Delingpole on Friday: How Feminists – and Activist Trolls – Ruined Social Media!

I’ve just been catching up with Game of Thrones Season 3. It’s a bit of a disappointment, I must say, bearing the same relationship to its predecessors as your third ecstasy tab: not as good as the second; definitely, DEFINITELY not as good as the first.

Still, you go through the motions all the same because you know here and there you’ll find traces of the old magic. And also because when it doesn’t quite do the trick it gives you another thing to grumble about. That Daenerys, for example. What a sanctimonious young missy she has turned into.

In Season One, she was pretty much the main draw: looking pouty and blonde, getting taken from behind by the grunting Dothraki chieftain, earning much sympathy thanks to her frightful mistreatment by her vile brother.

But in Season Three she seems to have mutated into Polly Toynbee, not just humourless and self-righteous but seriously quite unpleasant. I can understand her underdog urge to free all the slaves but I can’t forgive her priggish high-handedness and moral certainty. Her treatment of Yunkai, for example. All right, it’s a slave city – but so was Britain a slave nation pre-Wilberforce. Imagine how annoying it would have been if say, in the 1780s, some priggish little blonde bint had been able to destroy us, just like that, because she had dragons and we only had the Royal Navy. I don’t think we would have liked it. And I don’t think it would have been right. But apparently George R Martin is a Democrat voter, so there you go.

Anyway, to the point. I thought I’d have a grumble about the above on my Facebook page, which is where I usually go for what I’d call my “mates down the pub” type chats. All are welcome, just so long as they understand the basic rule – which for me apply across the social networks: “We’re here to have fun and if you don’t like it, fuck off. No, really. FUCK RIGHT OFF.”

So here’s what I posted:

“I am really, REALLY angry with that stupid blonde cow of a Mother of Dragons from Game of Thrones season 3. She used to be so fanciable. And now she’s just turned all priggish, self-righteous, bullying and, worst, dishonourable. She is RIGHT off my shag list.”

Many entertaining comments ensued, only to be interrupted by this one from a woman I’d never heard of, with a ridiculous first name which sounds a bit like Vomit. Here’s what she said:

“Well that is the most disgusting piece of sexist, misogynistic crap I’ve read today and I work for TROLL HAGS ANONYMOUS. You should be ashamed of yourself. You won’t be though.”

Her organization isn’t really called TROLL HAGS ANONYMOUS, by the way. I’m calling it by a pseudonym because I don’t want to give it any publicity. Basically, its aim is to eradicate misogyny from the internet.

So on and on this Vomit woman went, arguing with all those of my Facebook friends, male and female, who had the temerity to respond that she was talking ineffably tedious, Millie-Tant-style bollocks. And though I don’t suppose I mind a bit of trolling now and again – certainly gets a debate going – at the same time what struck me was this woman’s outrageous presumptuousness. She seemed to feel she had every right to barge into our conversation and give us her tuppenny ha’penny’s worth, whether we liked it or not. And personally I’m not sure that she did.

Earlier I used the analogy of a pub conversation.

Suppose you were sounding off in a pub on some contentious issue to your mates. You wouldn’t expect some stranger to just barge in and put you right, would you? It would be out of order. The very least they’d deserve would be to be told to mind their own business.

Yet in social media, this happens more and more.

The other day, for example, I posted on Twitter something about how nice it was to have a daughter who had just baked a cake for me. Yes, mildly provocative sexual stereotyping, I’d agree, but no worse than that. Certainly not enough to merit – as one Tweeter felt compelled to inflict on me – a series of sententious Tweets on, yup, sexual stereotyping and the correct way to bring up male and female children.

WTF?

This woman knows NOTHING about me, save what she has been able to infer from my 140 character bulletins, which for all she knows may be sarcastic, ironic, self-parodic, provocative, or dead-in-earnest sincere. Which of these they are, however, ought to matter not one jot because, again, it is NONE OF HER FUCKING BUSINESS.

I know some will disagree with me here. They’ll go “Ooh yes, well once you’re on Twitter or Facebook, it’s public isn’t it?” or they’ll say something tedious about privacy settings.

No, you disagreers. You are missing the point.

If I’m writing a blog, say, for the Daily Telegraph that’s one thing: I have to be reasonably mindful of the paper’s advertisers and of its house rules.

But if I’m posting random thoughts up on Twitter or Facebook, that’s another story altogether. These are My playgrounds where I play with MY mates. (And your Twitter and Facebook pages are YOUR playgrounds where you play with YOUR mates.)

