FOS discussion

[Anonymous]

One of the most sensible speakers on this subject is Debbie Hayton. We need to hear more from rational voices like hers. It is such a shame that the ideologues have dominated the debate for the last few years. They have put back trans rights by a decade. If you tell people that 2 + 2 = 5, eventually someone will say, nah, this is bull shit. Looks like even Keir Starmer now is stepping back from supporting trans ideology as he knows the general public think it's dangerous.

Kier Starmer hasn’t said anything of the sort. Please link to his quote on that.

The public think a tiny percentage of the transgender population that has to go through a 5 year medial and psychiatric process to legally change their gender is dangerous? Nonsense. Send me the link to that polling.

It is incongruous to believe a man would go through that gruelling process to legally change their gender just to rape a woman. They don’t need to change their gender legally to do that or to enter a women’s space.

 

[Redacted]

It really is impossible to engage in a sensible discussion if you are going to suggest that Morrissey has made 'comments on pedophilia'. He didn't say anything about paedophilia - you should become a journalist for The Sun. He simply made some comments about human sexuality being grey, not black and white.
I made that very point in a previous post about 'hate speech' having its origin in the Public Order Act of the Thatcher government during the Miners' Strike. Kind of ironic isn't it that it is now championed by the left.

He was talking about a CHILD. Yes, in the end Spacey was found not guilty, but at the time Morrissey had made his comment, Spacey had apologized for what he was accused of, any rational person would take an apology as an admission.

 

[gashonthenail]

This exactly. Freedom of Speech means the government can't punish you for your speech, with very limited exceptions. Also, in the US, there is no such thing as hate speech, for anyone who does not know that, because Brits sometimes think there is.

The 1st amendment is one of the best things about the USA. No other country in the world enshrines freedom of speech in quite the same way.

 

[gashonthenail]

He was talking about a CHILD. Yes, in the end Spacey was found not guilty, but at the time Morrissey had made his comment, Spacey had apologized for what he was accused of, any rational person would take an apology as an admission.

Spacey was never charged with a crime - he wasn't found 'not guilty'. An actor came forward and made an allegation. Morrissey commented on the allegation. I know in this era of #MeToo we are all supposed to believe 'victims' as sacrosanct, but that is a really bad idea, as evidenced recently by the case of Eleanor Williams in the UK.
Spacey was sued for assault in a civil case and the jury dismissed the claim. The burden of proof is lower in a civil case as you know. I know these are details but they are important. It points to Morrissey being vindicated over what he said. The allegation was never the crime of the century and the jury clearly agreed that it just didn't stack up.

 

[Anonymous]

The 1st amendment is one of the best things about the USA. No other country in the world enshrines freedom of speech in quite the same way.

Not true but don’t let the truth get in the way of your posts.

No response re your statement that Morrissey has never talked about anything to do with paedophilia?

Any view on people having the freedom to not spend their hard earned cash on something produced by someone they don’t like any more?

Any other snippets of made up rhetoric or fictional make believe?

 

[Anonymous]

Spacey was never charged with a crime - he wasn't found 'not guilty'. An actor came forward and made an allegation. Morrissey commented on the allegation. I know in this era of #MeToo we are all supposed to believe 'victims' as sacrosanct, but that is a really bad idea, as evidenced recently by the case of Eleanor Williams in the UK.
Spacey was sued for assault in a civil case and the jury dismissed the claim. The burden of proof is lower in a civil case as you know. I know these are details but they are important. It points to Morrissey being vindicated over what he said. The allegation was never the crime of the century and the jury clearly agreed that it just didn't stack up.

You completely miss the point.

morrissey said the fault of a child abuse victim was the child’s fault because they should have known to not be in a room with an adult.

Do you agree with that that the child is to blame and not the abuser?

He also said the victims of Weinstein were only accusing him because they didn’t get a career out of it.

Do you believe that too?

He said meat eating is the same as paedophilia. You believe that?

You still think Morrissey never commented on paedophilia as you stated?

You would be surprised if the above comments might offend abuse victims and a large section of his fanbase?

He has the freedom to say those things. He wasn’t arrested for it. Then fans who didn’t like it chose to no longer spend their money on him.

Do you not believe that is their freedom to decide to do that?

I don’t see any breach of any freedom to speak with this.

