JOURNALISM - in a major, prestigious, London university.

    You must not think much of people's intelligence or critical thinking abilities if you expect people to believe this would not be taken more seriously if the roles were reversed, when we know that this is not the case.

    Because we know that a (usually white) man's life can be destroyed by an intentional fabrication, and the person responsible will not be held to account, especially if the liar is female (or black), like Connie St. Louis who is both.

    Mustafa Bahar on the other hand, has been quoted accurately in every context. There is no doubt that she is a hatemonger. But she's the "right kind" of hatemonger, that's why she wan't fired the way a Klansman or BNP member would have been.
    Apparently that twitter hashtag does indeed exist, to little reaction or comment.

    It was mentioned up-thread. Did you read the thread?
    Presumably because no-one uses it with their real name, representing any important entity and expecting to be taken seriously.

    If a white man, known to be a sexist and racist in any position of importance had, for example Tweeted "Affirmitive Action and welfare for minorities is the worst thing ever #KillAllNigBitches" and had done so publically using the profile of any credible entity, do you think there would not be more about it?

    Damn straight there would be fallout from that, and rightly so.


  • Options
    #248
    Donkey Oaty
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,533 ✭✭✭Donkey Oaty


    Given that she appears to have devoted her career to telling people what they are and are not allowed to say or think, it's hardly surprising that there will be a few gloaters when she is hoisted on her own hypocritical petard.

    Her cultural appropriation of people with a genuine civil-rights grievance to further her own narcissistic colonialist agenda is the last straw.

    #lockherupandthrowawaythekey


  • Options
    #249
    jobbridge4life
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    The Corinthian wrote: »
    She didn't.

    Oh. How disappointing. Nasty, pathetic cretin.


  • Options
    #250
    Harry Palmr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 40,061 ✭✭✭✭Harry Palmr


    Good article by Suzanne Moore in the guardian which draws neatly draws in militant student union institutions that "no-Platform" those they don't approve of (its good as she goes beyond her usual rants) note the post by the moderator at the bottom of the comments.

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/07/a-hashtag-shouldnt-make-men-fear-lives-already-have-safe-space-manchester-university


  • Options
    #251
    Ulysses Gaze
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,570 ✭✭✭Ulysses Gaze


    SeanW wrote: »
    This is false. We know what happens when the reverse occurs. It happened with Dr. Timothy Hunt. He gave a speech calling for more women and girls to go into science, but started it out with the infamous stupid jokes.

    One (Connie St. Louis) attendee quoted just the jokes and the story spread based on an out-of-context quote, a serious mis-representation.

    His career was destroyed without him having had any real chance to defend himself, but even though it was found out that Connie St. Louis lied not only about the content of Dr. Hunt's speech, but also about her academic credentials, she still has her job - TEACHING JOURNALISM - in a major, prestigious, London university.

    You must not think much of people's intelligence or critical thinking abilities if you expect people to believe this would not be taken more seriously if the roles were reversed, when we know that this is not the case.

    Because we know that a (usually white) man's life can be destroyed by an intentional fabrication, and the person responsible will not be held to account, especially if the liar is female (or black), like Connie St. Louis who is both.

    Mustafa Bahar on the other hand, has been quoted accurately in every context. There is no doubt that she is a hatemonger. But she's the "right kind" of hatemonger, that's why she wan't fired the way a Klansman or BNP member would have been.

    Presumably because no-one uses it with their real name, representing any important entity and expecting to be taken seriously.

    If a white man, known to be a sexist and racist in any position of importance had, for example Tweeted "Affirmitive Action and welfare for minorities is the worst thing ever #KillAllNigBitches" and had done so publically using the profile of any credible entity, do you think there would not be more about it?

    Damn straight there would be fallout from that, and rightly so.

    She can't be fired because technically she is not an employee of Goldsmiths College. She's an employee of the Union which is a separate entity. There was a petition to have a vote of no confidence in her set up but it needed 3% of the students registered with the Student Union to sign for the hearing to take place. They got 1.9%.

    She should be arrested definitely. If only to reinforce the fact that there is equality under the law when you do this type of thing and that you can't play the race, sexual orientation or gender card and use that as an excuse for reprehensible behaviour.

    At most she'll end up with a caution. IF she is smart and keeps her mouth shut in court and lets her solicitor or barrister do the talking.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #252
    se02orqua5xz9v
    Closed Accounts Posts: 119 ✭✭se02orqua5xz9v


    bluewolf wrote: »
    I've heard that nonsense redefinition of racism before all right
    Metroboulot wrote: »
    She might need to re-check her definition of racism.