If you don’t like what I say, that’s your problem and it’s easily soluble: don’t read any of the stuff I write any more. It’s not like you don’t have a rough idea of who I am and where I’m coming from by now. It’s not like there’s any shortage of people out there writing the kind of crap it sounds like you do want to read: maybe Cherie Blair talking about sexual inequality; or George Monbiot on rewilding; whatever rocks your boat.

What I absolutely don’t accept though is that – outside the rules of libel – you have any right whatsoever to whinge about what I say, still less to campaign against my right to say it.

You may think you are a crusader for a great cause. You are not. You are a stinking, loathsome troll. You are the kind of sad loser who seeks attention and personal validation by being seen publicly to take offence over issues you had absolutely no need to be offended by because you could just as easily have shrugged your shoulders and looked the other way. That’s what normal people do in a free society. What you did, Ms Vomit is not normal, not healthy. Again, you and your kind are trolls. Fuck right off, the lot of you.

64 comments on “Delingpole on Friday: How Feminists – and Activist Trolls – Ruined Social Media!

  1. tallbloke
    October 25, 2013 at 11:33 am #

    I’ve never had a fb account. Can’t you block trolls?

  2. raytheron
    October 25, 2013 at 11:42 am #

    How right you are! It irks me no end when some silly biddy tries to tell me what to say or think on my page, which is why I share with friends only. Trolls are a pain in the arse, anyhow…. and no, you can’t block them — well, you can, I suppose, one at a time. Best is for your mates to REALLY weigh into them LOL

  3. Ian W
    October 25, 2013 at 11:49 am #

    You certainly get succinct on Fridays James

  4. Mike
    October 25, 2013 at 11:52 am #

    If you want to play with your mates and not be confronted or criticised then don’t do it in places where the whole world can see. Perhaps if you hadn’t chosen a career as an intentionally provocative journalist who makes his money from shocking claims and sensationalist articles then people wouldn’t care what you said to your mates. You know as well as anyone how to block ‘trolls’ and have private sessions on facebook etc. You also know as well as anyone that this article is just another one of your cheesy attempts to wind people up and grab a bit more attention that you can convert into cash.
    It’s true that I don’t have to read what you say but then why do you have to say it at all? If you want to believe in outdated, outmoded, misogynistic, nonsense that’s entirely up to you but you publish it then complain when people disagree? We know you’re not that stupid. But don’t assume that we’re as stupid as your readers to believe that you have anything other than causing a stir on your agenda.
    I wish you would go away and play with your mates, in private.

    • grumpyoldmanuk
      October 25, 2013 at 12:32 pm #

      Sententious Prattdom seems to be taugnt at college level these days.

      • Mike
        October 25, 2013 at 12:42 pm #

        @Alex, Thanks for the suggestion. I’ll get one as soon as I’ve finished commenting on here (which is exactly what you’re doing). @ James So you don’t rely on your writing, it’s popularity acquired by your divisive and controversial opinions for your income, however much that may be? @grumpyoldmanuk I had assumed it was a natural skill some people were just born with.

    • Up yours
      October 25, 2013 at 1:19 pm #

      Mike, you really are a pillock and that type of ‘right on’ talk won’t get you laid. VIRGIN.

    • Jeff
      October 25, 2013 at 2:13 pm #

      Mike your obviously a reader of Mr Delingpole ,does that make you stupid ?

    • Keitho
      October 25, 2013 at 4:19 pm #

      Not just feminists I see. A whole sub order of offence vultures just circling waiting for the next thing to get indignant about. Just ask Roy.

    • Hannah L (@HannahLonline)
      October 25, 2013 at 10:53 pm #

      Is no one allowed to tell a joke now? What’s dangerous is your comment about: “why do you have to say it at all” – perhaps because he wanted too? Freedom of speech is not just what you define as FOS. I’m a woman and if someone wants to be sexist I couldn’t care less and if it went to far I’d ignore them. Everyone’s reaction is THEIR choice, we’re not just passive recipients of PC instruction manuals re when to get offended!

    • blingmun
      October 27, 2013 at 1:02 pm #

      Mike comes across as a tosser and he’s obviously a troll. But the good thing about trolls is that they actually improve the ranking of your blog or Facebook page with their comments and indeed their very presence. So tell him to fuck off by all means but don’t forget that – quite perversely – he is actually doing you a favour 🙂

  5. George Silver
    October 25, 2013 at 12:02 pm #

    taking offense is now the national sport of certain sections of the UK. See CiF on the guardian for world class offense taking over the most trivial of things.

    • Rocco
      October 25, 2013 at 1:25 pm #

      As a resident of the UK who takes offence to trivial things, I take offence to that!