 

[Anonymous]

Spacey was never charged with a crime - he wasn't found 'not guilty'. An actor came forward and made an allegation. Morrissey commented on the allegation. I know in this era of #MeToo we are all supposed to believe 'victims' as sacrosanct, but that is a really bad idea, as evidenced recently by the case of Eleanor Williams in the UK.
Spacey was sued for assault in a civil case and the jury dismissed the claim. The burden of proof is lower in a civil case as you know. I know these are details but they are important. It points to Morrissey being vindicated over what he said. The allegation was never the crime of the century and the jury clearly agreed that it just didn't stack up.

You may need to also check your spacey never being charged comment.

He was charged with 7 offences in the UK.

But the issue that it is spacey or whatever is not the point. Morrissey said a child in a room with an adult is to blame for being abused because he should have known not to be there.

In most rational people’s minds the person to blame for child abuse is always the adult and never the child. A child is not legally or morally responsible for being abused by an adult. Ever.

 

[Malarkey]

You may need to also check your spacey never being charged comment.

He was charged with 7 offences in the UK.

But the issue that it is spacey or whatever is not the point. Morrissey said a child in a room with an adult is to blame for being abused because he should have known not to be there.

In most rational people’s minds the person to blame for child abuse is always the adult and never the child. A child is not legally or morally responsible for being abused by an adult. Ever.

He didn't say that - he said he didn't think anything had happened at all because the story sounded implausible.

And as he repeated the wrong story - it was implausible.

 

[Vesper Nocturne]

Ridiculous. She was cancelled? Right now she is earning $100 million a year from the recently released hogwarts legacy computer game.

Of course she wasn’t cancelled.

How is that relevant to Morrissey’s statement about freedom of speech as this thread was about?

My interest and care in that woman is less than zero.

Anyone want to get back to the point re Morrissey?

Listen, brainbox

The only thing that’s ridiculous around here is the length of your posts and the fact that the arguments are nonsense.

1. You didn’t start this thread
2. You keep repeatedly telling the person who did start this thread that they are off-topic
3. The name of this thread is “FOS” not “What Anon Wants To Discuss About Morrissey’s Comments Out of Context While Also Telling Everyone Else They’re Off-Topic”
4. More nonsense from you about JK Rowling in your retort that I’ve quoted above. Because whether she was “cancelled”, or whether interested parties only “tried” to cancel her, or whether you personally don’t like the word “cancelled”, are just another way of dancing around the point, so as to never clearly face the reality
5. And the reality is that you are now talking about JK Rowling having a new contract, several years after everything I mentioned in my original post did happen first.

Your arguments are disingenuous, and it’s why barely two people are interested in engaging in wasting their time in this conversation with you, as you continue to persist with more of the same of your deliberate and knowing misrepresentations

In my book, that’s what’s ridiculous and boring, and that’s what *I* have less than zero interest in

 

[Anonymous]

He didn't say that - he said he didn't think anything had happened at all because the story sounded implausible.

And as he repeated the wrong story - it was implausible.

Not true.

He said

“As far as I know, he was in a bedroom with a 14-year-old,” Morrissey added. “Kevin Spacey was 26, boy 14. One wonders where the boy’s parents were. One wonders if the boy did not know what would happen.”

“I do not know about you but in my youth I have never been in situations like this. Never. I was always aware of what could happen,” Morrissey continued. “When you are in somebody’s bedroom, you have to be aware of where that can lead to.”

As a victim of abuse by being in a room with an adult I find his view to be hideous and am amazed that others don’t. But in reality we know many people were outraged by this view.

And you don’t think the Weinstein abuse comment is also wrong?

"the person referred to as a victim is merely disappointed".

"People know exactly what's going on," he reportedly said when asked about Weinstein. "And they play along. Afterwards, they feel embarrassed or disliked. And then they turn it around and say: 'I was attacked, I was surprised'. But if everything went well, and if it had given them a great career, they would not talk about it.

 

[Anonymous]

Listen, brainbox

The only thing that’s ridiculous around here is the length of your posts and the fact that the arguments are nonsense.

1. You didn’t start this thread
2. You keep repeatedly telling the person who did start this thread that they are off-topic
3. The name of this thread is “FOS” not “What Anon Wants To Discuss About Morrissey’s Comments Out of Context While Also Telling Everyone Else They’re Off-Topic”
4. More nonsense from you about JK Rowling in your retort that I’ve quoted above. Because whether she was “cancelled”, or whether interested parties only “tried” to cancel her, or whether you personally don’t like the word “cancelled”, are just another way of dancing around the point, so as to never clearly face the reality
5. And the reality is that you are now talking about JK Rowling having a new contract, several years after everything I mentioned in my original post did happen first.

