BS: Sackings at the Tower

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: Joe Offer
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 08:23 PM

This page says the full moon is tomorrow, 2 December - but it sure looked full to me last night. There was a little personal squabble in this thread that I had to delete. Do think it was the moon, or just plain orneriness?
It's funny how those squabbles hurt my ears, even though I'm just reading them....

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: catspaw49
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 08:30 PM

Odd......No mention of Rapunzel that I can find..............Should we maybe send this Moira a drum? I mean if it'll help...............


Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: Folkiedave
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 04:11 AM

Lizzie, Joe has deleted one of your posts.

Tell him Lizzie, go tell him........................

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 04:34 AM

"I am not unable to see an alternative view, Lizzie, but I DO know a lot more about the facts of this case than you do because I know Moira. I know what a cool woman she is and I know the shit she's been through. For you to be so flippant and sneery about her stress-related hair loss rather shows your true colours once again. You're a nasty piece of work, lady."


No, it's strange how blind some people are.

Tell me, Joan, why do you consider it right to spread terrible and vicious words about me, on the internet, via Facebook....which for some strange reason have been removed from this thread, yet you think that it's right for two men to lose not only their jobs, but their homes as well, when your friend is apparently bullied?

Do you ever sit down and think about how YOUR behaviour has made me feel at times?

The messages that you left about me, on Facebook, for all to read, and many to think was true, are in the 'Facebook Harrassment of Mudcatters' thread on here.....I'd suggest you go and read your own words and then consider if you are any different to those who have behaved towards your friend in the manner you are now kicking up a stink about...

As John said earlier.....goose and gander.....


I guess because you are a woman, you are allowed to get away with the deeply personal crap you've written about me, but....because your friend's colleagues are men, THEY are not....

Interesting, huh?

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 04:40 AM

And Joe, sorry, but those words I put on WERE relevant to this thread, very much so, because this lady has had people put things about her on Wiki, or they changed what was on there, I'm not sure exactly what...

The point I was demonstrating, by putting Joan's words about me, from that Facebook page was that it's not only her friend who has been treated this way on the internet. And I was treated exactly the same way by Joan herself, who has never had the guts nor the good manners to own up to it, least of all apologise.

You cannot have double standards in this thread....

Or...maybe you can....

I dunno...

You're in charge of it all, Joe...you make those decisions, but I'm afraid I find it deeply hypocritical that a person who is herself responsible for some highly unpleasant behaviour towards me, is jumping up and down over the way her friend has been treated, when her friend has suffered exactly the same fate as me, in some respects.

Ho hum.....

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 04:42 AM

Oh...and I would hope that any grandchild of mine wouldn't want to be guarding the Crown Jewels. Far better to go back to the days of Robin Hood and share them out amongst the poor......

But that's just my hope... :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 04:44 AM

I even used to love it when builders used to wolf whistle at me

A woman who teetered into an open women's meeting on impractical FMQ heels said this too. She too was dripping with glitter eye shadow, sloshed on - it would seem - to "impress" the blokes she worked with (i.e. typed their illiterate outpourings and made their tea) and announced that being whistled at "made her feel better".

[btw "blokes" is an alternative word for men, not derogatory (indeed they positively like it) with (natch) blokish - i.e. unreconstructed sexist - connotations. It also, in the Montréal joual dialect, means simply an English speaking person].

Of course, she needed to feel better and I'm glad to say was persuaded to retrain and embark on a more personally fulfilling career. Not that this guarantees freedom from discrimination at work on the grounds of gender. Oh no. At around the same time, the height of the women's movement in the 70s, I was the first female journalist to report from the Wales TUC and the NUM in the run-up to the first miners' strike. Reaction ranged from bemusement to hostility from certain "brothers". When applying for a press officer post at the UK's largest union, I received a preprinted postcard which read "Dear Mr . . . " in acknowledgment. And as a freelancing subeditor at Wapping pre-Murdoch lockout I was denied shifts on the grounds that "men needed the money more".