  6. Alex
    October 25, 2013 at 12:17 pm #

    Mike get a life!

  7. James Delingpole
    October 25, 2013 at 12:31 pm #

    Mike, you seem to have a weird idea of how much journalists make. Even provocative journalists.

  8. Bob
    October 25, 2013 at 12:34 pm #

    “…but then why do you have to say it at all?”

    So TRUE Mike, and yet here you are adding flesh and bone to the adage that it is better to stay quite and suspected an idiot than to type and prove it…

  9. Rocco
    October 25, 2013 at 12:43 pm #

    Dude, spoilers!

  10. Mike
    October 25, 2013 at 1:18 pm #

    @Bob. I was not the one who published to the world then complained about those who disliked what I had said. Far from it. I was the one who said if you can’t stand being disagreed with then don’t publish in a medium designed to allow anyone to comment. You clearly don’t understand the most basic principals of social media. I am more than happy to be disagreed with as that is how intelligent debate can forge new ideas. If I couldn’t stand being opposed I wouldn’t say what I said on line, in a forum, an open blog or a social media site would I? That would either be stupid or divisive.

  11. Maneno
    October 25, 2013 at 1:29 pm #

    A bit strident and boring James – you can do better than that

  12. Mike
    October 25, 2013 at 1:31 pm #

    Using Mr Delingpole’s own analogy, imagine you’re in a pub that’s well known as a place where people go to discuss things with whoever is there and there’s a bloke in the corner talking so loudly that everyone can hear on purpose. Saying things that even the simplest mind knew would offend quite a lot of people. He then gets very upset when someone disagrees with him and goes to another similar pub to complain about that. Wouldn’t it be pretty obvious that he was more interested in the attention he was getting than actually talking to his mates about whatever it was he was talking about?

    • Simon Roberts
      October 25, 2013 at 1:53 pm #

      I don’t think that’s a very good comparison.

      You came to this site deliberately, as the woman that James is complaining about did with his FB page.

      It wasn’t accidental and wasn’t the equivalent of overhearing a conversation. It is the equivalent of joining a conversation that you would have to go out of your way to overhear.

      Having said that, I’m not sure I agree with James on this. The internet is an open medium and if you are going to post opinions in an area where others can see and comment, then expect them to do so.

      Lectures on privacy may be tedious, but in this context they are valid.

      An FB page is no more private than this blog, unless you choose to make it so.

      At the risk of stating the obvious, I suspect that James’ anger may actually be at the ridiculous arses who would impose their will on others “for their own good” – hence the reference to The Toynbee.

      • Mike
        October 25, 2013 at 2:03 pm #

        Good point Simon but I was led here via James’s tweet. So not only does he want to play with his mates he wants everyone to know what he is playing, where, why and with who, but he still doesn’t want anyone to comment on his games unless it’s to say how nicely he is playing and how they wish they could play too. He should learn not to play where it says NO BALL GAMES (see what I did there?).

      • Aparat
        October 25, 2013 at 4:55 pm #

        Mike, you followed his tweet, so are looking for confrontation.

      • Mike
        October 25, 2013 at 5:04 pm #

        Good point Aparat. No I was curious as to what he was tweeting about. It was a short tweet with a link and I was interested. I arrived here, read it and responded. Had I answered ‘yes’ would that have made any difference to the content or validity of my comments?

  13. SadButMadLad
    October 25, 2013 at 1:35 pm #

    Twitter and Facebook are both public and private. If you are a public figure using your account for publicity then it’s public. But James is using his in private capacity so it’s not public. But even if you use your account for private matters if you use a hashtag then you are pretty much going public – but on that topic only. So if James had included the #GameOfThrones tag then it would be inviting discussion by strangers.

  14. Pleiades
    October 25, 2013 at 1:55 pm #

    So sad that the definition of “misogyny” has been expanded to include…well, every statement that at least one woman somewhere on this planet doesn’t want to hear. Words have specific meanings, and when a word’s definition opens up so much that it means anything and everything, it ends up meaning nothing. As a woman and an English professor, that offends me. (Or it would, if it was possible to offend me.)

  15. James Delingpole
    October 25, 2013 at 1:57 pm #

    Anyone is welcome to troll me, Simon. What I objected to from this woman was that she felt I needed policing and belongs to a group which campaigns against what it perceives as misogyny and what I perceive as freedom of speech.

    • Jeff
      October 25, 2013 at 2:23 pm #

      Just out of interest ,what is the opposite of misogyny ? feminism ?

      • Mr Davies
        October 25, 2013 at 4:22 pm #

        Misandry.

