Another missing poster

All politicians, male and female, have their bearing and clothes criticised, Boris Johnson, Dominic Cummings, Michael Foot, Jeremy Corbyn - and that's just for starters, and of course a lot of women polticians

Still more why should someone who criticises a woman politician be banned but someone who criticises a male one not? Sauce for the goose should be sauce for the gander.

GrannyGravy13

⬇️

If someone has, or creates, another email address they can join GN using that address and a new name or, in Urms case as she isn't banned, using the same name.

Oops, just realised the same name wouldn't work for a new account as it would be already taken.
It would have to be a very similar name, to be recognised.

M0nica

All politicians, male and female, have their bearing and clothes criticised, Boris Johnson, Dominic Cummings, Michael Foot, Jeremy Corbyn - and that's just for starters, and of course a lot of women polticians

Still more why should someone who criticises a woman politician be banned but someone who criticises a male one not? Sauce for the goose should be sauce for the gander.

If anyone can tell me a word for a male politician (or any male person) that equates to ‘tart’, I’d be interested to hear it. I don’t mean ‘stud’ or another word that suggests prowess - I mean one that suggests prostitution or promiscuous sexual activity.

And whilst Johnson has been criticised for fathering numerous children, it was his infidelity that was mentioned but the ‘legitimacy’ of his offspring.

I don’t think anyone has ever linked a politician’s clothing to their sexual behaviour until AR, who, despite being more successful than anyone on here (AFAIK, anyway) has also suffered disparaging remarks about her social class, her accent and her lack of education.

If those remarks get anyone banned, and we don’t know that they did, it was nothing to do with geese or ganders. It was sexism mixed with classism - pure and simple.

Classism exists in Britain as surely as it ever did. I know of no law against sorting people into categories with whom I may (or may not) wish to interact. Real life may not like Downton Abbey where the classes are clearly defined. However in many respects people are often still subtly kept in "their place" by the way they present themselves. That includes their mode of dress, accent and possession of social capital.

I totally agree Doodledog I was horrified Angela Rayner was called a tart.

Class is about a lot more than ‘presentation’. It is the need to find ways to keep others ‘in their place’ that causes the shallow to look for clues to class in accent, clothes or etiquette, not ‘presentation’ that causes the class system.

In any case, whether there is a law against snobbery is neither here nor there. My point was that it is not true that calling a woman a ‘tart’ is the same as criticising a old man (Michael Foot) for wearing an overcoat at the Cenotaph - it has gone down in History as a donkey jacket, but it was in fact an expensive Jaeger coat bought in Harrods. Regardless, the men M0nica mentioned had their clothing criticised for being deemed inappropriate. Links were not made between their clothes and their sexual mores. That humiliation is reserved for women.

For avoidance of doubt, I am not commenting here on what may or may not have caused posters to be banned - sexism and classism are, to my mind, unpleasant, as is making implications about someone’s sexual behaviour, but as you say, biglouis, not illegal, and posts on here are littered with all of those things. I don’t deny that classism exists - in fact I brought it up. I was refuting the suggestion that the way men and women are criticised for sartorial choices is the same. It’s not.

rafichagran

I totally agree Doodledog I was horrified Angela Rayner was called a tart.

Sorry - we cross-posted. I was replying to biglouis, not ignoring you . I didn’t expect anyone else would be awake - insomnia is a curse, isn’t it?

Has any man been described as dragged up and from the gutter ?

Not that I know of.

rafichagran

I totally agree Doodledog I was horrified Angela Rayner was called a tart.

Indeed. Why the need to feel that you have to call someone that awful name without full personal knowledge of what they have been through? Apart from the fact that many women time past and indeed today have had to resort to the oldest profession in the world to feed her children. And, it is never a sign of good manners or standing to lower yourself to use that kind of language.

There are lots of disparaging descriptions of homosexual men that equate to tart. I have heard them but cannot remember them offhand.

I think all this talk of class is nonsense, it is just a veil to cover whether people have money or not. You cannot go into any society anywhere without finding these same social divisions with one group looking down on anther, whether you dispargae people for bein 'toffs' or 'working class'

The only way to deal with it is to ignore it and treat all people on an equal footing. This doesn't stop criticism of you think it deserved.

As for all the criticism of Angela Rayner, I simply do not understand it, except the investigation into her finances that was justified but she has now been cleared. In the same way an male Labour MP who owns a block of buy to let flats has been outed as an oppressive landlord, threatening to eveict tenants if they complain about the disgusting condition of their flats, infested by ants and covered in mould.

These forums are full of people claiming to criticise the'class' system' but in actuality supporting it by talking about it all the time.

If you do not want it, then let the change start with you, ignore it. Discuss people as if we all start from the same level. It doesn;t mean you cannot criticise people or a group of people, you just do not talk of them in old fahioned and hackneyed class terms. If everyone did that change would happen.

biglouis

GSM got carried away on that day, as it was unlike her usual posting style. Voicing a remark about the appearance of a female politico is certainly not an egregious crime. It is an "opinion" People are entitled to hold opinions - even if they deeply offend others.

If someone gives their opinion on a post that will offend the poster then that is a definite no no. Why can't someone just reply to a post without getting their knickers in a twist. If you do not agree with the post then say so but there is no need to offend anyone.

Sometimes it sounds as though posters on these forums are children in the playground. If they do not agree with what has been posted, instead of saying so in a decent manner and putting their own opinions forward they get very personal which is so very childish.

GrannyGravy13

The only connection as far as I can see between our banned/suspended GN friends is that they are right of centre in terms of their politics…

And Urms is too?

I wondered if she was not very well biglouis.

Fortunately some people have been in contact with her since. So that's good at least.

I totally agree. I don't think anyone should be banned for one ill judged comment, but I do see some posters who seem to be constantly disparaging of other people's views in ways that are rude, dictatorial and insulting. They cause a lot of bad feeling and drive people off gransnet because they create such an awful impression but they seem to behave with impunity, and it's very annoying.

Sorry I was replying to Bigbopper there.

I have heard from Callistemon she hasn’t been banned, thank goodness.

She is having the same issues as Urmstongran

It appears GNHQ have a few problems…

Glad to see your still here at least GG.

I’m relieved to hear that Urms,Callistemon and GSM are all ok. They are missed.

I suspect, as someone has said that a ‘bot’’ is flagging up certain words or phrases. Maybe even responsible for the banning of certain posters? , which is,( I was going to say sad) really annoying if that’s the case.

Many friendships are formed and they must realise at HQ that we worry when posters just disappear.

I'm keenly looking forward to the return of Callistemon and GSM. My only worry is that I won't recognise them if they change their names.

rafichagran

I totally agree Doodledog I was horrified Angela Rayner was called a tart.

GSM didn’t call Angela Rayner atart she said she looked like one: big big difference.

It seems that huge mountains have been formed from tiny mole hills.
Much unjustified speculation.

Sometimes a website may leave cookies on your computer which "mess it up" and prevent you posting or re-registering a new ID. Its a pretty crude device. In order to re-register (even with a new user name and email address) you have to go into cookie settings and remove all the cookies for that particular website to leave a clean page. Then create your new login script.

annsixty

It seems that huge mountains have been formed from tiny mole hills.
Much unjustified speculation.

Wisest post on this thread.