There are, of course, certain benighted female persons who go along with this, even today. They have no conception of the bravery of pioneering women who won crucial political and labour rights nor of the importance of equality and diversity at work and indeed in life itself. As much as I have contempt for sexist men, those apologies for women who connive in this are far, far more distasteful.

I know that there are some women who seem to only derive their self-esteem from courting the approval of men, and who will even do down their own sex in the pursuit of it.

Yes, I know them too.

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 04:48 AM

Lizzie, you have bullied, harangued, goaded and harrassed more than your fair share of Mudcatters, including a 15 year old girl. You are not the victim of bullying; you are, in fact, an aggressor. You start thread after thread bragging about how you regularly browbeat and berate people in your daily life, either in person or shouting at them down the phone, so we know that this abrasive and confrontational behaviour is not confined to the internet. You have been banned from numerous internet fora for your antisocial behaviour. You have posted lengthy, very nasty and defamatory blogs about various Mudcat members, not to mention Ian Anderson of fRoots magazine. You are no innocent.

To compare your antics, largely self-inflicted, with what Moira has suffered, is laughable. Now you have managed to make this thread, like so many others, all about you. Well believe it or not, for the rest of us, the world does not revolve around Lizzie Cornish. We might like to discuss certain issues without thinking about how they actually, personally, inevitably, all come back to you in the end. We might actually just like a bit of bloody peace.

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: kendall
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 05:30 AM

To correct a misconception...What's good for the Goose is very painful for the Gander.

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 05:33 AM

:D

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: Folkiedave
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 05:37 AM

There are also women out there, the equivalent of 'blokes' who make sexist comments about and to men....who take great delight in hanging up the sexy posters of men..whilst perhaps choosing to slam into any man who fancies a Pirelli Calendar in his office. Some women are lewd and crude and sexist...and they make false accusations about men, for their own agendas.

Nver met anyone like this but clearly with the strength with which you write you have direct personal experience of this sort of thing. I mean you wouldn't write that without knowing about it personally would you?

Was it really like this where you worked? In Harley St? You worked with lewd crude and sexist women in Harley St? I am surprised they put up with that sort of thing there. I'd have expected a much more professional attitude. If I am ever to visit Harley St. I shall take a look.

In a National Trust Shop? You worked with lewd crude and sexist women in a National Trust shop? I shall look for the sexist posters next time I go in one, and perhaps even ask to look at the rest room. I am really surprised they put up with that sort of thing there. I'd have expected a much more professional attitude in a National Trust Shop.

What strange people you have worked with, wherever it was!

Just as a matter of interest and knowing your "I'm not allowing that to happen" attitude to life in general - what precisely did you do about these "lewd crude and sexist" people you met? We know you are prepared to leave your job rather than put up with things you don't like. How many times did you leave employment because of this?

We know what Moira did. What did you do?

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: Folkiedave
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 05:39 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: catspaw49
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 05:42 AM

Well personally, I offered to give her a drum but y'all didn't seem to think that would help........which is kinda' sad..............

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 05:52 AM

Nope, Diane....I simply come from a time, when...if a man smiled at a woman (or whistled at her) we didn't fall over sideways in shock, horror and indignation, but many of us smiled back.

Of course, I realise that because I wasn't wearing my Doc Martens and reading Germaine Greer each night, under the bedclothes...screeching my head off about Women's Rights and spitting on any man who DARED to 'patronise' me by opening a dorr for me, this makes me barely worthy to be considered any form of human whatsoever...

But you know something, the men I know, have known and was brought up by, are all very decent human beings, who have never hurt, hit or insulted any woman at all.

Even Germaine Greer, these days, is heard to mutter 'It wasn't supposed to be this way!' from time to time...

No, Germainey, it wasn't was it, but the feminists created a divide between men and women, making out that ALL men were just Cupboard-Misogynists-in-Waiting.

What was it now....ah yes...the Male Chauvenist 'Pig'....such a very loving term that.