Your arguments are disingenuous, and it’s why barely two people are interested in engaging in wasting their time in this conversation with you, as you continue to persist with more of the same of your deliberate and knowing misrepresentations

In my book, that’s what’s ridiculous and boring, and that’s what *I* have less than zero interest in

So many wrong statements there.

First this isn’t a thread started by anyone in this diatribe. The discussion came from the review of Morrissey’s show in London and was a discussion around his comment on stage about freedom of speech.

It had nothing in do with JK Rowling or transgender rights.

The discussion was moved from that show review by a moderator to this FOS thread.

The whole discussion about Morrissey and freedom of speech was hijacked into an attack on “woke” arguments around transgender which has nothing to do with Morrissey whatsoever.

The Rowling point you keep reiterating is that she states she was not cancelled. She is still able and say what she wants and still able to sell her “art” and her career has not been affected.

But back to the point over freedom to speech. It was stated in this discussion that Morrissey has been cancelled so let’s deal with that in very short points.

Has Morrissey been prevented from saying what he wants?

Is Morrissey still able and play gigs?

Is Morrissey still able or produce his art?

Do his fans of years / decades who don’t like what he said or not like him anymore for any reason whatsoever have the freedom to stop spending their cash going to his gigs and stop buying his products?

Do those same fans have the freedom to speak about that and free to express their dislike of his views regardless of whether you agree with that or not?

These points are the basics of freedom to speak and consumer freedom of choice.

There have been statements on here that have stated he has been cancelled but that clearly isn’t the case. Saying people should be free to say what they want and then in the next breath attack people for their freedom of consumer choice is a conflicted viewpoint.

I say freedom needs a be consistent even if you don’t like something surely.

 

[Anonymous]

In my book, that’s what’s ridiculous and boring, and that’s what *I* have less than zero interest in

…and yet you do seem to have an interest in it to be bothered to reply…..

 

[Anonymous]

Listen, brainbox

The only thing that’s ridiculous around here is the length of your posts and the fact that the arguments are nonsense.

1. You didn’t start this thread
2. You keep repeatedly telling the person who did start this thread that they are off-topic
3. The name of this thread is “FOS” not “What Anon Wants To Discuss About Morrissey’s Comments Out of Context While Also Telling Everyone Else They’re Off-Topic”
4. More nonsense from you about JK Rowling in your retort that I’ve quoted above. Because whether she was “cancelled”, or whether interested parties only “tried” to cancel her, or whether you personally don’t like the word “cancelled”, are just another way of dancing around the point, so as to never clearly face the reality
5. And the reality is that you are now talking about JK Rowling having a new contract, several years after everything I mentioned in my original post did happen first.

Your arguments are disingenuous, and it’s why barely two people are interested in engaging in wasting their time in this conversation with you, as you continue to persist with more of the same of your deliberate and knowing misrepresentations

In my book, that’s what’s ridiculous and boring, and that’s what *I* have less than zero interest in

If you look carefully you will see the 1st post in this thread is mine so you certainly could say I started the discussion and was related to what Morrissey said on stage.

I know that may be difficult to work out with all the sidetracks but there you have it.

It’s always good to debate. Freedom of speech in action.

 

[gashonthenail]

You may need to also check your spacey never being charged comment.

He was charged with 7 offences in the UK.

But the issue that it is spacey or whatever is not the point. Morrissey said a child in a room with an adult is to blame for being abused because he should have known not to be there.

In most rational people’s minds the person to blame for child abuse is always the adult and never the child. A child is not legally or morally responsible for being abused by an adult. Ever.

I was referring to the Rapp allegation, which is what Redacted was referring to, and what Moz was referring to when he made the comments in question.
Yes Spacey has been charged with 7 offences in the UK. Morrissey wasn't referring to any of these charges in the UK as they came after the comments in question. None of the charges relate to a minor. There is no evidence that Spacey is a paedophile. Chucking that allegation at him smacks of 'all gay men are paedophiles'.
Moz merely asked what was a teenager doing at an adult party where there was alcohol. Why wasn't he at home being supervised by his guardian? That is not an unreasonable question to ask.
Rapp alleged that, whilst at the drunken party, Spacey lay on top of him on a bed for a few seconds. Rapp then got off the bed and left the party. If you want to classify that as child abuse that is your opinion. But the jury didn't agree with you.
As for the eating meat quote - Moz loves a bit of hyperbole to emphasise the fact that he thinks, wait for it, meat is murder. Were you a slow learner at school?