    She isn't the first person to promote this definition of racism.

    Paul Mooney, a controversial stand up from the US, had a similar definition.
    A black person can't be racist by definition, because we don't have any control over other people's lives. I can't tell you what neighbourhood to live in. I can't tell you what school to go to. I can't tell you you're a second-class citizen. I can't tell you that you can't vote. If I get on that corner for five years and I go, 'I'm gonna take me a knife and I'm gonna cut your throat and I'm gonna take a car and I'm gonna run you over, and I'm gonna take this hammer and beat you till you dead'. If I never kill anybody, am I a murderer? All we [black people] do is talk. White folks do.

    Let's break that down.
    A black person can't be racist by definition, because we don't have any control over other people's lives.

    Neither does almost every white person.
    I can't tell you what neighbourhood to live in.

    Neither can almost every white person.
    I can't tell you what school to go to.

    Neither can almost every white person.
    I can't tell you you're a second-class citizen.

    Neither can almost every white person.
    I can't tell you that you can't vote.

    Neither can almost every white person.
    If I get on that corner for five years and I go, 'I'm gonna take me a knife and I'm gonna cut your throat and I'm gonna take a car and I'm gonna run you over, and I'm gonna take this hammer and beat you till you dead'. If I never kill anybody, am I a murderer?

    Um... no. But if you were saying 'I'm gonna take me a knife and I'm gonna cut a white person's throat', I'm pretty sure you're racist.



  • Options
    #253
    Tarzana2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,553 ✭✭✭Tarzana2


    SeanW wrote: »
    This is false. We know what happens when the reverse occurs. It happened with Dr. Timothy Hunt. He gave a speech calling for more women and girls to go into science, but started it out with the infamous stupid jokes.

    Timothy Hunt faced the courts and prison for his comments? News to me. And the correct content of his speech is now known and, honestly, I don't know what he was thinking.

    We don't know that this woman's future career won't be affected by her actions. Employers do google searches of potential employees and this will be all over Google. Why do you think her future career won't be affected by her actions? I can imagine employers not wanting to go near her as she'd be a liability.


  • Options
    #254
    Rippington
    Registered Users Posts: 122 ✭✭Rippington


    Tarzana2 wrote: »
    We don't know that this woman's future career won't be affected by her actions. Employers do google searches of potential employees and this will be all over Google.
    Which makes you wonder why people put themselves out there like this ? ...is there an ulterior motive ?


  • Options
    #255
    Dimithy
    Registered Users Posts: 351 ✭✭Dimithy


    Rippington wrote: »
    Which makes you wonder why people put themselves out there like this ? ...is there an ulterior motive ?

    Does stupidity count as an ulterior motive?


  • Options
    #256
    TheLastMohican
    Registered Users Posts: 1,837 ✭✭✭TheLastMohican


    speedboatchase wrote: »
    No, I believe she's Turkish. And of course, the Turks have never exercised their power and privilege over an oppressed minority.

    Aside from the cheeky Armenian genocide of 1915...

    And Kurds
    DeadHand wrote: »
    They weren't too gentle with the Greeks or Kurds either.

    The Turks have a long history of violent expansion, imperialism, the suppression of minorities and ethnic cleansing.

    Which makes her ravenous appetite for racial victimhood all the more ironic.

    And innocent Cypriots caught up in their expansionism!


  • Options
    #257
    BlaasForRafa
    Registered Users Posts: 7,020 ✭✭✭BlaasForRafa


    Good analysis by Sargon of Akkad

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQ4Or0lAvfY


  • Options
    #258
    strelok
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,162 ✭✭✭strelok


    Harry Palmr wrote: »
    Good article by Suzanne Moore in the guardian which draws neatly draws in militant student union institutions that "no-Platform" those they don't approve of (its good as she goes beyond her usual rants) note the post by the moderator at the bottom of the comments.

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/07/a-hashtag-shouldnt-make-men-fear-lives-already-have-safe-space-manchester-university

    didn't you know? disagreeing with feminists on the internet is harassment.
    hopefully the UN can do something about this scourge, the sooner the better.


  • Options
    #259
    melissak
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,873 ✭✭✭melissak


    Rippington wrote: »
    Which makes you wonder why people put themselves out there like this ? ...is there an ulterior motive ?

    Media student, edgy, provocative project about something perhaps. Or compulsive attention seeking? Who knows?