Well, take me back to the days where men were men and women loved them.

Yes, there have ALWAYS been bad men, just as there have always been bad women...and yes, many women WERE treated badly in times gone by....but I never was, nor any of the girls I grew up with.

And I'm sorry to disappoint you gals, but...I don't wear my sparkly eye shadow for the men, but for myself. I've never dressed for anyone but myself either...

I'm proud to say though, that if a man smiles at me, I smile back. If he opens the door for me, I thank him and say a few kind words too.

And Joan, may I kindly suggest that you go back and read many of your own posts....and especially bear in mind what you said to Gervase about how the Daily Mail only reports some of the story and is always lenient with the truth.

Interesting too that if *I* had posted a link to the Daily Mail about this story, all merry hell would have broken loose about it, about me supporting a facist paper....about my father being likewise, etc....yet Gervase got away with it sooooo lightly..

Weird, huh?

And I'll let you know how I'm getting on with South West Water soon...I spoke to one of their executives the other day...Yeesh! Now THAT was a phone call and a half!



And now...back to bullying.........and make up....and BAD women who wear it.....because Gawd, they should all be hanged, drawn and quatered, and their sparkly faces put on a pole inside The Tower...eh?

Of course, the male Beefeaters probably wouldn't dream of putting the poor feminine Wenches heads on poles...but...er...........

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 05:53 AM

They're not gonna fall into your snare, Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 06:09 AM

"You have posted lengthy, very nasty and defamatory blogs about various Mudcat members, not to mention Ian Anderson of fRoots magazine. You are no innocent."


And Ian Anderson has said very many things about me, too...Joan.

Why, he even lets you refer to me as a 'fuckwit' on his site...

Cool, huh?

He also tried to interfere with Seth Lakeman's career in the days BEFORE Seth became fRoots Pin Up Boy on his magazine....

Heck, Seth sells magazines doesn't he! Who'd have thought that Ian Anderson after ALL the things he said about Seth and Show of Hands would have finally come out on their side.

I suggest you take your words over to Ian's board and tell him off for the way he used to go out of his way to abuse me....then thank him for doing so, because he taught me how to stand up for myself, just as Diane did too.

Thank oooooo

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: catspaw49
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 06:22 AM

Yeah JM, you're right once again. Do you think this Ian Anderson character would like one? The rent on the warehouse is coming due, no to mention Anne's upstairs loft.....................

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 06:33 AM

Amazing, isn't it? Somebody holds a door open for lizziecornish and all's well with the world. This, I imagine, is because her vision is so obscured by the eye glitter and batting eyelashes that she remains wholly unaware of the legions, the "monstrous regiments" of pioneers who, for decades passed, have pushed tirelessly against the virtual swing doors of patriarchy to achieve the social, employment and political rights that she accepts thoughtlessly today as though they just fell from the sky.

Moira Cameron was the first woman to achieve appointment to a job that she really wanted and was eminently qualified to carry out. Two benighted male persons who tried and failed to bully her out of it have been sacked, according to the law and by due tribunal process. And who does lizziecornish think is right? Distasteful is far too mild a word for this muddled lack of logic.

I have very little expectation that lizziecornish will heed my reading recommendations, but for an exposition of the roots of feminism and gender equality I direct her first not to Ms Greer but to John Stuart Mill.

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: bubblyrat
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 06:33 AM

The Armed Forces generally and traditionally are hotbeds of lewd,crude and sexist people.It goes with the territory.Moira,more than anybody,would know that,especially after spending 22 years or whatever in that environment. I believe that women are still not permitted,in Great Britain,to engage in hand-to-hand combat in the Infantry or Royal Marine Commandos,or to serve in the crews of SSBNs (Nuclear Submarines, but probably ANY submarine,to be honest ---I don't know ??).The point is, she knew the score,was / is a tough cookie, and would have been well equipped to deal with any "hassle" that may have transpired.
                  Of course,there can be no excuses whatsoever for the behaviour of some of her male colleagues at the Tower ,and I ,personally,would have been very pleased to have a, or some ,female colleague / s if I were lucky enough to be employed in such a high profile and historic position. BUT....Moira is the first of her kind,in this instance,and there were BOUND to be some difficulties to be overcome ; look what happened (inexcusably,of course,but still inevitably) ,to Lady Astor on becoming the first female MP.
      I think that, really,YOU should have been the first female Beefeater, Ruth !!

