#25

I think if you read my posts to him you would be hard pressed to say I didn’t both warn him this was dangerous territory and avoid anything as long as possible.

FWIW I have banned him for 2 weeks not for good.

2 Likes
#26

Just to clarify, @bennyhana22 - I don’t think Safebruv is calling you a cunt, but the idea of defeating unpleasant/malignant views in the #marketplaceofideas is pretty played out at this point, what with - [check notes] - all of politics in the past 3 years.

That said, it’s not exactly the best choice of words.

THAT said, you also said he’d insulted you, and I’m not sure when he’d insulted you up til that point.

7 Likes
#27

No, we haven’t. The forum has decided that it is under no obligation to host or offer a platform for his opinions, which he is more than welcome to shout in the street or tell other people in other places, should he wish.

10 Likes
#28

Big fan of advocating for free speech then getting huffy when someone gets sweary and blunt with you…

4 Likes
#29

There’s a difference between being sweary and blunt while conveying your argument and just swearing at someone.

image

e: also, sorry - feel like this is a bit of a blind alley and not relevant to the discourse, so happy to stop sidetracking things.

#30

He’s chosen a thread about sexual assault to make his “free speech” claims.

It’s all a bit The truly downtrodden are the people that can’t say what they want on Internet forums not the victims.

5 Likes
#31

Always a good test isn’t it

#32

He included me in the ‘don’t like the believe the victim ethos’ cohort, which implied that I have a lack of sensitivity to the victims of sexual abuse and, perhaps, to the current challenges they face from wider society when those like the orange man-baby create such barriers to their voices being heard.

safebruv knows exactly diddly squat about me, nor can he (I’m assuming ‘he’, given ‘bruv’ not ‘sis’) have inferred any such thing from my posts, other than by a predilection to finding fault in anyone who does not echo entirely his own position.

It was insulting, Did I feel insulted? Not really - I’m too old for that, and my professional exposure to accusers and accused likely gives me more insight into these matters than I imagine any experience of his will ever allow him.

Ben

#33

A fair grammatical riposte, IHH, though you’re assuming he used it correctly…! Given that he included me in the following comment about not needing to be here, I wouldn’t be confident of that.

Anyway, this is an increasingly unnecessary and unhelpful diversion from what should/could be a useful thread, so I need to stick by my previous ‘bow out’ comment.

Thanks for your very sensible approach to this stuff.

Ben

#34

If it had been a regular poster, I’d have been more inclined to engage with them but the new poster argument did it for me (there seemed to be, if not an axe to grind, some sort of agenda).

That said, if we’re not here to discuss the issue, what is the thread for other than sympathy / expressions of disgust?

#35

In part, yes. But also; the thread can make people aware of what’s going on, it can help people understand what it’s like for survivors, it can lead other men to see why there’s such a lack of faith and also hopefully show what can be done.

Lots of things basically…without having to have some sort of RaTIonAl debate about whether this might be one of those anomalous cases where the accusation is false (it has also been pointed out that the circumstances of this case make it even less likely to be made up).

If we have to chose between being a forum of “sensible discussion” or one that is kind and supportive to survivors…then I’d pick the latter, always.

2 Likes
#36

Fair points. I think for the most part it has been useful, and I’ve certainly thought about issues and taken in points of view that I wouldn’t have done before reading it.

I’m very aware from other threads that going against the hive mind is difficult on here at times (troll is andy easy word to throw around), but it’s good to see the mods exercising their usual spot-on assessment of when to ban.

1 Like
#37

FWIW, I was particularly harsh on the guy because he was a new user, so there wasn’t much trust there.

Perhaps DB’s suggestion that a thread for discussions about debate/censorship be created, so it doesn’t sidetrack this thread too much

1 Like
#38

Not something you can really self-proclaim, is it, that you were being sensitive?

1 Like
#39

Forgive me, but I don’t understand the point you’re trying to make.

Ben

#40

I personally, as a victim of sexual assault, thought that you were displaying a lack of sensitivity to victims of sexual assault. But that doesn’t matter I guess because you decided you were being adequately sensitive by taking offence at being called out.

10 Likes
#41

I am, of course, very sorry for any terrible experience that you might have endured. Ands I’m not going to get into any protracted discourse here. But I would. courteously, ask you to point out how, in any way, I might have displayed any lack of sensitivity to victims of sexual assault.

I’ve left this thread alone all day as my interactions were becoming pointless, and that was fine. But if you’re going to come on and feel you have anything about which to call me out, then I would appreciate a little clarity on the matter. Because you are out of line, I’m afraid.

Ben

#42

give it a rest.

12 Likes
#43

Asking someone to explain is in itself insensitive

9 Likes
#44

Definitely best to leave this here, Ben.

8 Likes