Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
He must have a steely sense of self
like CG. similar psychology
makes me want to take a shower
I mean really outraged, probably more than a lot of other people.
It's easy enough to just be like oh look people are being well trolled here. But what I take his comments to insinuate is that he would sexually assault her, given the chance. The fact that anyone (even a well-known leader of racists) is willing to tweet that he thinks a woman's body is there for him to do as he pleases with, is a problem. While people sit having their wee quibbles about the appropriate level of outrage and disgust to be expressed, rapists and rape apologists are continuing to say this stuff and continuing to be violent.
and wants to make a crude and obvious joke about it. Nothing really about sexually assualting her given a chance. He's an odious man obviously.
'If I had the opportunity to squeeze Nigella Lawson, her throat wouldn't be my first choice.'
which was a direct and obvious reference to an incident in which she was assaulted by her husband who grabbed her throat. His 'joke' is that if he had the 'opportunity' to, as Charles Saatchi did, "squeeze" Nigella, he would not opt for her throat. What he is most certainly not saying is if he had the 'consent' or the 'permission' to squeeze her, his choice would be something other than her throat. He's quite clearly suggesting that were he in the position of Charles Saatchi, he would have assaulted her in a different way.
and making a crude tasteless joke about it. I don't think he's actually seriously talking about opportunity, consent or permission or anything like that.
but it's ok because I'm not ACTUALLY going to do it...
At best (at BEST) what he's done is downplayed the seriousness of domestic violence through making a gag out of it.
That's bad enough in itself. Given that, it's not the best idea to then make a wisecrack yourself about the nature of other people being `outraged`. Unless alleged domestic assault isn't something people are allowed to be justifiably outraged about, in your view...
I don't think for one moment he was imagining himself being Charles Saatchi, being married to Nigella, having a row in a Mayfair restaurant and then assaulting her.
My point was that in you saying `he's JUST saying that she's got nice breasts` you were ignoring the fact that his joke inherently downplays the significance of alleged domestic violence.
Not only did you ignore this, you chose to post in this thread making a gag about DiSers as opposed to criticising what Nick Griffin had said.
Combine these two things and you don't come across in the best light here (and that's regardless of the stuff that DD is talking about).
but I can see how it might be misinterpreted so you have a point there.
I didn't critice any DiSers.
However the fact that there is any sort of conceptual blurring between situations where someone has a mere 'opportunity' for sexual contact and situations where there is full, unvitiated consent to sexual contact is kinda the point. The fact that he related what can only be described as physical assault to the question of 'whether or not he would get to touch her boobs' means he is relating HIS sexual conduct to physical force, violence and the absence of consent. The way that he does it so unthinkingly and casually kinda just goes to show how far we do need to go in re-articulating and embedding consent.
I don't think Nick Griffin is thick. That's what makes him so unpleasant
I just don't have better words for describing the sick mentality of fascists (including rapists).
I think ridicule is one of the most powerful tools against people like Griffin. He's by no means thick, but he's certainly an idiot.
he's obviously a prick, it's obviously an insensitive and dickheadish thing to say - i'm just not convinced that he is saying he would sexually assault a woman given half the chance.
your making some pretty large leaps of logic to interpret it that way
given the context I think it's heavily implied.
but i'm not particularly interested in the motivation or intent of some idiot racist, and i'm certainly not going to spend any more time defending his wafer-thin honour, so i'm out
it's taking him at his word
again however tasteless and crude they are.
there's a separate discussion about whether joking about molesting someone leads to a world in which more molestation happens, or in which people live in more fear of molestation, which i don't fancy having with you.
playing with the context, etc, is what makes it a joke
(he's still a cunt)
Cause I think in the context it appears Nick Griffin kinda just forgot that you're only supposed to touch people who give you their consent.
The joke also relies on a presumption that someone can give you blanket permission to touch them however you want - as if Nigella is Charles Saatchi's to be 'squeezed' and that he doesn't have to ask on individual occasions because of the nature of their relationship.