 

[Malarkey]

Not true.

He said

“As far as I know, he was in a bedroom with a 14-year-old,” Morrissey added. “Kevin Spacey was 26, boy 14. One wonders where the boy’s parents were. One wonders if the boy did not know what would happen.”

“I do not know about you but in my youth I have never been in situations like this. Never. I was always aware of what could happen,” Morrissey continued. “When you are in somebody’s bedroom, you have to be aware of where that can lead to.”

As a victim of abuse by being in a room with an adult I find his view to be hideous and am amazed that others don’t. But in reality we know many people were outraged by this view.

And you don’t think the Weinstein abuse comment is also wrong?

"the person referred to as a victim is merely disappointed".

"People know exactly what's going on," he reportedly said when asked about Weinstein. "And they play along. Afterwards, they feel embarrassed or disliked. And then they turn it around and say: 'I was attacked, I was surprised'. But if everything went well, and if it had given them a great career, they would not talk about it.

You missed out the bit where he said it doesn't ring true - ie. he didn't think it had happened.

And he didn't say anything about Weinstein at all - Der Spiegel added the name into the published version. It's not on the audio. He was talking about the casting couch/awkward relationships in general.

 

[TheSmiths_1985]

You missed out the bit where he said it doesn't ring true - ie. he didn't think it had happened.

And he didn't say anything about Weinstein at all - Der Spiegel added the name into the published version. It's not on the audio. He was talking about the casting couch/awkward relationships in general.

What is your motivation to excuse everything he says?

 

[Anonymous]

You missed out the bit where he said it doesn't ring true - ie. he didn't think it had happened.

And he didn't say anything about Weinstein at all - Der Spiegel added the name into the published version. It's not on the audio. He was talking about the casting couch/awkward relationships in general.

And you too are missing the point.

Forget about whether he thinks it was true or not and forget that it is Spacey and Weinstein.

A person stood up and claimed he was abused when he was 15 by an adult and Morrissey said it didn’t sound true because a 15 year old would know what could happen if he went into a room with an adult.

It doesn’t even matter if the child knew what could happen and in Morrissey’s words “went along with it”.

The blame is never ever going to be the child’s under any circumstance.

To say the victims of abuse re couch are only speaking up because they were disappointed they didn’t get career out of it is cool?

But this isn’t about whether you think this is right or not. It is about freedom to speak which he did and then my freedom to choose to stop being a fan regardless of whether you agree with my reason for doing so .

That isn’t cancel culture. It is purely my democratic consumer right to make decisions of my own and how I spend my money.

And if I want to speak about it since that is also my freedom to speak.

 

[Malarkey]

What is your motivation to excuse everything he says?

Accuracy.

And social justice.

 

[Anonymous]

Accuracy.

And social justice.

his words seem pretty clear to me but you just keep denying the obvious.

But this isn’t about whether you will never have a problem with anything he says but whether my choice to not fund him after what he said is democratic free consumer choice or cancel culture?

I would have more chance of getting JK Rowling to agree that gender is fluid than getting a member of the Morrissey cult to agree in him being wrong in any way but that isn’t my objective.

The thread I started under the London gig review in relation to his comment on freedom of speech at the gig which was moved by a moderator because it went off topic onto trans “ideology” was about the freedom to speak and freedom to chose not to spend my money on him without being accused of cancelling him.

 

[Malarkey]

And you too are missing the point.

Forget about whether he thinks it was true or not and forget that it is Spacey and Weinstein.

A person stood up and claimed he was abused when he was 15 by an adult and Morrissey said it didn’t sound true because a 15 year old would know what could happen if he went into a room with an adult.

It doesn’t even matter if the child knew what could happen and in Morrissey’s words “went along with it”.

The blame is never ever going to be the child’s under any circumstance.

To say the victims of abuse re couch are only speaking up because they were disappointed they didn’t get career out of it is cool?

But this isn’t about whether you think this is right or not. It is about freedom to speak which he did and then my freedom to choose to stop being a fan regardless of whether you agree with my reason for doing so .

That isn’t cancel culture. It is purely my democratic consumer right to make decisions of my own and how I spend my money.

And if I want to speak about it since that is also my freedom to speak.

He didn't react to a 15 year old - he reacted to things he'd heard via the media.

The very first time the press tried to "cancel" him in 1983 - they linked him to paedophilia. It's a well known homophobic trope & it's not surprising he'd be wary of it in the press.