  • Options
    #260
    Maguined
    Registered Users Posts: 8,247 ✭✭✭Maguined


    Tarzana2 wrote: »
    What has that got to do with all the Goldsmiths grads who have nothing to do with the students union?

    Firstly, in the months leading on from this, Goldsmiths might ring a bell to interviewers as where something happened in the students union. If I was an interviewer, I'd know that student union elections tend to have a very low turnout and that most of the student body doesn't really care about it and are just intent on getting their qualifications and living the student life.

    Secondly, in the long term, this is not going to be remembered by interviewers. Goldsmiths grads needn't worry.

    I would be worried about the education she received from that college to be honest. She got a masters in gender and media studies from Goldsmiths and she then used her employers official social media to racially insult someone and defended herself by saying due to her ethnicity and gender she cannot ever be racist or sexist. She is extremely lucky her employer happens to be the students union that no one really cares about as if she was in any other form of employment she would be immediately fired.

    If she was employed by The Guardian newspaper and she used their official twitter page to call someone "white trash" I think the HR department might have some reservations before hiring another student who received a gender and media studies masters from Goldsmiths. Actually I am probably wrong, The Guardian would probably love her. :pac:


  • Options
    #261
    The Corinthian
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    Tarzana2 wrote: »
    What has that got to do with all the Goldsmiths grads who have nothing to do with the students union?

    Firstly, in the months leading on from this, Goldsmiths might ring a bell to interviewers as where something happened in the students union. If I was an interviewer, I'd know that student union elections tend to have a very low turnout and that most of the student body doesn't really care about it and are just intent on getting their qualifications and living the student life.

    Secondly, in the long term, this is not going to be remembered by interviewers. Goldsmiths grads needn't worry.
    Are you regularly part of the hiring process? I am.

    It really comes down to how often such stories come out of a college. If it's a once off, you may well be right. But if a college student union is repeatedly in the news for this sort of radical idiocy, then the college ends up getting tarnished. And Goldsmiths Student Union is no stranger to controversy:
    In October 2014, the union faced critical coverage in the student newspaper The Tab after voting down a proposal to commemorate Holocaust Memorial Day, with Education Officer Sarah El-alfy describing it as "Eurocentric" and "colonialist." According to the union, El-alfy offered to help put forward a redrafted version of the motion for the following Student Assembly meeting. The Union issued a statement claiming "Redrafting motions and re-entering them at a later date isn’t unusual in Students’ Unions and shouldn’t be misinterpreted as opposition."

    In February 2015, feminist comedian Kate Smurthwaite's gig was cancelled after a minority of members from Goldsmith's Feminist society threatened to picket the event over disagreements with her views on decriminalising prostitution.

    You can forget one controversy, but multiple controversies you can't so easily - they're called a reputation.

    Anyone having done any kind of social science degree will be automatically assumed to be exposed to this radical ethos to begin with, and not all student union elections have low turnouts; these vary from year to year, college to college, so there's no guarantee of being able to hide behind the presumption of apathy.

    Which leaves you looking at the CV of someone who's been educated in an environment that is less than attractive for a hiring firm. Probably they've not drunk the coolaid, but why take the risk? You've another thirty CV's for the same role anyway.

    Even a subconscious feeling about someone from a particular college is enough to put you in the wrong pile. I assure you this happens and people's CV's get binned for far less. You might think this stupid or unfair, but this is often what happens regardless of what you think.

    Now Ms Mustafa probably need not worry about anything because, like may other radical student activists, she'll probably end up with a job in a university or in some charity / think tank / social organization as it often the case.

    Not ever case naturally; one of my best friends used to be Student Union welfare officer, and now she's a happily married barrister. Of course, she's probably the exception rather than the rule - most of the others I knew are all professional activists now.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #262
    DeadHand
    Registered Users Posts: 2,720 ✭✭✭DeadHand


    Ulysses Gaze wrote: »
    She can't be fired because technically she is not an employee of Goldsmiths College. She's an employee of the Union which is a separate entity. There was a petition to have a vote of no confidence in her set up but it needed 3% of the students registered with the Student Union to sign for the hearing to take place. They got 1.9%

    I think the university needs to rein in the student union and straighten it out because it's clearly destroying the reputation of the college as a whole.

    Or maybe the faculty are just as foolish.


  • Options
    #263
    liam24
    Registered Users Posts: 369 ✭✭liam24


    The law should keep its nose out of stuff like this. Let society look after her.


