Two Maulings in One Day - Paxman AND Channel 4

[eighthobstruction]

I'm sorry, it appears that Rooooosta Sings ....Cecil is not available for comment on any U-Turns, nor Scandals today....next week maybe....

He is currently in conference with Thingy, Blaa Blaa ,Doofer, Dooshanker and Watsit....discussing Moarals, and how we can avoid them....

[amateur51]

Ahhhhhhhh ... that's better ... a reasonably honest answer, amsey!

So that's it then ... 'women's rights' only should be applied to those who take a similar political line to yourself? As for for Tory women, well they can, well .. er .. simply sod off?

Actually, as always, the records will show it wasn't I who first disturbed any temperamental equilibrium this morning, amsey ... but, don't worry, I'm enjoying this thoroughly!

I may have rather more expeerience of Tory women' than you imagine, scotty - I was the Chair of a organisation of disabled people for several years and our Patron was the former leader of the Tory Council and now sits in the House of Lords as Baroness Hanham - a very effective and in that sense admirable politician.

However for every decent one there are several plonkers, memorably, sadly, the utterly vile section 28-promoting Baroness Young

[scottycelt]

But you don't call yourself a feminist (or a 'feminist', in your formulation) so why do you keep insisting you know what feminism has to mean and what a feminist should think in order to be a feminist? That was all: what you think about anything is your business, as long as you don't claim it has some authority over other people's thoughts. Feminist views of Margaret Thatcher are the business of feminists, who are likely to have given the matter thought from a feminist perspective. (Note: not women's views of Margaret Thatcher. Feminists' views of Margaret Thatcher). "Given the matter thought from a feminist perspective" - unlike you, since your perspective isn't that of a feminist, and since on occasions you seem to be saying that feminism is a kind of sexism your perspective doesn't seem to be much informed by a knowledge of feminism (or one that goes any further than a few cartoon-ish stereotypes of what feminism is about. Think middle period Benny Hill).

As a start, here's the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy 'Topics in Feminism': http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-topics/

Hmmm, so full of flaws one hardly knows where to start ...

So, what you seem to be saying is that, as nobody knows what 'feminism' actually is (including feminists themselves), nobody, including presumably yourself, can possibly have a view on it ... ?

Well, in that case, we may as well end the discussion here, which no doubt was the goal in the first place ...

However, in a literal sense one is certainly entitled to a view on the word 'feminism', and for anyone to even attempt to deny that the word itself is inherently sexist I find quite extraordinary.

[amateur51]

However, in a literal sense one is certainly entitled to a view on the word 'feminism', and for anyone to even attempt to deny that the word itself is inherently sexist I find quite extraordinary.

And therein lies your problem, scotty

[Stunsworth]

I'm currently listening to 'B.H.' on Radio 4. They've been searching high and low for the Chancellor - hilarious! Apparently, he's not scheduled to appear on BBC Radio, Sky News, BBC1 (north or south of the border), Teachers' TV or indeed anywhere else

Budget u-turns, banking fraud, borrowing higher than forecast, second quarter of negative growth - also higher than forecast, it's all going so well for him at the moment.

I'm beginning to wonder if he's had some sort of breakdown. How else to explain his total absence from the media?

[JohnSkelton]

and for anyone to even attempt to deny that the word itself is inherently sexist I find quite extraordinary.

I'm sure you do. But only in your apparently locked, solipsistic, world does the fact that you find something extraordinary make it extraordinary.

Does it follow that - the word feminism being "inherently sexist"- feminism is "inherently sexist"?

Well, in that case, we may as well end the discussion here, which no doubt was the goal in the first place ...

That's up to you, but no it wasn't the goal in the first place (the first place of what?). You could start by pointing out the most glaring of those flaws the text of mine you quoted is so full of one didn't know where to start. I'd be grateful for the assistance.

However, in a literal sense one is certainly entitled to a view on the word 'feminism'.

I can't work out what "in a literal sense" means there, but sure - I'm certainly entitled to a view on the word raspberry (or 'raspberry') ... say that it means a panda's left buttock. But, again, that's my business, and raspberry growers are likely to get a bit indignant if I insist that they are growing pandas' left buttocks.

[amateur51]

Budget u-turns, banking fraud, borrowing higher than forecast, second quarter of negative growth - also higher than forecast, it's all going so well for him at the moment.

