The Ghost of B A R P Posted February 25, 2021 Share Posted February 25, 2021 Just now, Genuine Hibs Fan said: Not at all, just asking you to back up your assertions bud! Ok... ’Terf’ is a term only used in description of women and is often used in contexts where violence is being encouraged or celebrated. To be clear, and even leaving aside the problematic rhetoric encoded in the term itself, it is a term of abuse associated with violence. 100% of the women I’ve discussed it with regard it as a misogynistic slur. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMMjag Posted February 25, 2021 Share Posted February 25, 2021 2 minutes ago, Bob Mahelp said: I don't think it's a non-issue if there is proof beyond doubt that the FM has broken the ministerial code and/or conspired in someway to try and get Salmond jailed. If that were the case, she would have to resign and the SNP would have to face the consequences in May. But....there are many dynamics in play here which mean it's not just a simple 'guilty/not guilty' issue. Salmond's ego and thirst for revenge being one, opposition politicians having already judged and sentenced her being another, and the inherent division in Scottish politics which means that 50% of people support the SNP and 50% hate the SNP. Until everyone has a chance to be questioned and present their case, I don't see how anyone can truly work out who is right and who is wrong. None of this actually matters in the sense that what is under investigation is the independence and credibility of key Scottish institutions and figures of power in the handling of harassment complaints, including why they have ignored police and legal advice throughout the process. If they can't stand up to a challenge from Alex Salmond - regardless of his own motivations - then they are not fit for purpose and it calls into question the positions of those who have presided over them. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Detournement Posted February 25, 2021 Share Posted February 25, 2021 6 minutes ago, SandyCromarty said: You may recall Alex Salmond's lawyer, Gordon Jackson, during the course of the trial, being caught on camera in a train carriage loudly discussing the trial, in the video, which was obtained by the Sunday Times, he seems to name two of the accusers despite court orders not to do so. He later resigned his position as Dean of the Faculty of Advocates. He wasn't "caught on camera" was he? He was being followed and surveilled. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bob Mahelp Posted February 25, 2021 Share Posted February 25, 2021 12 minutes ago, The Ghost of B A R P said: Stop with this utter pish, will you? You seem like a very reasonable and calm individual. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMMjag Posted February 25, 2021 Share Posted February 25, 2021 5 minutes ago, SandyCromarty said: You may recall Alex Salmond's lawyer, Gordon Jackson, during the course of the trial, being caught on camera in a train carriage loudly discussing the trial, in the video, which was obtained by the Sunday Times, he seems to name two of the accusers despite court orders not to do so. He later resigned his position as Dean of the Faculty of Advocates. And rightly so. However Nicola Sturgeon cannot claim either that the process of taking up the complaints have properly upheld the wishes and right to anonymity of the complainers, and therefore it strikes me as incredibly cheap of her to build some morally superior throne for herself to sit on. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SandyCromarty Posted February 25, 2021 Share Posted February 25, 2021 Just now, AMMjag said: And rightly so. However Nicola Sturgeon cannot claim either that the process of taking up the complaints have properly upheld the wishes and right to anonymity of the complainers, and therefore it strikes me as incredibly cheap of her to build some morally superior throne for herself to sit on. Did Gordon Jackson, as Alex Salmond's lawyer, name two accusers in public during the course of the trial? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ghost of B A R P Posted February 25, 2021 Share Posted February 25, 2021 1 minute ago, Bob Mahelp said: You seem like a very reasonable and calm individual. I am indeed. Whereas you keep on talking about ‘Salmond’s ego and thirst for revenge’ (which exists only in your mind) as if it has anything objectively to do with actions that have been taken. That is the pish I’m suggesting you stop with. As AMMjag says, it has nothing to do with what’s happening or its eventual outcome. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genuine Hibs Fan Posted February 25, 2021 Share Posted February 25, 2021 4 minutes ago, The Ghost of B A R P said: Ok... ’Terf’ is a term only used in description of women and is often used in contexts where violence is being encouraged or celebrated. To be clear, and even leaving aside the problematic rhetoric encoded in the term itself, it is a term of abuse associated with violence. 100% of the women I’ve discussed it with regard it as a misogynistic slur. I mean it's not only used to describe women and I've discussed it with women who don't regard it is a misogynistic slur, so I guess on the basis of anecdotal evidence we'll agree to disagree. A "term of abuse associated with violence" it may be, but that's not necessarily misogynistic is it? Thanks for the response though! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SandyCromarty Posted February 25, 2021 Share Posted February 25, 2021 6 minutes ago, Detournement said: He wasn't "caught on camera" was he? He was being followed and surveilled. He was filmed discussing the trial in public on a train and it was broadcast on the TV news, we all saw it, obviously you didn't. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Detournement Posted February 25, 2021 Share Posted February 25, 2021 3 minutes ago, SandyCromarty said: He was filmed discussing the trial in public on a train and it was broadcast on the TV news, we all saw it, obviously you didn't. Someone sitting behind him on the train recorded him having a conversation where he used the name of some accusers (not illegal). An edited version of the video appeared on the Sunday Times website. That version was broadcast on TV. The Sunday Times did not explain how they got the video. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMMjag Posted February 25, 2021 Share Posted February 25, 2021 48 minutes ago, SandyCromarty said: Did Gordon Jackson, as Alex Salmond's lawyer, name two accusers in public during the course of the trial? I believe he did yes, although I haven't seen the footage which claims to show him doing so. Regardless, it has nothing to do with my point about those tasked with protecting the interests of the complainers and their complaints, did nothing of the sort. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim McLean's Ghost Posted February 25, 2021 Share Posted February 25, 2021 3 hours ago, Boo Khaki said: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-56170459 Idiot jailed for tweeting the names of complainers, twice. Maybe the Crown Office shouldn't have intervened. 6 months in the clink for the esteemed committee would have been a great laugh. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MONKMAN Posted February 25, 2021 Share Posted February 25, 2021 ‘Nap’... ‘moron’... You could do us all a favour and go silent for the next 48 months. Actually, nobody would notice, because, like the rest of the mouth-breathing clowns desperately clinging onto ‘nothing to see here’, you have absolutely f**k all to say. Nap.I’ve enough to say that caused you to reply. Also, I’d like to offer a friendly bit of advice; there’s a function on this forum that allows the user to multi-quote, that I feel with a bit of training would vastly enhance your posting ability. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ghost of B A R P Posted February 25, 2021 Share Posted February 25, 2021 1 hour ago, Genuine Hibs Fan said: I mean it's not only used to describe women and I've discussed it with women who don't regard it is a misogynistic slur, so I guess on the basis of anecdotal evidence we'll agree to disagree. A "term of abuse associated with violence" it may be, but that's not necessarily misogynistic is it? Thanks for the response though! So if somebody occasionally calls a man a ‘bitch’, it’s ok to call a woman a ‘bitch’ (not even getting into the circumstances in which that might become more aggravated)? Now write me a wee essay about how you’re comfortable using racial or homophobic slurs based on ‘anecdotal evidence’. No, didn’t think so. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ghost of B A R P Posted February 25, 2021 Share Posted February 25, 2021 32 minutes ago, MONKMAN said: I’ve enough to say that caused you to reply. Also, I’d like to offer a friendly bit of advice; there’s a function on this forum that allows the user to multi-quote, that I feel with a bit of training would vastly enhance your posting ability. I replied because you were talking shite. As said, the only thing that could conceivably improve your posting ability would be to fall silent for 48 months (minimum). Thanks for the advice. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D Angelo Barksdale Posted February 25, 2021 Share Posted February 25, 2021 I see Glinner has a new account. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ghost of B A R P Posted February 25, 2021 Share Posted February 25, 2021 3 minutes ago, Henderson to deliver ..... said: I see Glinner has a new account. Hey, at least let the boy deflect for himself... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genuine Hibs Fan Posted February 25, 2021 Share Posted February 25, 2021 1 minute ago, The Ghost of B A R P said: So if somebody occasionally calls a man a ‘bitch’, it’s ok to call a woman a ‘bitch’ (not even getting into the circumstances in which that might become more aggravated)? Now write me a wee essay about how you’re comfortable using racial or homophobic slurs based on ‘anecdotal evidence’. No, didn’t think so. Aye you're contradicting yourself now, and your analogies don't hold any water. You're still just saying "it's misogynist because I say so" and are mocking anecdotal evidence while offering it as the basis for your argument ("100% of women I've discussed it with" etc). There's no consensus amongst linguists or any other group which says it is misogynistic, and it's a fairly blatant attempt to claim victim status by people who aren't used to being seen as reactionaries. Why would I be comfortable using racist or homophobic slurs? If something is a slur I wouldn't use it. TERF (Trans exclusionary radical feminist) isn't a slur I'm afraid and other than getting very mad about it you've done nothing to convince me. But thanks for trying and by God please learn how to multiquote xx 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ghost of B A R P Posted February 25, 2021 Share Posted February 25, 2021 1 minute ago, Genuine Hibs Fan said: Aye you're contradicting yourself now, and your analogies don't hold any water. You're still just saying "it's misogynist because I say so" and are mocking anecdotal evidence while offering it as the basis for your argument ("100% of women I've discussed it with" etc). There's no consensus amongst linguists or any other group which says it is misogynistic, and it's a fairly blatant attempt to claim victim status by people who aren't used to being seen as reactionaries. Why would I be comfortable using racist or homophobic slurs? If something is a slur I wouldn't use it. TERF (Trans exclusionary radical feminist) isn't a slur I'm afraid and other than getting very mad about it you've done nothing to convince me. But thanks for trying and by God please learn how to multiquote xx Don’t like multi-quoting unless everybody’s talking about the same thing, thanks. Glad you think women are making a ‘fairly blatant attempt to claim victim status’. That’s even more misogynist than your first attempt... and the sad thing is you clearly have no idea why. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genuine Hibs Fan Posted February 25, 2021 Share Posted February 25, 2021 1 minute ago, The Ghost of B A R P said: Don’t like multi-quoting unless everybody’s talking about the same thing, thanks. Glad you think women are making a ‘fairly blatant attempt to claim victim status’. That’s even more misogynist than your first attempt... and the sad thing is you clearly have no idea why. Not women chum, TERFs, a group united by a common ideology for which the description is accurate and contains both men and women! Sorry you didn't know this! Happy to help 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.