Thursday 29 November 2012

Jeremy Duns - Calling Women Bitches Is Repugnant

After I blogged about Duns's un-authorised taping of telephone conversations, I was subjected to a wave of vile sexist abuse.

One of Duns's supporters described me as a 'bitch'.

I highlighted this as an example of women-hating, and went on to explore in more depth the evidence of Duns's sexism in articles he has written. 

Duns has responded to my points. You can read his full answer below. On the 'bitch' point, he states that he cannot be held responsible for the comments of his followers. "The idea that I am responsible for what people who follow me on Twitter write is daft – after all, you follow me on Twitter. I don’t know the person who referred to you in the comments here as a ‘man’s bitch’ at all, but they thought you were Steve Roach, who is of course a man," writes Duns.

This is an extraordinary statement to make, and one that deserves to be exposed for the violent woman-hating nonsense it is. 

Duns is publicly stating that it is acceptable to call people 'bitches' so long as they think they are a man (just as his loyal sidekick Steve Mosby, who has threatened me over this blog, thinks it is okay to call people 'cunts'). Why he thinks I am a man is very odd in itself, except that in Duns's world of right-wing, public school writers all women are either housewives or whores, not people with their own views. But leave that aside. Is it okay to call black people 'niggers' - if you happen to have mistakenly decided they are white. Of course not. It is a vile racist term. By the same token, 'bitch' is a vile sexist term. 

'Bitch' is a word that is no longer acceptable in any circumstances.

Duns could have taken the opportunity to disown it. And yet his choice was to defend it.

That is morally repugnant. 

But then Duns defends other writers who use it.

Duns has written extensively in praise of the book 'Casino Royale'. You can read one of his articles here. 

The last line of that book (referring to the heroine Vesper Lynd) is this. "The bitch is dead now."
(there is a link here). In fact he refers to her as 'bitch' several times in the book (a link is here). 

So Duns praises a book in which a women is described a 'bitch' without a word of criticism of that expression. 

'Bitch' has become a word that symbolises male violence towards women. 

Every day women are attacked and hurt because men like Duns promote a culture in which violence against women is seen as cool and acceptable. 

It has to stop. 










14 comments:

  1. You know you're insane, right?

    I mean, assuming this isn't just a novelty theater piece, you do know that telling you that someone thought you were someone else is saying only that someone thought you were someone else. Nowhere in that sentence does Duns say, nor even imply, "so that's all right, then." It's a simple statement that means only what it says.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I honestly do not see why you have something against Jeremy Duns, who is one of the least likely abusers of women or anyone else I know. Your main complaint seems to be that he told you he thought you were someone else - politely - and someone else was rude to you. Are you saying that if a fan of mine is rude to you, I should take full responsibility?

    On the other point, yes, "Bitch" is an unpleasant word when intentionally used derogatively. It is perfectly fine when, as I use it regularly, it refers to my bitch. She is a lovely hound, but she is a female. However, the use of it correctly in fiction is perfectly defensible, as is "cunt", "whore", "bugger", "fuck" and any other good old-fashioned anglo-saxon. Yes, they may offend. If they do, avoid the books.

    The more important issue here is not the words in the book, for God's sake. You are talking about a character who is a paid murderer. You wish to pick up on the fact that he's rather unpleasant with his language towards a woman, when he is clearly a psychopath. Would he be a better, nicer, rounder character if he wasn't so rude to poor Vesper?

    I think your priorities are a little skewed.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Maria,

    Your only supporter appears to be Stephen Leather.

    Might be an idea to check his credentials as a supporter of feminism. I'd start here - http://www.stickmanbangkok.com/interview/interview1.html - and here - https://groups.google.com/forum/m/?hl=en&fromgroups#!topic/soc.culture.thai/0VlVJ0WDZI4

    You won't though. That would show up your pathetic blog for what it is. A thinly veiled attack, with no basis, on a man who has quite patently upset you in some way. Upset you in a way in which you can't argue against it in a conventional manner (as many people do with Jeremy, who is more than happy to engage in debate, as anyone can see from his Twitter feed). No, you choose to create this.

    Your continued stance of ignoring any points render your entire argument defunct (and also the fact that Jeremy Duns didn't write that article - I'll say it again for clarity - Jeremy Duns didn't write that article), and if you had any sense of morality or dignity, you'd shut this thing down.

    You won't though.

    I'm sure Leather will turn up soon. Your one supporter. Again, check out those links of your supporter.

    Maybe create some new accounts and post some support for yourself under different names. It's called 'sockpuppeting'. Stephen Leather, your only supporter, can explain how it's done.

    ReplyDelete
  4. When your only ally in a fight appears to be Stephen Leather, you really should take the time to ask yourself some hard questions.

    If you have a case against Jeremy Duns, present it. If you do not, if this blog is simply a forum for you to take potshots at him in an attempt to publicly disgrace or discredit him then both it and you are beneath contempt.

    Grow up.

    ReplyDelete
  5. 'Maria' - this whole blog is just an embarrassment. Everyone visiting knows the motivation behind it, and that it's nothing to do with femminism or anything like.

    As others have said - grow up.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Nice to see Luca Vesta here, isn't it Maria?

    I see he's not averse to the 'C' word himself. http://twitpic.com/bh8rih

    Isn't it Interesting to see all the warm fuzzy reviews he's given to Steve Mosby's books? All five stars of course. They are of course close Twitter friends... http://twitpic.com/bfzo5n

    I have to say I am horrified how often Steve Mosby uses the 'C' word. I can't think of anything more misogynistic than using a woman's sexual organ as an insult. http://twitpic.com/bgv7if

    He's also a big fan of the 'F' word in public, too. http://twitpic.com/bh8tfq

    Personally I thing language like that is totally unacceptable on a public forum.