I'm beginning to wonder if he's had some sort of breakdown. How else to explain his total absence from the media?

Possibly the prospect of a country luncheon somewhere with like-minded chums?

When Northern Rock was going tits-up you couldn't keep Darling off the radio

[amateur51]

Nadine Dorries sticks it to Gideon in the Daily Mail .... those of a delicate disposition should look away now ...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2166996/The-cowardice-Submarine-Chancellor-At-sign-trouble-George-Osborne-slips-surface.html#

[scottycelt]

I'm sure you do. But only in your apparently locked, solipsistic, world does the fact that you find something extraordinary make it extraordinary.

To me, yes, I can only speak for myself and see my 'apparently locked, solipsistic world' as I find it. That might be slightly preferable than you speaking for me, and also apparently finding and seeing your very own 'apparently locked, solipsistic world' on my behalf?

Does it follow that - the word feminism being "inherently sexist"- feminism is "inherently sexist"?

But I thought you said I can't have a valid opinion on feminism because I'm not a feminist and, in any case, nobody really knows what feminism is? It would be greatly helpful if you were to make up your mind here and find some degree of consistency ..

That's up to you, but no it wasn't the goal in the first place (the first place of what?). You could start by pointing out the most glaring of those flaws the text of mine you quoted is so full of one didn't know where to start. I'd be grateful for the assistance.

Well, I suppose, only you really know whether saying a non-feminist is unable to form a view on 'feminism' of which, in any case, nobody really knows the meaning, is a bid to end the discussion, so I'll give you the benefit of the apparent confusion here!

One, of course, may as easily claim one has to be a banker before properly pontificating on the banking industry, assuming we can find a proper definition for banking to suit your goodself, of course.

I can't work out what "in a literal sense" means there, but sure - I'm certainly entitled to a view on the word raspberry (or 'raspberry') ... say that it means a panda's left buttock. But, again, that's my business, and raspberry growers are likely to get a bit indignant if I insist that they are growing pandas' left buttocks.

'In a literal sense' means literally 'in a literal sense' ... I'm sure you are quite capable of 'working it out', without your mind wandering off and fantasising about 'raspberries and pandas' left buttocks'.

[Lateralthinking1]

Nadine Dorries sticks it to Gideon in the Daily Mail .... those of a delicate disposition should look away now ...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2166996/The-cowardice-Submarine-Chancellor-At-sign-trouble-George-Osborne-slips-surface.html#

She isn't always right but there's not a word in that with which I would disagree.

From The Independent on Sunday -

"Conservative cabinet ministers have rounded on George Osborne for his catalogue of Budget U-turns, with one branding the Chancellor a "bastard" for humiliating his colleagues.....One minister said: "The coalition is rotting from the bottom up.......We need to [stop it] reaching the top before 2015. The PM mustn't be pulled by our hard right. It would mean the retoxification of the party. To think we will win by being more right wing is mad...........

........Ministers are pinning their hopes on this month's Olympics to lift the coalition out of the gloom. The IoS understands that Boris Johnson is to join the Cabinet – at least for the duration of the sporting spectacular."

(Johnson has described Osborne as 'The Jaws of Death' - Osborne's disappearance is no doubt coincidental)

[handsomefortune]

it gets worse...........oh no, not delluded opportunist dorries purlease, grabbing at leadership ... i shall have to leave reading that till later.

(perhaps fittingly) at the moment mr h is reading margaret atwood's 'robber bride', she has written of a male character 'he thinks he can tell what a woman thinks, by the shape of her bottom' is that a masculinist perspective scotty - or just amusing (if typically senseless) drivel? did aristotle have thin thoughts, or fat ones? compare the same with guardian journo's comments, in view of the context in which they are made, the sheer gravity of masses of money risked, verses (for instance) 'atos' rulings? (lateralthinking1 - how can you not recognise this perspective? so many of your recent posts have expressed the exact same disgust, at govt 'nobbling the weakest')?

