Hard News: And some cat from Japan ...
76 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 Newer→ Last
-
I'm sorry Megan, but in my day women knew not read things that might have been written by stupid people. We knew very well that authors who seemed all smiley and nice in the headshot above their column might be waiting for the chance to drop an infuriating conclusion or a snide assertion once they'd won our trust. If you're going to just wantonly click on any old link you deserve everything you get. It's just common sense.
-
If you're going to just wantonly click on any old link you deserve everything you get. It's just common sense.
Oh my god, Stephen, you are right! God. I should stop being such a victim. Wait, no, I am confused.
To confound my stupidity, I read the "reader comments". Now I hate myself, the internet, and the world.
-
Oh, crap. I saw all the tweeting about that on Sunday, and had managed to avoid actually reading it. Then I clicked on your link, and now I have a sore head. From all the banging, you see.
I personally find it rather hard to argue with the headline that "If women want sexual freedom, they must accept sexual responsibility." Would be nice if women weren't expected to take on sexual responsibility for the animal penis brains as well... How have I survived all these years as a flaming faggot, without the restraining balm of a slutty (yet demure) angel of the hearth to keep my bestial instincts under control?
And the most bile-inducing passage from Ms. Woodham's piece:
The courts are there to deal with crimes that are alleged to have been committed; it appears the media's there to allow women scorned but not criminally-abused to wreak their vengeance.
Yes, because the columnists of the Sunday papers never tried, convicted and assassinated Louise Nicholas' character as a mentally unstable, vindictive whore...
ETA: Stephen -- stop poking the angry lady.
-
How have I survived all these years as a flaming faggot, without the restraining balm of a slutty (yet demure) angel of the hearth to keep my bestial instincts under control?
Well, you know I am always here for you, darling.
I really don't want to start this fight again, because I feel like we've been having it for a couple of years now. So, um, isn't that a cute cat?
ETA: Stephen -- stop poking the angry lady.
Hey!
-
Uncovered meat, anybody? I'd say someone's trying to exhume the Mazengarb Report.
And as for Mr Lhaws - Pot. Kettle. Black.
-
Sorry, I was tired and not up to picking any bits to extract for fair warning. Seems a fascinating social reflection that this silly nastiness feels empowered to show its face in public now (again).
Wonder what those nice misters McVicar or McCockrie think about this, representing 1% of the voting population as they do? I'm sure the media will make it their job to tell us. More cute cats needed..
-
I felt pretty used last time I wandered down a Herald comments thread, punch drunk from the stupid article and wearing nothing but a nice rebuttal.
-
Gold
-
Heh, Ben!
Megan:
To confound my stupidity, I read the "reader comments".
I try not to do this at the Herald, the Guardian, or Salon. I don't know who sent around the memo to all the whining MRAs, but that's where they hang. Blurgh.
-
the filth column
what a sorry bunch of Opinionistas ...
Laws (why did he leave parliament again ? I do need reminding), Woodham (am I to understand she's not drinking anymore ...), McLeod is just tiresome and now I see Gareth Morgan hammering home his attack on the aged and infirm's alleged rorting of the system...Prominent among those bullying their way to the front are those who use well-organised lobbyists such as Age Concern and Grey Power. And the frequency of politicians turning up on TV advocating loudly for some old lady or equally heart-rending case and barking at the Government to respond is symptomatic of the system's failure.
Last week I confronted one such politician making her mark in this way on television's Close Up. Such soap-boxers should play no part in how health resources are allocated.I watched him on that Close Up, he looked decidedly uncomfortable and weaselly with it...
and the Press has sadly dropped John Minto for Chris trotter, so it goes...
-
This really just makes me incredibly tired and incredibly sad. Welcome to the 19th century. What have we learned? How hard is it to understand that 'comatose consent' is an oxy(you)moron(s)?
-
Let alone the comatose consent of a twelve year old, eh? But it's good to know we can force ourselves on those weaker than us and count on the spirited defense of cheerful intellectuals.
-
Without disagreeing with any of the above sentiments, I'd be grateful if we could stop short of bringing down a rape conviction on the basis of a thing we heard on the news.
-
The funny thing is, if you took about 5 phrases (like "unwanted sex") out of the column, I'd be pretty close to agreeing with her.
-
the spirited defense of cheerful intellectuals.
There are some occasions where there just simply isn't an irony tag big enough to do it justice.
This was a particular highlight;
It is little wonder the media have become a distrusted profession in recent years. Their hypocrisy reeks.
Look in the mirror, much?
I'd be grateful if we could stop short...
Fair point, but hopefully it was clearly about what LHaws and Woodham have said, not about the case itself. That needs to be dealt with in other quarters.
-
Yes, because the columnists of the Sunday papers never tried, convicted and assassinated Louise Nicholas' character as a mentally unstable, vindictive whore...
Really only Michael Laws, from what I can recall. The Star Times actually made a lot of the early running on the historic police rape cases.
-
I'd be grateful if we could stop short of bringing down a rape conviction on the basis of a thing we heard on the news.
It's obviously what Woodham was commenting on, though, no? In a pretty appalling level of abstraction. But I'm not assuming the guilt of anybody about anything - the allegations, hearsay, call it what you want, are simply the context of Woodham's piece.
-
cheerful intellectual
pleased to see the phrase getting another trot..
-
Oh yes.
-
I feel that describing Laws, Coddington, George and Woodham as "intellectuals" is possibly a wee bit generous.
-
Woodham's not an intellectual - except in the sense that she might pass for one to one of our newspaper editors - but she certainly is a cheerful intellectual.
-
It's obviously what Woodham was commenting on, though, no? In a pretty appalling level of abstraction. But I'm not assuming the guilt of anybody about anything - the allegations, hearsay, call it what you want, are simply the context of Woodham's piece.
Fair enough. I'm just mindful that all I know of this story has been passed through the filter of a certain sort of reporting.
But what was the "comatose consent of a twelve year old" a reference to? I was confused.
-
Without disagreeing with any of the above sentiments, I'd be grateful if we could stop short of bringing down a rape conviction on the basis of a thing we heard on the news.
Entirely fair there, Russell. I just wish the likes of Ms. Woodham and Mr. Laws would extend the same courtesy all the way round. Making false criminal complaints and committing perjury are far from trivial offences.
Laws, in particular, has a very nasty habit of aiming intemperate abuse at people who don't have fifteen hours a week of radio air-time and a newspaper column to return fire.
-
Entirely fair there, Russell. I just wish the likes of Ms. Woodham and Mr. Laws would extend the same courtesy all the way round. Making false criminal complaints and committing perjury are far from trivial offences.
And I cannot disagree with a word of that.
-
Ops. Make that 17 year old. Don't know where that came from either.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.