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 06:36 AM

"To compare your antics, largely self-inflicted, with what Moira has suffered, is laughable."


Er...I was comparing YOUR antics, actually. Stop spinning what I said, Joan. I said that the words YOU put on Facebook, about me, were similar to Moira's 'internet experience' where one of the men now sacked went to her Wiki page...Of course, I doubt that even he said the things that you said about me, but heyho.....

And, if you can find any words of mine where I've told people that you are a pyscho, that you are dull, thick, or a fuckwit, or have insulted your child's intelligence, your ex-husband, threatened to talk to your ex-husband about you, as you did to me, then please, feel free to put it all down here.

And the '15 year old girl' accusation you've put down there is, I presume, your daughter...who signed herself 'Daisybell' (I think) in a thread about Education. Nope, I didn't bully her at all....but I did point out how lucky she was to go to an all girl's school where she was immensely happy...and told her that many people aren't so lucky.


"You have been banned from numerous internet fora for your antisocial behaviour."

Nope, I was banned from the BBC because of a small group of people who bombarded the BBC with complaints about me, to the point where they could no longer afford to deal with those compaints. Even the BBC themselves referred to it as a 'witch hunt'...It was out and out bullying, nothing less.

And er...YOU guys are making this thread about me, with your continuous put downs and lies.

So I have a different point of view? We are all allowed our points of views...and all allowed to comments on the views of others...

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: Folkiedave
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 06:40 AM

Some women are lewd and crude and sexist...and they make false accusations about men, for their own agendas.

I take it that since you have posted twice since I challenged you to substantiate this - it was a load of horlicks. There's new. Lizzie writes horlicks.

There may be some new readers who will wonder what Lizzie will do next. We often get a departure at this time of year. She is likely to flounce off.

In fact she may use words like she has used before....

I can no longer take the nastiness, the unpleasantness and the hypocrisy that I see so often and which is continually directed at me at every turn on here. The last thread I started is another perfect example, I expect THAT's my fault as well...hey ho...

That was December 2005 by the way. Hey ho indeed. She was back shortly afterwards.

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 06:42 AM

Damn! Joe - you made a mess of my 'Page 2!' post and deleted the post where Lizzie says she is not posting to this thread any more.

Ah well, the best laid plans of mice and men...

DeG

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 06:43 AM

"Amazing, isn't it? Somebody holds a door open for lizziecornish and all's well with the world. This, I imagine, is because her vision is so obscured by the eye glitter and batting eyelashes that she remains wholly unaware of the legions, the "monstrous regiments" of pioneers who, for decades passed, have pushed tirelessly against the virtual swing doors of patriarchy to achieve the social, employment and political rights that she accepts thoughtlessly today as though they just fell from the sky."


So, you never read my Myspace blog on 'Bums, Boobs and Brains' then?

:0)

You know, it DOES cheer me up when men open doors for me, even more at age 54! chuckle...

It cheers me up because it's lovely to see men still wanting to be courteous and kind, thoughtful and pleasant....and it puts me in a good mood for the rest of the day. I always go out of my way to thank them profusely and tell them how kind they are, and how wonderful it is to see that 'the Age of Chivalry' is not yet dead...

I like men, as human beings. Get over it.

I most certainly don't see them as er....'penises' as Joan referred to them above. Yikes! How much more insulting does it get!

Over to you, Spaw, on that one, because methinks you'll have a very witty comment about to burst forth... ;0)




Oh, and thanks, Diane, but I have never seen myself as 'a gender' although those who DO have their own agendas would see me as precisely that.