]I'm beginning to wonder if he's had some sort of breakdown. How else to explain his total absence from the media?

oh that's easypeasy stunsworth. most (of us) are aware of his spanko afternoons, as a bone fide 'masculinist'. he rose to the top of the tory heap without being slapped back down, because he has buttocks like a rhino, or a (very) furry panda. i'm sure coulsen will eventually help us understand the ups and downs of his promotion to chancellor....one day soon when it's worth his while leaking that the chancellor was and remains a very naughty boy.

meanwhile, we might try sucking barley sugar to avoid sickness, while waiting patiently for his return from sudden bursts of annual leave. having left everything to a gothic pixie 'at the helm' of british finance instead.

and that's a feminine perspective btw - nothing overtly political, petrifying, or 'masculinist' ...like the misty world of banking.

however, how i wish i too was participant in a feminine hollywood gothic pixie movie release, with full access to back up pixels and cgi. i could just slam certain people into an ancient oak tree ...or knock them off a manga style precipice ...i suspect chloe was extremely disappointed this wasn't an option when she was talking to paxo on the tellybubble! of course, she may feel similarly violent thoughts when the chancellor eventually returns....but wont be able to express them. besides her absolutely revolting 'friends' will make things hell for her....(and ultimately themselves, and us all in the long term).

in this predictable way, historically, this is the nooky hollow, the 'very precious secret' of masculinist and feminine power. those who hate feminism and also care to decide when discussion might start, or stop on a given issue, (as scotty celt has on this very thread), can see it's very difficult to maintain power having grabbed it...............and fowl play is often the only option left, in order to appear 'masculine' and (vaguely) in control.

meanwhile, the nation is gripped by 'what happens next'? and a sense of 'who done it'? ....not that it makes an awful lot of difference, as unfortunately ours is a dependent, infantile, spectator role, rather than a participatory one. though i haven't read the link, the likes of dorries can see this, along with her very own feminine moment to be just as paranoid, selfish, and hideously destructive as attila the hun, or the iron ladle of the 80s....full of poisoned broth, and sickly reminders that 'mummy always knows best'.

[Flosshilde]

Nadine Dorries sticks it to Gideon in the Daily Mail .... those of a delicate disposition should look away now ...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2166996/The-cowardice-Submarine-Chancellor-At-sign-trouble-George-Osborne-slips-surface.html#

Nadine Dorries is quite bizarre. A comment about her (in the Guardian, probably) suggested that as her constituency will disappear in the next reorganisation & she doesn't expect to get selected anywhere else she's not really bothered about upsetting the party hierarchy, but I'm not sure that that really explains her loose-cannon aproach. One does wonder why she's staying in the party if she thinks so little of the 'posh boys' (who are likely to be in the ascendency for some time to come).

[JohnSkelton]

'In a literal sense' means literally 'in a literal sense' ... I'm sure you are quite capable of 'working it out'

Well I'm not capable of working it out. Sorry. Are you drawing some distinction between a literal sense and a non-literal sense of being entitled to a view?

in a literal sense one is certainly entitled to a view on the word 'feminism'

or do you mean a literal sense for the word feminism? And why do you keep putting '' around words? Is that to indicate they aren't to be taken literally?

Again, I don't understand whether your (for me rather strange) idea that a word - feminism - is inherently something (sexist) means that you think feminism as a a collection of theories, practices, social actions, etc. is inherently sexist. Whether what the word signifies is inherently sexist, or whether it's somehow the word itself - something about the word itself, internal to it - that is inherently sexist. The way it sounds when you say it out loud? The way it looks on a page / screen?

without your mind wandering off and fantasising about 'raspberries and pandas' left buttocks'.

I know, it's not good.

buttocks like a rhino, or a (very) furry panda.

George Osborne, God of Love. http://www.wikigallery.org/paintings.../painting1.jpg

[Lateralthinking1]

(perhaps fittingly) at the moment mr h is reading margaret atwood's 'robber bride', she has written of a male character 'he thinks he can tell what a woman thinks, by the shape of her bottom' is that a masculinist perspective scotty - or just amusing (if typically senseless) drivel? did aristotle have thin thoughts, or fat ones? compare the same with guardian journo's comments, in view of the context in which they are made, the sheer gravity of masses of money risked, verses (for instance) 'atos' rulings? (lateralthinking1 - how can you not recognise this perspective? so many of your recent posts have expressed the exact same disgust, at govt 'nobbling the weakest')?

