Going to try to use my big platform or whatev to point out that this post is still up after 8 hours and the replies are absolutely swarming with Nazi apologists who are defending the Hyena of the Gestapo. Public historians have a responsibility not to celebrate people like this.
And yes, it is clearly celebratory. When someone tortured people for the Gestapo you lead with that. That is the thing about them. Everything g else is background colour. Pretending otherwise emboldens fascists, and the replies here are testament to that fact.
If you say you want to prove that women don't always have to be good, fine, but you then frame the post around how this woman was a fascist and tortured people. You do not do a friendly little write up about her and occlude what she did.
Were I this account I would grapple with what I had done here and own it. Were I you and saw this and the recalcitrance about apologising I would not follow this account or buy their weird book which presumably has lots more Nazi girl bosses for you to stan or whatever.
They have taken it down, which is good. I find their apology lacking. They have asked us to "judge them on their record" and their glossy posts about Coco Chanel haven't changed my mind at all, personally. However at least the deleted it I guess.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
No, I am sorry. I don't care if you are a "history buff" you do not, under any circumstances get to make pronouncements about Nazi collaborators based off of a wikipedia article and girlboss vibes.
Here are some excerpts from Kelly Ricciardi Colvin's Gender and French Identity:
Gender and French Identity after the Second World War, 1944-1954:
"At first she [Violette] had been part of a reconnaissance cell, one which would track down Resistance members and turn them in and she also concerned herself with economic requisitioning for Germans.
She denounced members of the French Resistance and participated in deadly raids, and she was at least party responsible for the deaths of dozens of resistors. As the war went on, she transitioned to physical violence, becoming, according to one historian, one of two
I will save you the clicks. The "misuse of history" that Doug here is complaining about is "saying things that happened that make him feel sad."
The misuse of history is ipso facto the doing of history. He wants a whitewashed fictional history where Britain are the good guys.
Non historians love to say that doing history - interpreting the past and attempting to explain why events happen is a "misuse" because they think history is something which exists to aggrandise them. And to be fair it often is because of how textbooks are made and why.
Real history, however, doesn't gloss over stuff you don't like. It has to grapple with Britain's refusal to take in Jewish refugees during WWII, oh and the cheeky refugees it sent to prison camps in Australia just in case they were spies. You know. Whatever.
Watching Come Dine With Me on Netflix and absolutely losing it at these two terrible people in Durham. I would like to stan @AshleighMenzie1 for life. She is so clever, sweet, brave, and a cracking cook. I just adore her.
Also totally open to going over to Stephen's for dinner. Love this scrumpy and venison vibe. So great.
This is a Come Dine With me/ Ashleigh and Stephen Stan account.
For your Friday consideration, this week's blog is a cross-over episode where I talk with sex and relationships expert @bishtraining about No Nut November, #histsex, and why it matters to us now. Check it.
👇👇👇 going-medieval.com/2020/11/13/on-…
I am 100% the Mr Peanutbutter in this situation.
The good news is that it is a video so you don't even have to read.