I'm simply....me.

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 06:50 AM

Lizzie, you have made wholesale, unsolocited and unwarranted public attacks on two of my employers and one organisation of which I am a director. Two of those organisations you have no direct experience of, but you publicly attacked them anyway purely because they were associated with me. You tried to undermine me professionally, and, if you were anything other than the acknowledged ignorant mad hysteric that you are, could have put my career at risk. You knew this, and in fact I believe it was your express intention to bring my job into the argument to frighten me off disagreeing with you.

As I said earlier, you are a very nast piece of work.

I see you as far more akin to Moira's bullies than to Moira herself.

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 06:51 AM

fuckwit

This is a specific term, meaning terminally "clueless".
It is not abusive, merely concisely descriptive.

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 06:52 AM

"I most certainly don't see them as er....'penises' as Joan referred to them above. Yikes! How much more insulting does it get!"

I have already addressed this above. That is not what I said. But at least we know what's on your brain.

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: GREEN WELLIES
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 07:09 AM

Name calling and just no liking certain people you are forced to work with is completely different to bullying.

Workplace bullying can be compared to mental torture, and the events Lizzie recounts in the descriptions of her various workplaces does not even come close.

I have witnessed woman on woman bullying, and it not only affected the victim, but scared the hell out of a number of other members of staff. They were so frightened of becoming the next target they did absolutely nothing. It went on for years, snide remarks, deliberate undermining, wrecking work, changing office procedures when the victim was on holiday and of course not passing on the information, I could go on and on. One day I saw the victim sitting at her desk, shaking. I was so convinced that she was going to have a heart attack that I went straight to my boss and reported it and action was taken straight away. Oh boy, then it was my turn. The bully made it clear to the rest of the staff that if they spoke to me one of them would be next, so I worked alone and in silence for weeks, until I had enough and approached the bully in person in front of everyone in the office. I made it clear that I was in no way scared of her and it would be in her best interests to get on with her work and leave people alone. She was asked by management to apologise for what she had done, she refused and was asked to leave there and then.

Lizzie a stand up row or difference of opinion or just a plain dislike is not bullying. Bullying is done quietly, behind backs, its terrifying and to witness it is also very frightening.

Moira is incredibly brave not only to stand her ground but to actually report it is also extremely brave. She had no idea when she reported it how it could go. It could have got alot worse - you should never assume that the person you are reporting it to is necessarily on the side of the victim.

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: catspaw49
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 07:21 AM

"But at least we know what's on your brain."

I can't figure why anyone, male or female, would want a dick on their brain. Its just flat out the wrong place to put one of them. Now there are a lot of other places that are far more suited not to mention enjoyable........for everyone. Lizzie always strikes me as one who likes a good time so I don't think she's the dick-head type..............although that species is not unknown here at the 'Cat.


Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: GREEN WELLIES
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 07:27 AM

My mom always God was a woman with a great sence of humor, who else would design a bloke with all that hanging about on the outside !!

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: Smedley
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 07:36 AM

This thread is an absolute hoot. More! More!!

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: kendall
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 08:09 AM

Lizzie, I have always held the door for women. Some doors in public places have springs that can be a problem to women, especially the elderly.
I also hold the door to let my dog out, or in. Am I patronizing him?

Ruth, old Maine proverb: "It's useless to play the violin in front of an ox."

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 08:16 AM

Wayhay - Lizzies original may have been deleted but my response is still there. From Ms C 2 or 3 days ago -

And now, I'll leave this thread to The Sisters

She is still here though. Doesn't surpise me in the least.

DeG

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 08:22 AM

Wise words, kendall.


Ta ra.

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 08:45 AM

"Lizzie, you have made wholesale, unsolocited and unwarranted public attacks on two of my employers and one organisation of which I am a director. Two of those organisations you have no direct experience of, but you publicly attacked them anyway purely because they were associated with me."