  • Options
    #264
    Donkey Oaty
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,533 ✭✭✭Donkey Oaty


    BlaasForRafa wrote: »
    Good analysis by Sargon of Akkad

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQ4Or0lAvfY

    Some very astute observations on that vid. Well worth watching.


  • Options
    #265
    zeffabelli
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,516 ✭✭✭zeffabelli


    The universities can hardly complain. They created this mess by using banning in order to create a false consensus.

    So by creating a false consensus and killing dissenting voices, by killing argument, they now have reps not dissimilar to cults. And they produce morons.

    In time you will see companies no longer requiring third level degrees. Ernst and Young have got the ball rolling already.


  • Options
    #266
    tritium
    Registered Users Posts: 7,426 ✭✭✭tritium


    Harry Palmr wrote: »
    Good article by Suzanne Moore in the guardian which draws neatly draws in militant student union institutions that "no-Platform" those they don't approve of (its good as she goes beyond her usual rants) note the post by the moderator at the bottom of the comments.

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/07/a-hashtag-shouldnt-make-men-fear-lives-already-have-safe-space-manchester-university

    From my reading of it it seems to be a whine that people she agrees with aren't being allowed to say hateful things (Julie bindel ) and that people she doesn't agree with are allowed talk. There's a certain hypocrisy in it that you usually only see in the true zealot as they assure you of their absolute truth....


  • Options
    #267
    c_man
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,436 ✭✭✭c_man


    Meh, racists of her ilk have been pushing for this clamp down on social media posts. They can't be surprised when it actually turns back on them.


  • Options
    #268
    ElvisChrist6
    Registered Users Posts: 595 ✭✭✭ElvisChrist6


    Maguined wrote: »
    I would be worried about the education she received from that college to be honest. She got a masters in gender and media studies from Goldsmiths and she then used her employers official social media to racially insult someone and defended herself by saying due to her ethnicity and gender she cannot ever be racist or sexist. She is extremely lucky her employer happens to be the students union that no one really cares about as if she was in any other form of employment she would be immediately fired.

    If she was employed by The Guardian newspaper and she used their official twitter page to call someone "white trash" I think the HR department might have some reservations before hiring another student who received a gender and media studies masters from Goldsmiths. Actually I am probably wrong, The Guardian would probably love her. :pac:

    You're right, she's lucky in that way, but unlucky in that she won't have really learned anything from this other than that the system will oppress people like her after "standing up to them". The student body that is part of that union isn't quite so lucky either. Welfare officers are supposed to be approachable, moreso than anyone and to anyone, to help their students whether that be pointing them to university financial aids, food vouchers, helping them find and use the counsellors or even just talking to them to help mentally. I, being a white fella, could never be comfortable going to her and just wouldn't be able to. She's hardly going to be sympathetic, and the bloody mansion she grew up in tells me she might not be so understanding of financial struggles either.


  • Options
    #269
    Potatoeman
    Registered Users Posts: 4,216 ✭✭✭Potatoeman


    Fletcher Greasy Sieve wrote: »

    And therefore women of colou[/I]r [again, huh?] and minority genders cannot be racist or sexist because we do not stand to benefit from such a system.”

    "To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize" Voltaire.


  • Options
    #270
    The Corinthian
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    Potatoeman wrote: »
    "To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize" Voltaire.
    But he was a white male...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #271
    Maguined
    Registered Users Posts: 8,247 ✭✭✭Maguined


    ElvisChrist6 wrote: »
    You're right, she's lucky in that way, but unlucky in that she won't have really learned anything from this other than that the system will oppress people like her after "standing up to them". The student body that is part of that union isn't quite so lucky either. Welfare officers are supposed to be approachable, moreso than anyone and to anyone, to help their students whether that be pointing them to university financial aids, food vouchers, helping them find and use the counsellors or even just talking to them to help mentally. I, being a white fella, could never be comfortable going to her and just wouldn't be able to. She's hardly going to be sympathetic, and the bloody mansion she grew up in tells me she might not be so understanding of financial struggles either.

    This particular student union do not care. Students complained about all the horrible things she did while welfare and diversity officer and the students union had a meeting about it and decided not to remove her from her paid position and instead they cautioned her to not call students "white trash" using their official twitter accounts. They had the power to remove her from her position due to the complaints and they did not, they let her off with a warning. It was this inaction that led the students that complained to try a petition but this petition failed to get enough signatures to qualify for an SU meeting. It seems the young students of that university don't care if their welfare and diversity officer doesn't look after the welfare of disabled students and racially insults others.


Advertisement