    Anyway, keep up the good work, Maria.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hi Stephen,

    Nice to see you here. No one saw that coming at all. I know it's been difficult for you in the past few months...all those pesky questions about your online behaviour which you can't answer to.

    Also good to see you continuing your Mary Whitehouse style attack of public forum swearing. We all need hobbies. And time doing that, is time you're not spending in Thai Bars, playing the farang.

    Nice to see you also can't spell my name correctly. Was the "foreignness" of it too offputting?

    If you can manage it, go back over a year, and you'll see I've been giving "warm, fuzzy reviews" for Steve's books for a long time. Also, google any interviews or past blogs I've done and you'll realise I'm quite generous with my praise of Steve Mosby's books, as he just happens to be one of my favourite writers. Has been for a very long time. I don't have similar relationships with other writers I've given a multitude of gushing reviews to over the years. Correlation doesn't always infer causation Stephen. Or to put it in terms a Daily Mail addict might understand, I don't give Steve 5 star reviews because we happen to be friendly now.

    I note you have similar friendly relationships with your own reviewers (would you like a list?). I'm sure there's nothing untoward about that.

    Stephen...if you were actually willing to engage in a public discourse and answer important questions about your behaviour on public forums (Big Nick Palmer?) I'd give your comments more credence.

    Can you can confirm if any of the following it also "totally unacceptable" on a public forum (you won't, but I'll ask anyway. Always best to give people a chance)...

    Lying?
    Bullying?
    Racism?
    Sexism?

    I know you've been desperately scrabbling around for something to use against Jeremy and Steve, but quite frankly, you're going to have to do better than their use of language. Honestly, this posturing is pathetic (calling me a "wannabe writer"...stay classy la) and completely unbecoming of someone in your position Stephen. But given your track record, entirely predictable.

    Criticism is difficult Stephen, I know, but hopefully I can give you something constructive to maybe think about acting upon?

    Step away from the arguments, the discussions, and walk away. This isn't something to be won or lost. The only people continuing these issues are yourself and whoever runs this blog (which you of course wholeheartedly support). It does you no service to continue to present this side of your personality. Stick to what you know, to what you're good at. Selling your books. Try and limit your more offensive remarks. Maybe read the Daily Mail less. Check your bank balance and realise you've already achieved what you wanted.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Oh, and one more thing...

    Glass houses and all that - https://twitter.com/stephenleather/status/198093124390752258#

    ReplyDelete
  9. Stephen -

    "I can't think of anything more misogynistic than using a woman's sexual organ as an insult."

    I'm sure if you think a little harder you can come up with a few things.

    ReplyDelete
  10. You know, this place is pathetic enougth and then Stephen Leather comes along an lowers the tone. It's ...I was going to say 'almost impressive'..but it's really not.

    And before it's hurled at me as an accusation, yes I'm twitter friends with Steve Mosby, Jeremy Duns et al and no, I do not believe that invalidates me (or anyone else) having an opinion about the antics and behaviour being displayed by this site.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Oh, but Stephen, you do use the C-word, and in a brilliantly witty way - remember that clever "sarf London" accent of yours, deployed against someone who had dared to give you a negative review on Amazon...
    http://www.amazon.co.uk/review/R3HGL2UDD8VL3S

    And while you're here, would you care to confirm whether you posted the comments on Yahoo Finance under the names Joe King, Stephen Leather and Big Nick Palmer? Links to them can be found here:
    http://storify.com/LucaVeste/jeremy-duns-exposes-alledged-racist-remarks-made-b

    Can you deny that you made those comments? (If I had to guess I'd say, "You can't, Stephen. You can't.")

    And Emily/Maria, I find you a rather intriguing if implausible character. Are we really supposed to believe you're a crusading female left-wing lawyer? Right from the start, your confusion as to whether you were called Emily or Maria raised the strong possibility that you are called neither. And since you haven't verified your identity, why should we believe you are female? I'd say that the tone of your writing is much more in keeping with that of a weak, inadequate man.

    Your grasp of the law is non-existent, so you're not a lawyer. Your poor grammar and punctuation make it unlikely that you're any kind of educated professional. And as for being a left-wing feminist... well, no credible left-wing feminist welcomes Stephen Leather as an ally. The weakness of your arguments against Jeremy Duns, together with your inconsistency in failing to condemn Stephen Leather's misogyny, are just two of the reasons why absolutely no one is taking you seriously.

    And it's interesting to see that your Twitter account follows any number of people who have contributed to the recent sockpuppet debate, and yet the one person you don't follow is Steve Roach, despite the fact that your blog was set up with the express purpose of attacking Jeremy Duns for recording an interview with Mr Roach. Why is that?

    I feel sorry for you, Emily/Maria, because history suggests that at some point your real identity WILL come to light, and so every ludicrous new comment that you add to this site will only increase the potential shame and humiliation that's coming your way. A wiser man would bow out now.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I don't understand why Duns's supporters keep coming onto this blog complaining about Stephen Leather. He may well be more of a woman-hater than Duns. If so, fine. Write about that by all means. This blog is about Duns. In my view he actively promotes a view of the world that encourages violence against women.

    He had the opportunity to disown the use of the word 'bitch'. He decided to defend it.

    If you think that is fine that is your business. Most women I know think it is disgusting.

    ReplyDelete
  13. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  14. In case you (or anyone) is wondering, I deleted the above comment because I just can't be arsed anymore.

    Have fun in your pathetic way, 'Maria'.

    ReplyDelete