You tried to undermine me professionally, and, if you were anything other than the acknowledged ignorant mad hysteric that you are, could have put my career at risk. You knew this, and in fact I believe it was your express intention to bring my job into the argument to frighten me off disagreeing with you."



Joan, for what it's worth, YOU put my family's lives at risk, by revealing my real name on the BBC, over and over, along with Diane and Ralph Jordan. It broke all the BBC rules, and it went against my wishes, but did you give a fuck? You also have demeaned me over and over in here...

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 08:52 AM

Bugger it...posted too early....


"Lizzie, you have made wholesale, unsolocited and unwarranted public attacks on two of my employers and one organisation of which I am a director. Two of those organisations you have no direct experience of, but you publicly attacked them anyway purely because they were associated with me."

I've not a clue what you're talking about there, or who...

If you mean...yawn...Cecil Sharp House....well I was saying YEARS before you ever turned up, what a turn off it was....so my opinion on that has nowt to do with you at all....

Gawd, Cecil bloomin' Sharp....yawn....

"You tried to undermine me professionally,"

Nope, you've done that yourself, with saying what you did about Show of Hands music, despite being a Festival Director. I merely pointed out what a crap and highly unprofessional way it was to talk about artists...


"and, if you were anything other than the acknowledged ignorant mad hysteric that you are,"

Good to see you're not into bullying then.

Hey, maybe I need to get Moira in here! :0)


"could have put my career at risk."

Well, to be honest, I'd not have had you as a Festival orgainiser, if I'd been in charge...but hey ho, there ya go...and besides, Show of Hands say they prefer the vitriol to the championing, so you vitriol away, with my blessings...Coochee..


"You knew this, and in fact I believe it was your express intention to bring my job into the argument to frighten me off disagreeing with you."

Nope, sorry, but I didn't have 'an ulterior motive'....Gawd, that would mean I'd have to have intelligence, and as you tell me over and over, I ain't nowt but thick...


Ho Hum


I expect Moira's starting to realise that she got off a bit lightly if she's reading this thread.


Someone send for a Beefeateress, fast!

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 09:14 AM

"Well, to be honest, I'd not have had you as a Festival orgainiser, if I'd been in charge..."

You in charge? Well, happily, there's no world in which that would ever be likely to happen, but just to put things in perspective, I was hired as Artistic Director at a time when the festival's future was in serious doubt because of mounting financial debts and a continuing inability to make the festival hit break-even. This year, thanks to tight budgetary control and improved programming which resulted in substantial increases in ticket sales, we turned a nice little profit, rather than the three previous years of substantial financial losses. A few more years like this one, and the festival may well be out of the woods and have a long-term future. So maybe it's just as well you're not making the decisions, eh, Lizzie? By the way, how is Torquay Folk Week coming along?

I'm intrigued to know how your families lives were "put at risk" by your real name being published on a BBC messageboard (which was not done by me in the first place, by the way - check your facts). Are you in some sort of witness protection programme? Hiding from the mob? Are you in MI5? The world wants to know.

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 09:23 AM

"but did you give a fuck?"

Oh dear, Cruding Away...what happened - did you get bored of Jane Austen?

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: Folkiedave
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 09:25 AM

I can't post all of this because it is too long. But here is what Lizzie Cornish 1 said (writing as Lizzie Cornish) a while ago.

From: Lizzie Cornish - PM
Date: 07 Mar 07 - 05:00 AM

So from now on, the folk world can sing to it's heart delight. Safe in the knowledge that I'll no longer write about the music that I love.

The words I have written you'll never take away from me, as I said above. But I'll write no more words, because I am sick to death of the petty, spiteful, narrow-minded, unwelcoming world that I have had the great misfortune to come across in the English Traditional world in particular.

I want no more part of it...ever

So that's twice Lizzie had threatened to stop writing. Go on Lizzie - do it.......

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: GREEN WELLIES
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 09:46 AM

Flippin' 'eck !

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: GUEST,Emma B
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 10:56 AM

Lizzie, why do you continually associate mysandry with feminism?

Feminism is 'The advocacy of women`s rights on the grounds of sexual equality' (OED)

Feminism does not seek to oppress men - it seeks to achieve a balanced relationship between women and men

THIS feminist hates misogyny, not men!

In fact I'm quite happy to smile and thank people of either gender who hold a door open for me and equally pleased to recieve the same from those I've held a door open for too if I happen to reach it first.
I don't expect anyone to have to perform this action because I'm the 'weaker sex' thanks :)

I would never criticise or turn a 'good deed' down but I believe it is sexist when you begin to treat people differently because of their gender as much as it is racist to treat people differently according to the colour of their skin
I would assume the man holding the door for me would hold the door for anyone else.

According to a study last year three researchers from the University of Houston found that contrary to popular beliefs, feminists reported lower levels of hostility toward men than did non feminists.

abstract

Basically the authors conclude that feminists feel less hostility toward men than women who operate within traditional gender roles because they are exposed less to 'power differentials' within those roles.

and btw
I would expect any group of women who conducted a similar long term gratuitous hate campaign against a sole male colleague based on his gender to be similarly disciplined.

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 11:15 AM

I would assume the man holding the door for me would hold the door for anyone else.>>>

A somewhat complex question is raised here, regarding conventional courtesies to which one has been brought up in conflict with expectations of full equality. I am an old man now [77], and young people will still sometimes offer me a seat in a crowded underground train in London. When it is a young man, I consider it civil on my part to accept with a smile and grateful thanks. But when it is a young woman, I explain that, tho grateful and appreciative, it would just fly in the face of all my condiditioning to accept a seat from a lady and beg her to resume the seat without being offended by my refusal. I will also offer my own seat to an older woman or one with children, but not to a younger woman.

I am unsure how these principles of mine would stand up to the scrutiny of GuestEmmaB.

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 11:54 AM

It's the metaphorical stiff door and the impenetrable glass ceiling that needs to concern us, not who gets to sit down on the Circle line. If someone offers me a seat I worry that I must be looking rough and betraying my age.

Denying women promotion or resenting their employment in the first place on the grounds of gender is one aspect of misogyny. Women continuing to struggle for equality in employment are fighting for a basic human right. It is not misandry.

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: Smedley
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 11:56 AM

Don't know about Emma, but under my scrutiny (and if it matters I'm male & very early 50s) your gender differentiation in accepting/refusing a seat seems at best quaint & at worst masochistic. Why turn down the chance to be more comfortable on account of the generous person's genitalia???

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 12:17 PM

It's how some on'us was brung up, Smedley.
My policy nowadays is to offer my seat to anyone, regardless of their age or genitalia, who looks as though they need it more than I do. Otherwise, they can bugger off, I got there first. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 12:24 PM

"I would never criticise or turn a 'good deed' down but I believe it is sexist when you begin to treat people differently because of their gender as much as it is racist to treat people differently according to the colour of their skin
I would assume the man holding the door for me would hold the door for anyone else"


You see, that's the bit I just don't get. I am really *happy* to be a woman. And I don't consider myself to be the same as a man, in many ways. But I don't see this as a threat. I'm not out to prove that 'I can do anything a man can do' because I know I can't and besides, I don't want to.

I've never seen myself as 'the weaker sex' at all, although I fully appreciate that men are a damn sight stronger physically than women..and they're that way because nature made them that way, as She, I presume, had it in mind for men and women to do different things...That's why, until comparitively recently in our history, the men went out and hunted, built the houses etc...and the women raised the children....

Nowadays, everything's gone arse over whatsit..and women are out to prove they're every bit as good as men.

Well, what the f*ck is that all about?

Of course we're every bit as good, but not at the same things, that's all.

This crazines of "Hey, there's just men doing that job...and ****I**** want to do it!!" drives me a little bats at times.

It's like the women who wanted to be soldiers in The Sealed Knot, carrying 16ft pikes into battle, because "Hey, I'm just as good as a man!"....until one day, a woman got one of those pikes through her spleen and so...women were banned from the battlefield..Shock! Horror! I was happy to be a Camp Follower, tending the 'wounded' and doing what Camp Followers did (up to a limit, of course) ;0)..but no, there were some gals who just had to put the soldiers outfits on and soldier..

I guess if you want to do that, well...that's OK, but killing people goes against creating them, which is, whether women like it or not, 'what women do' in many cases...


Oh, and Dave, you may have not noticed, but I rarely write about the music that I love any longer.   I rarely even go into the music section. If that makes you feel that you've 'won' something, then it just shows me what a sad situation the English folk world is in, because to feel some sort of victory has been scored by getting people NOT to write about the music is very sad indeed....and it explains totally why so many good people walk right away from English folk music.

I didn't realise that the success of Sidmouth was entirely down to you, Joan, I do apologise most humbly. HOW could I not have realised that...(raises hand to head yet again!)   Good to hear a profit was made this time round though, as last I heard, they were worried sick about it, and certainly the town wasn't as full as in many years past...In fact, since the new team took over from Steve Heap and had that first very successful year, it hasn't been the same...and where once you had to queue to get along the seafront, as it was so festooned with musicians and dancers, now you can walk along unhindered, all week long..

Sidmouth's yours now, so I hope you enjoy it. It's nowt to do with me any longer. I'd got to the point where i couldn't wait for it to be packed up and out of town...That's what you and your pals did. Again though, if that pleases you, it shows me how sad your world is.

I have new music to love now...and it's music that's not played by stressed out people who are always so controlling or live in fear of upsetting those who want to control. It doesn't come with rules or regulations either, but is just played for the love of it and left to be loved by those who appreciate it.

Good luck with Show of Hands..and I'm still waiting to read some reviews from you about them...and from their other new fans on Mudcat and fRoots who gained so much respect for them recently. I'm sure your reivews will be excellent. Please don't keep us waiting too long though.

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 12:30 PM

"Feminism does not seek to oppress men - it seeks to achieve a balanced relationship between women and men"


Nope....it does seek to oppress men, in my opinion...and it has been bloody successful at it too.

Far from creating a 'balanced relationship', it has created a gulf and where once, many men were very protective of women, now they feel they can't be, because the woman would tell them off for 'treating her as the weaker sex'

What a load of ballyhoo!

Bring back Sir Walter Raleigh and The Men with Capes! :0)

Now, if you women will excuse me, but I have to go and touch up my sparkles, lipstick and kohl, because after all, it's a woman's duty to always look her best...

:0)

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 12:42 PM

You're on fine form today Lizzie.

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 12:47 PM

Thank you, John. ;0)

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 01:00 PM

"I didn't realise that the success of Sidmouth was entirely down to you, Joan, I do apologise most humbly."

Well, in terms of the financial turnaround I had rather a lot to do with it, yes. Tight budgetary control - that was the production and the artistic directors working together. Reducing the artistic budget by £30k and still delivering a strong artistic programme: that was my responsibility. A turnaround in performance of the Bulverton: achieved through reduced costs and more ambitious programming. Increased ticket sales across the programme: that was one of my targets. Increased fundraising: the Board, but I brought in some sponsorship as well.



"certainly the town wasn't as full as in many years past"

We must have attended different festivals. The town was rammed. You couldn't get accomodation for love nor money, and the ticket sales revenue increased substantially.


"In fact, since the new team took over from Steve Heap and had that first very successful year, it hasn't been the same..."

No. That'll be because there's no longer an arena holding many thousands of people. Sidmouth is over 50 years old. The Mrs Casey years were one phase of its life. This is another. It's been through a fair few. Hopefully with the way we're currently working, the future will be secured so that it has many more years to come.

Subject: RE: BS: Sackings at the Tower
From: catspaw49
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 01:07 PM

100