monkers
Legendary Member
Did somebody turn your rock over again? Diddums.
Gender again. Sorry!
- Thread starter theclaud
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Did somebody turn your rock over again? Diddums.
Pale Rider
Veteran
Her history of abuse, assuming it's accepted as true, is mitigation, even strong mitigation, but it's no more than that.
Had she only given the abuser a good hiding, that strong mitigation may have saved her from any prison time at all.
The mitigation is also time sensitive, saying 'I was rogered senseless as a child' has a much reduced impact from a woman in her 50s, both in the eyes of the law and I reckon, the general public.
Another mistake she made is that when she heard the clang of the prison gates behind her, she thought she could carry on as normal.
Attending a demo, let alone picking up the mic, was such a dumb decision.
As we've seen, the arrest risk for those attending demos is very high, whether that be a reasonable arrest or an unreasonable one.
She needs to grasp she cannot afford even the lightest brush with the law or authority.
Unless she's happy enough to add to her tally of 30 not out, in which case, carry on.
monkers
Legendary Member
I've looked at this a bit more since posting. Unintentionally not everything I have posted is strictly accurate; but that's the problem with the internet isn't it.
There is much about for people to dislike. I like her honesty. She doesn't make excuses, doesn't think she shouldn't have been punished.
She says that she did intend to murder, so the charges seem correct.
She is sure to be a divisive character, but an intelligent person. She went to jail as a non-reader. She now has a degree in economics.
I will always have sympathy for those who have suffered this level of abuse, especially as a child. That's not the same as thinking that her actions as a young person can be dismissed. I do think that released prisoners should have the same rights as all others.
According to today's papers she has been returned to prison. She is charged with public order offences which I believe might be being heard tomorrow. It will be interesting to follow the case. My prediction is that they will find her guilty. I'd prefer that they don't, but that she does learn her lesson.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1mvPfVSnA8
Pale Rider
Veteran
So do I, and largely they have.
Her release licence may have something to say about that.
I've never read one, and in any case a lifer's licence is written for the individual.
Having said that, committing any further offence will certainly be a breach.
A further like offence and it really would be throw away the key time.
But as this is an unlike offence - unless there are loads on her record - she may be saved from a long period in the slammer.
AuroraSaab
Squire
No, that's the problem with you caping for violent sexual abusing attempted murderers like Sarah Jane Barker to have access to women's single spaces and services.
Here's Sarah Jane being honest. Their speech wasn't the light hearted banter you make it out to be. What they actually said was:
“I was going to come here and be really fluffy, be really nice and be really lovely and queer and gay and laugh......But if you see a Terf, punch them in the farking face.”
Cheers from the crowd....
Any sympathy for girls and women who suffered this level of abuse from men and consequently don't want males in their vulnerable spaces? You've shown literally zero so far.
monkers
Legendary Member
Page after page of lies and abuse from you, and it never stops. You are not in a safe place to deliver that lecture.
Have you no self-awareness? Why do you keep on so?
AuroraSaab
Squire
Your fall back position is personal abuse so I'm not sure you have any self-awareness either.
What you are is a huge hypocrit though, with your sympathetic portrayal of Sarah Jane Barker as a victim of trauma whilst deliberately ignoring the fact that women and girls with similar trauma need spaces away from men, all men however they identify. It's not that you don't know this; you just don't think it matters as much as your special sub set of men having the validation of being in women's spaces.
What you are is a huge hypocrit though, with your sympathetic portrayal of Sarah Jane Barker as a victim of trauma whilst deliberately ignoring the fact that women and girls with similar trauma need spaces away from men, all men however they identify. It's not that you don't know this; you just don't think it matters as much as your special sub set of men having the validation of being in women's spaces.
monkers
Legendary Member
Do you not think that keeping on telling people that they don't care about women and girls is tedious? It's highly presumptuous and completely untrue.
Just because I debunk your lies, it doesn't mean I don't care. It just means I don't care for your lies.
By all means make your points, but please use the facts rather than your own facts, and don't presume that because people don't fall for your lies, that they don't care. What response do you think you are going to get, when you repeat these lies?
I care about women and girls, I care about men and boys. I don't care for lies.
D
Deleted member 159
Guest
Monkers, to put the record straight and clear for the forum
Do you agree biological women and girls should have their own safe spaces away from any biological man no matter of their gender?
It's a yes or no answer
Do you agree biological women and girls should have their own safe spaces away from any biological man no matter of their gender?
It's a yes or no answer
Bromptonaut
Rohan Man
- Location
- Bugbrooke, Northants
D
Deleted member 159
Guest
Yawn.
She's answered it. Dozens of times.
And it ain't yes/no.
You weren't asked, so keep out of it
Ian H
Legendary Member
He's quite correct, it isn't yes or no.
monkers
Legendary Member
It's a false dichotomy. I'm not stupid.
D
Deleted member 159
Guest
There you have it,
Monkers does not believe biological women and girls should have safe spaces away from biological men.
Refuses to answer a perfectly straightforward question.
Monkers does not believe biological women and girls should have safe spaces away from biological men.
Refuses to answer a perfectly straightforward question.
