Beware. If you have high blood pressure already, do not read this. My attention was drawn to the Indie’s commenters by looking at the online coverage of slutwalk. To say i am aghast at reading stuff that wouldn’t be out of place in the worst bits of the Sun doesn’t do this justice. Here’s a selection of what got past the moderators:
Referring to a picture of a woman in chains, used to illustrate the article, John writes:
“The above picture is kind of surreal. But it is not. It is the picture of a wh0r3 asking for patronage. Ind3cent people attract ind3cent people. And when they do get patronage, not from the people of their chosen, they cry rape!!!”
Ian says: “It is good to see men starting to react against all this feminist silliness”
“Right, that’s it. I was against the burka until I saw those ugly dogs on that march now I am all for the ban. All lesbians and feminist must wear the burka by law. It won’t stop rape but it will stop men turning the other way.”
Faizal, who claims to be from South Africa tells us:
“Anastasia Richardson you obviously haven’t been raped. Come here and ask the woman how they dress after being raped. Please, please don’t play with fire. It seems you people in the West have time to play games.”
Ian is back again:
“Women’s main attraction is the offer of sex, without sex, women would be only good for slaves or even food. Rich men seek attractive trophy wives. Western women have become the most unpleasant human beings ever to have lived on the earth.”
Or there’s this one from Firozali: “Why do not these people wear simple clothes like we used to wear in 60s? Because the cash is pouring in if you show your boobs and the hips swing.”
Even some of the superficially supportive comments have a sting in the tail. F’rinstance: “Of course the ladies have a very good point but modesty can make a woman just as or even more beautiful rather than justifying slavery to fashion”
John241 obviously bears a grudge:
“A society that confiscate, …yeah..forcibly take possession of or rob a man of the proceeds of his lifelong toil in favour of a woman, just because the man want out of a marriage he no longer find comfortable, creates a sense of entitlement in women.”
And a lovely bit of victim-blaming from StimParavane: “It is about time women took responsibility for the sexualisation of society, or would you argue that the level of sex crimes committed has nothing to do with it?”
Still, this march – compared, in one of the few comments that the Indie appeared prepared to ban, to a load of dogs – is no more than a “bunch of silly girls with too much time on their hands”.
Or as Ken Jackson explained “young, idealistic, immature, teenage college students”. Thanks for the compliment, Ken…but I’m still a 50-something middle-aged lady (as were many of those I marched alongside).
And whose comments appear to be under review, presumably on the grounds that they upset the sensibilities of the Indie’s ever-so-delicate readership? Er, Carmen Rose-Locke, who at times seems to be the only voice raised in protest against this onslaught of vicious misogyny.
And possibly my own. At least, my comment, which can be seen here, is no longer visible on site to me.
Time, perhaps, to think again about the Indie.