    • andyL
      October 25, 2013 at 2:27 pm #

      It’s your own fault for watching Game of Thrones. By the box sets of all the seasons of Sopranos instead.

  16. Angry Harry (@AngryHarrysPage)
    October 25, 2013 at 2:24 pm #

    The reflexive accusation of being a misogynist whenever one says something of which a woman disapproves is known very well by women as a technique to silence debate.

    It is a reflection of the fact that feminist ideology is based on nothing but lies.

    Western women are, demonstrably, the most over-pampered, over-indulged, over-privileged organisms on the planet and yet they see themselves as being so superior to men that any criticism of one woman is seen as an affront to all of them.

    Thankfully, more and more men are waking up to this.

  17. Douglas
    October 25, 2013 at 3:23 pm #

    James

    With the recent discovery of an Earth shattering comet on course to hit our planet we need to make sure that proactive campaigners like this woman are guaranteed their place on Spaceship A.

    It is essential that she, and her sisters, are sent ahead to make sure the new world that humans colonise is prepared as a place of equality, with a nurturing environment for all sexualities in a low carbon economy.

  18. saeroberts62
    October 25, 2013 at 3:31 pm #

    Spiteful article…Thoroughly spiteful….That is all.

    Oh, actually, it isn’t quite all. I watched the first two episodes of Game of Thrones and got thoroughly bored that the only position the hairy, grunting men seemed to know was Doggie Style.

    • Rocco
      October 25, 2013 at 3:54 pm #

      Dude, spoilers!

      That is all.

  19. Mr Davies
    October 25, 2013 at 4:20 pm #

    It’s not feminism that’s the problem, it’s Marxism. Some feminists are Marxists. Often they won’t even know they are because they are yanks, but you can tell them from their tendency to say yanko-marxist things like “check your privilege”. There is no reasoning with them, but a simple Anglo-Saxon “fuck off” is both aposite and pleasing.

    Peace.

  20. Terry Kinder
    October 25, 2013 at 4:55 pm #

    If I may barge in for a moment…just kidding!

  21. Terry Kinder
    October 25, 2013 at 4:58 pm #

    If a may barge in for just a moment…just kidding!

  22. Roger L
    October 25, 2013 at 6:21 pm #

    @Mike – see you next Tuesday. Delingpole’s skint anyway.

    @Rocco – what’s the logical libertarian position on this debate!?

    • Mike
      October 25, 2013 at 6:36 pm #

      @ Roger L That’s the way forward. Veiled profanities will convince me to rethink my position.

    • Rocco
      October 25, 2013 at 7:51 pm #

      As far as privacy is concerned, Mike is absolutely right. You can’t put something where anyone can see/interact with it, then complain that someone you don’t like saw/interacted with it in a manner you don’t approve of. (However, I don’t think this was the main point of James’ article. I believe James was more concerned about this lady trying to tell him what he can and can’t say.)

      If I own a swimming pool, I can set the rules for who can swim in it. I can ban anyone I want, for any silly reason I want. However, if I’m on holiday swimming in the hotel pool and some obnoxious fellow gets in with me, I have no right to demand that he is removed – I don’t own the pool, so I don’t have the power to set the rules. Of course, I would be perfectly within my rights to complain about the policy of the pool owners in letting obnoxious fellows swim in it, and I’m at liberty to lobby them (or bribe them) to change their policy. I could even write an article on Bogpaper about it. But, unfortunately, my subjective feelings have no power to trump the rights of the legitimate owners of the pool. Privacy is a function of property.

      The interested reader might want to read my “Adam, Eve and a very private cave” here on Bogpaper, which covers the imaginary ‘right to privacy’.
      Or, better, Walter Block’s article “There is no right to privacy”.

  23. Johnnydub
    October 25, 2013 at 7:51 pm #

    Feminists are full of shit – have you ever, ever heard one object to the rampant inequality in the family courts?

  24. Maneno
    October 25, 2013 at 8:08 pm #

    Not sure I understand what this site is all about, but its boring.

    • Rocco
      October 25, 2013 at 8:16 pm #

      Understanding things is boring.

      Wooh! Satire!
      :p

      • Rocco
        October 25, 2013 at 8:21 pm #

        😛

        Emoticons! Wooh!

      • Maneno
        October 26, 2013 at 10:42 am #

        What has got into you all ? seem to have gone bananas, why ?

      • Rocco
        October 26, 2013 at 10:55 am #

        Just trying to spice things up for you, dude!

        Here, have another emoticon

        😀

    • Ahahahahahah
      October 26, 2013 at 9:26 am #

      dude if u understood it woudent be boring no wot i meen

  25. Monty
    October 25, 2013 at 8:19 pm #

    i have much sympathy for you on this subject. However you need to look up what trolling is and isn’t, because you don’t understand what it means.