I just think that because it's a shit joke that's poorly constructed, it's not clear what exactly he 'means'
but on some level there is an indication that, perhaps because he's so thick and unfunny, he's given absolutely no regard to whether or not he would have to get her consent to touch her in that way and whether it would be wrong. It's the lack of consideration of consent that's so troubling, rather than a direct intention to force himself on her)
As well as giving no regard to the matter of consent, the joke completely denies the woman's agency. His specific phrasing - that he would have a 'choice' - heavily implies that how he would touch her would be up to him/the man and that Nigella/the woman would be a passive object without the same 'choice'.
(if we can beyond the idea that he shouldn't be commenting at all)
what, in this situation, an appropriate way to express to comment "I would not have choked her, but I would have liked to touched her sexually" is?
Are you also going for the cheap false dichotomy that the only alternative to him making this comment is him not commenting at all?
Or are you just being a tedious bellend?
Especially someone who he has absolutely no reason to believe is interested in him. and especially not by comparing it to a violent assault.
Poor Nigella, I hope she's being looked after by friends who'll keep her away from seeing this shit.
from the incident to the people like this gobshite making light of it, and the fact that a bunch of other people will be making light of VAW regarding this, including the perpetrator.
and realised that Nick Griffin is even more of a twat in the context of the whole story
it's still a really really creepy and disgustingly inappropriate thing to say.
...so help him God.
Charles Saatchi or Nick Griffin?
(trick question, they are both complete and utter c**ts)
"Nick Griffin MEP ?@nickgriffinmep 24m
To feminist cranks whining re my 'objectifying' Nigella, she was happy to use her curves to sell books. Her chorizo & potato soup v good btw"
I can't even.
I imagine twisting and squeezing that garment to get rid of all of the excess water would be very satisfying.
just imagine he mainlines steak and kidney pies into his veins
but at the same time I bet quite a few people would agree that she gets by on her image a lot if we were having this discussion under happier circumstances.
Basically, kinda weird how a perfectly reasonable, acceptable opinion can become horrible and cruel when made at the wrong time or in the wrong situation - or when said by a massive racist fuckwad
I think they're objecting to him expressing that attraction in a way that makes light of her being physically assaulted. Whether she trades on her image is immaterial to that, so using it as a defence is completely irrelevant.
it's just always interesting to me how reasonable and unreasonable arguments and points can get all tangled together
More people arrested for Twitter jokes
i can imagine Griffin as a rap star, busting out this line in a song, and no one really minding. because rap stars (musicians in general really) can say shit like that and still get good reviews and high sales and that.
'if nigella bustin at me, i wont be squeezin her throat, be tugging on them titties till they look like they broke'
poor nick. just the wrong context mate. put it to a tune next time.
I regretted posting it quite quickly, I was just so incensed when I saw it.
saying, 'did you see the pictures of nigella lawson husband choking her in public? sick man'.
as in...he's a sick man...not...that was cool, man.
now, knowing that she probably hasn't seen the griffin tweet, i've replied by sending what he said, as if they were my words.
let's wait and see how my girlfriend responds. exciting.
'sexist. just read he's trying to cover it up as a 'playful tiff'. I'd bloody playful tiff his bollocks'.
better watch out Charles, she's playful tiffed my bollocks before, and i can tell you, it isn't nice.
thought she'd take the bait and have more of a go at me there. disappointing.
it'd would be a gentle squeeze of her hand during a warm handshake to congratulate her on her brilliant recipes.
Nick Griffin isn't allowed to make these jokes because, well, he's Nick Griffin. If mainstream rappers sing about/promote these same themes though, DiS doesn't only accept it, but praises it.
I guess in white middle class lefty top trumps it's better to look potentially sexist than racist.
I'd forgotten about all those threads where DarwinDude was banging on about her favourite rap stars.
that everyone is ok with it coming from 'mainstream rappers' - which I'm sure is not the case.
Also, to clarify, are you suggesting that a subconscious thought process of 'lots of rap artists are black and if they are being sexist it's better to agree with them because if I disagree with them I might be thought of as a racist'?
Not trying to be glib, more trying to fully understand your point.
rappers spouting sexist lyrics than I am about Nick Griffin being a fuck-wit.