Erm, I am not quite sure whether I understand the question. My understanding is that the feminist writer Tanya Gold thinks she would be expected to defend Chloe Smith because Chloe Smith is a woman. She is saying she won't do so because being a woman does not make a person a feminist. In her view, Chloe Smith is not a feminist mainly on account of being a Conservative. As someone who appreciated the important role of women in the Miners Strike, and in the demonstrations at Greenham Common, I recognise a left-leaning aspect of politics to which, in my mind, a significant strand of feminism equates. Clearly they were very different examples of women's political involvement from that, say, exhibited by Home Secretary Theresa May. I understand that the latter once wore a top with the slogan "this is what a feminist looks like". I fully accept that many feminists would disagree.

However, I don't agree that, quote, "The myth persists that a woman in parliament, by virtue of her genitalia and her shoe size, is a feminist". While that sentence might well indicate the battle lines drawn between May and Gold in Tanya Gold's head, it really doesn't merit being inflated into proportions so mythical that they distort fundamental reality. I know of no one who has ever described ex Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher as a feminist, or Ann Widdecombe as a feminist, or even Sarah Teather as a feminist. I know of no one who is guilty of, quote, "confusing feminism with femininity". However, one senses that in the case of Chloe Smith, Gold wobbled momentarily. Perhaps for that reason she appears to have written an article principally to herself.

As a bloke, I am only keen to ensure in this context that we keep some focus on the reality. It is not for me to wade into a debate about the true meaning of feminism but I can spot a myth where it exists and where it is imagined. I am content that there are women in Parliament who are not feminists, just as I am content that there are women in Parliament who are feminists. I would be quite content if there were men in Parliament who had a completely different worldview from my own as long as there were men in Parliament who had a worldview that was very similar. As it happens, whenever I go to cast my vote, it is the policies rather than the gender of the candidates that matter to me. I would imagine the same is true for the overwhelming majority of people. What I think too is that there have been up to a dozen women in the history of Parliament who have been among the most outstanding individuals ever to have been elected. There might even be a very slight preference for women candidates for that reason.

In these days of house husbands and Christina Lagarde, it seems to me that any individual is increasingly less important in gender terms than the specific roles being undertaken across society. I think there is something to be said for defining the behavioural traits commonly associated with those roles in overtly gender based terms. This makes some sense if one is to enable the clear communication of a concept though probably not for any other meaningful reason. It is hard not to see high finance in the modern age as being ostensibly male. One might have hoped that where testosterone fuelled madness has led to systemic catastrophe, the increasing, if still minor, involvement of women would have had a stabilising influence. As things are, it appears that women are more likely to fit into indistinguishable clothes. That is why broad representation matters. If 50% of MPs were women, one might still find more of a certain kind of woman in the Commons just as one would find more of a certain kind of man. Nevertheless, the scope for having different kinds of people there would be far greater. Yes, I would expect there to be more feminist writers as well as more accountants. But whether there would be one or two ex dinner ladies and an ex cleaner is still, sadly, open to doubt.

[handsomefortune]

imo they actually look the mirror image of each other in 'the daily mail' pic of osbourne and smith - perhaps she's a relative of the chancellors? it wouldn't surprise me one iota. perhaps that's what nadine dorries is trying to tell us...... but via mime and complex diagrams.

One minister said: "The coalition is rotting from the bottom up.......We need to [stop it] reaching the top before 2015.

'one (anonymous) minister' must also fancy his chances ............... sees the threat, (possibly his own hopes dashed)? i can hardly see what i'm typing through my tears of sympathy.........

but the minister's got that the wrong way round surely: corpo world always operates top down. if our 'fantasy political leaders' are 'at the mercy of international banking', why EVER might 'the rot' logically begin at the bottom? where less of a 'conflict of interest' (ie sanity and logic) may actually still prevail. even the tin man in 'the wizard of oz' could work that one out, entirely without the aid of ANY magical potions, and a vital organ missing: a heart.

some women allegedly have tamazipan and cash stuffed down their bra apparently flosshilde - (as well as chicken fillets) so they don't have to worry..... (read wiki) nothing to lose, hoping to 'go for gold' ..prime minister, or a4e, or jubilee security co....that sort of thing...if not it means (another) trip down 'cash converters' sadly. according to wiki some women have too many fantasies about ackrington stanley football team too iirc,

(i might be wrong) but i think nd originally invented the chain saw, and made some films about it, which attracted criticism for being 'very feminine but too violent'. ............ (ok - i made that last bit up) she actually invented the cannon......... as used by napoleon.