Polly Toynbee.

Iam64

Calling someone a vile individual seems more than criticism, especially when directed at a journalist rather than a serial sex offender for example

Indeed.

This thread people have been critical of many, for no real reason.

Calling someone a vile individual seems more than criticism, especially when directed at a journalist rather than a serial sex offender for example

There are seven pages of this thread, of which less than 1 page equivalent of posts contain anything that could be described, even at a stretch as 'vilification, and on every occasion the person has been criticised by a later poster for their use of language.

If people put themselves in the public eye, then criticism of what they do is inevetiable. A writer of opion pieces in a newspaper, must know that they will have readers who profoundly disagreewith them and reach conclusions about whaat they are like as a result. Criticism is not vilification.

Iam64

Doodledog

Someone literally called her 'a vile person', which is the very definition of vilifying .

They did and that’s what led to the discussion about political disagreement being acceptable, vilifying an individual less or not acceptable

Agreed.

Goodness, many people are vilified in this thread. Many.

Vile talk is decidedly unkind.

merlotgran

^It is a good thing that there are rules in place that prevents posters being let loose towards other posters, because if the language we read over people like Markle etc is anything to go by it would be dreadful^

Sanctimonious or tongue in cheek?
🤔

Point clearly made

It is a good thing that there are rules in place that prevents posters being let loose towards other posters, because if the language we read over people like Markle etc is anything to go by it would be dreadful

Sanctimonious or tongue in cheek?
🤔

Doodledog

Someone literally called her 'a vile person', which is the very definition of vilifying .

They did and that’s what led to the discussion about political disagreement being acceptable, vilifying an individual less or not acceptable

Toynbee? Well tbh I always find her mildly irritating, but respect her views, and believe she is consistent, honest and sensible.

I am always taken aback at the ferocity of language used on this forum, towards individuals particularly at a very personal level.

It is a good thing that there are rules in place that prevents posters being let loose towards other posters, because if the language we read over people like Markle etc is anything to go by it would be dreadful.

Someone literally called her 'a vile person', which is the very definition of vilifying .

I agree Monica.

This word 'vilifying' keeps coming up. To criticise someone for their actions, views or attitudes is not vilification. Vilification means abusing some one on a purely personal base as for example to call someone ' a fat cow,' or similar.

I am not aware of any personal vilification on this thread, although I am aware of a lot of criticism of Polly Toynbee, which I consider more than justified (and that is not vilification.)

Luckygirl3

Indeed no. For instance I formed a judgement on Liz Truss - that she was misguided and not competent to be the prime minister. But I did not feel the need to vilify her as a person.

There is no problem with people making the judgement that Meghan found royal life a problem and expressing disappointment that things did not work out; but that does not mean she should be vilified. We do not know her. We do not know what problems she is contending with.

I just can't vilify either and attempt little judgement -wish I did better.

I’m sure that sexism and racism figured in the criticism of Priti Patel and Suella Braverman, but many do not see it, or call it out for what it is.

There were plenty of people who said that the criticism of Liz Truss and Suella Braverman was motivated by sexism, and, of course, racism in Suella's case. Considering it has been open season to subject Boris to intense criticism, I do not think that Suella or Liz has received anything like the criticism he has received, and so richly deserved and exactly the same applies to them.

M0nica

But Meghan is a woman, and as we know women can do no wrong. Any criticism is sexism even when well-deserved.

I must be sexist then! Oh well

M0nica

But Meghan is a woman, and as we know women can do no wrong. Any criticism is sexism even when well-deserved.

Including journos like Polly Toynbee😄 nobody must say anything, well that’s what the 😇 on here think, unless it’s about Liz Truss or Suella Braverman I’ve noticed, and then it’s open season on them.

But Meghan is a woman, and as we know women can do no wrong. Any criticism is sexism even when well-deserved.

What a strange opinion, we need Meghan? What for? She’s caused nothing but strife, trouble, and upset.

Calendargirl

Just listened to her on the 6 News giving her opinion on Charles and the future of the monarchy.

Predicting George will never get to be King, reckons it will all be gone in 25 or so years.

And saying how they needed Meghan, but how they ‘blew it’.

Well, like many of us, she probably won’t be around to gloat about it.

"Needed Meghan". is she mad? Nobody needs that narcissistic, brash Megaliar

However soon Charles goes, William will be next.

I think it will be a lot sooner than 25 years. Charles does not look a well man to me.

I do not 'get it' and I have come to the conclusion Quokka that either you haven't read my post carefully enough or by taking one or two sentences out of context you have given them a meaning that is not there.

M0nica

How on earth do you get by in life never reaching any judgment on anyone unless you know them in depth.

Polly Toynbee is a journalist - and a prolific one. She writes lots of opinion pieces. Of course you can get a feel for the person from what they write. If you have any sensitivity and intelligence you read what is written by people, of people, and their behaviour and listen and sift and compare and contrast, and reach 'on balance' conclusions about them.

How boring life must be if you see everyone who is not a personal friend or relation as being just as blank as a one dimenional photograph.

Does your blankness extend to saying we can know nothing about Boris Johnson, or Donald Trump because we do not know them, I won't say 'intimately', it could be misunderstood, but not well enough for them to be on your Christmas card list (Oh, I know, you do not send Chrustmas cards, you donate to charity) well enough to be texting them.

What a sweeping statement! There will always be those who believe what they read in the media because either they lack the necessary skills or because they believe what they want to believe. A certain type of journalist can lead them by the nose.

These are the sheep to which I refer. You talk of Trump! I talk of his moronic supporters, glued to Fox. Get it?

That is correct Doodledog and I think no one would disagree with that if state schools get less, they shouldn’t. However parents don’t get tax relief on fees but schools mostly have charitable status, and get tax relief through that. In order to benefit from charitable status, the schools must show clearly that they are benefiting the community in some way such as community use of facilities, or grants or scholarships to poorer families.
I doubt Polly Toynbee would have had need of such a grant.

Well said "Luckygirl".