  26. Kitler
    October 26, 2013 at 3:05 am #

    Well having researched the personette in question all I can say is she is wound up really tightly and needs a good hard…..

    • Maneno
      October 26, 2013 at 12:00 pm #

      She may well like to have a good hard….. but your limited imagination wouldn’t deliver one.

      • Rocco
        October 26, 2013 at 12:04 pm #

        Meeow!

      • Kitler
        October 27, 2013 at 2:14 am #

        Scientists have proven that semen contains chemicals that stop women from being bitchy. I paraphrase but apparently that sums up the extensive medical study.

  27. Kitler
    October 26, 2013 at 4:58 am #

    As for the personette in question they remind of the Steeleye Span song Alison Gross.

    • Maneno
      October 26, 2013 at 10:47 am #

      James, are you quite sure you want to put your name against your post and the subsequent comments ? I doubt anything you say subsequently will be taken seriously, in fact you will support opposite arguments. Is that what you want ?

      • Kitler
        October 27, 2013 at 2:19 am #

        Yes and feminists are easily baited because they are so predictable and you always try to deny 6 million years of evolution that has hardwired men and women in different ways. A nice rack is something I will always admire and no amount of reeducation camps or gulags you wish to send me to will stop that, it’s hardwired into my brain. If it wasn’t women would not be the only mammals that have permantly engorged breasts because nature would have no need for advertizing fertility to me.

  28. James Eadon
    October 26, 2013 at 10:52 am #

    This was a great post. I too love to hate the used-to-be-sweet dragon girl. I can only hope that the writers want us to loathe her. If they are trying to portray her as some kind of role model for women, then that’s a disaster, because she has become an entitled brat who thinks she knows best at the cost of thousands of innocent lives. However if the writers want her to be a villain, she is a terrific villain and very well acted.

  29. David
    October 26, 2013 at 8:38 pm #

    What leaves me bereft of any sympathy is the idea of a professional insulter not being able to take it back.

    And what always leads to an epic face palm that sees my hand reach the back of my skull, is that the rants about ‘trolls’ are always political. It is always feminists, the disabled, eco-loontards – the outliers in every group used to pull the rug from under the concepts they supposedly represent.

    Millie Tant – ha – I have met some of those therefore feminism is bollocks. Angry man in wheelchair – all disabled people are grumpy slackers, Ditzy ill informed celeb quotes third hand none truth about environment, typical of the evil fascism that is the foundation of the movement.

    Just because there are idiots on t’internet does not mean that all the hard work for ‘feminist’ issues was misguided, wrong, or misguided.

    On all these related issues you never have anything positive to say, along with all your mates that sit round with you looking into their pints muttering ‘wimmin…pah’,.

    • Rocco
      October 26, 2013 at 8:51 pm #

      Take it easy on the disabled, Dave! There’s no need to spread your hateful views on here.

    • Jake Haye
      October 26, 2013 at 9:21 pm #

      Not outliers, leftists. Leftists (egotistical moral exhibitionists) discredit every cause they associate with, no matter how worthy, and drown out or drive away reasonable people.

    • Kitler
      October 27, 2013 at 2:24 am #

      Feminism lost it’s way when it was hijacked by man hating lesbians in the early 70’s ever since it’s not been about rights but about how they can destroy men the competition for female partners.

  30. Richard Johnston
    October 27, 2013 at 1:11 am #

    Set your Facebook settings so only your friends can see it, lock your Twitter account so only the followers you approve of can read it. Then the pub analogy stands. Of course if one of them objects then you still have to live with it.

  31. Maneno
    October 27, 2013 at 9:07 am #

    You idiot James – this stuff will be wheeled out whenever someone wants to brand you swivel-eyed on Europe or AGM. Or anybody else for that matter, thanks a lot.

    I suggest you fit a breathalyser keyboard lock in future

  32. jdseanjd
    October 29, 2013 at 11:22 am #

    Sterling work James.

    Try these:
    Why Big Govt loves feminism: http://www.angryharry.com/esWhyGovernmentsLoveFeminism.htm

    Also google Aaron Russo Rockefeller

    Aaron Russo was being recruited by Nick Rockefeller to the Bankster/Crony Corporatist world control scheme, when Rockefeller predicted the false flag 9/11″attack”,11 months in advance . He also claimed the rockefellers bankrolled & planned “feminism”.

    When Russo wouldn’t play ball, he became dead.

    His film “Mad as Hell” is well worth catching.

    Keep stirring James.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: