Absolutely agree.
Any comments from the likes of AM and Old Dark Navys on this?
AM - this is the alternative opinion to yours.
I've already made comment on the divisive language championed by Paul Murray.
For one, he uses the outrage machine as a derogatory term for people who had a problem with it, and at the end of the day it was just a chance for a far right commentator to have a shot at someone on the other side of politics.
He excuses the behaviour by saying that McGuire and Wilson have been throwing things at each other for years. He has reduced it to a mutual dislike and all behaviours contained within that. Does she do the same things he does? Does she goes outside the scope of her profession to make distasteful remarks about him? Murray fails on this point because he reduces it to something that is quite beside the point.
Then he cynically says when a media personality gets the chance to play victim .... whoa ho off you go sister. So she is playing victim. Right, so let's ignore the fact for a moment that she didn't raise this and was not the first person to make comment on it. How on earth can he make the assertion that she is 'playing' victim? How does he know that she isn't genuinely offended? He said the comments were terrible and weird, yet gives her a bake for being offended herself because of the same joke being made by Shaw and Russell.
So people are holding up this crap opinion piece by Murray as some uncomfortable truth, then asking people here for comment, despite the fact that the very thing he talks about has been mentioned and responded to dozens of times in this very thread. Are we supposed to find Murray more compelling than when a poster in here raises it? Where are Murray's credentials as far as what constitutes offense, and when a joke is banter and when it is bullying?
Did he go on to convey the follow up part where McGuire made it clear he dislikes Caro and the way she operates, when he tried to convince Barrett not to support her? Does nobody think that demonstrates some malice that is unlike what Shaw and Russell were saying in front of Caro?
Nah, you get nowhere telling half a story and mispresenting the facts.
As for the last bit about statistics released today that did not get a lot of attention, therefore invalidating everybody's opinion about the specific Wilson incident, what a mischievous piece of rubbish journalism that is.
Every specific incident draws thousands of comments, a lot of concern. Plenty of people offended by this incident have had a lot to say about domestic violence and particularly when there is a human face to it. To suggest that not commenting on some statistics with not a lot of context behind them, somehow makes you disingenuous for commenting on this incident is a ridiculous assertion. Absolute sleight of hand and typical tabloid rubbish by one of the most selective faux outragers in journalism.
I await having to address the same point yet again, when someone else drops a lazy link as though they have somehow found the holy grail.