???

^that is the audio from that twitter screenshot. God forbid a UN agent trust their own agency's verification process, especially since the report discusses the sexual violence in Afghanistan, Central African Republic, Colombia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Libya, Mali, Myanmar, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, and Ukraine. So no, Israel was not uniquely targeted.

Do you believe it is normal to ask the person who compiles UN findings to doubt UN findings? To spend their time doing all the work other agents have already done? When the report verified 9,788 cases of conflict-related sexual violence during 2025?? (x)

If you wanted to review the evidence you wouldn't be screenshotting a tweet to complain about the unique ~antisemitism~ of a report that features the infamous Sde Teiman rape (caught on camera and widely distributed alongside the "right to rape" protests that followed and the Israeli government dropping the charges against the rapists). If you want to review UN methodology you can view that here, with the 2009 Gaza Conflict Commission used as a relevant example (this guide was published in 2015).

In fact, let's go over their methodology together:

Information-gathering methods of the United Nations Fact-finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict (2009) (a) The review of reports of international organizations, including the United Nations; reports and other documentation, including affidavits, produced by non-governmental and civil society organizations (Palestinian, Israeli and international); media reports; and writings of academics and analysts on the conflict; (b) interviews with victims, witnesses and other persons having relevant information in keeping with established human rights methodology and in order to ensure both the safety and privacy of the interviewees and the integrity of the information provided, such interviews were conducted in private. The Mission decided not to interview children. The Mission conducted 188 individual interviews. Most interviews were conducted in person. if the Mission was unable to meet the relevant persons, interviews were conducted by telephone. Also in keeping with normal practice for this type of report and to continue to protect their safety and privacy, the names of the victims, witnesses and other sources are generally not explicitly referred to in the report and codes are used instead. The names of individuals who publicly testified at the hearings held by the Mission or who have explicitly agreed to be named are, however, identified; (c) Site visits to specific locations in Gaza where incidents had occurred. The Mission investigated 36 incidents in Gaza; (d) The analysis of video and photographic images, including satellite imagery provided by UNOSAT, and expert analysis of such images; (e) The review of medical reports about injuries to victims; (f) The forensic analysis of weapons and ammunition remnants collected at incident sites; (g) Meetings with a variety of interlocutors, including members of the diplomatic community, representatives of the parties concerned, NGOs, professional associations, military analysts, medical doctors, legal experts, scientists, United Nations staff; (h) invitations, through notes verbales, to United Nations Members States and United Nations agencies, departments and bodies to provide information relating to the Mission’s investigation requirements; (i) The wide circulation of a public call for written submissions from NGOs and other organizations and individuals interested in bringing information to the attention of the Mission. As a result, it received numerous submissions from organizations and individuals from israel, the Occupied Palestinian Territory and elsewhere in the world; (j) Public hearings in Gaza and in Geneva to hear: (i) victims and witnesses of violations; and (ii) individuals with specialized knowledge and expertise on the context and impact of the hostilities.

I genuinely don't know what other criteria they might have missed for these investigations. Despite how Special Representative Pramila Patten says she would never herself visit a torture camp, the UN specifically calls for site visits and yet "Israel continues to deny visas for OHCHR international staff (x).

^this article was published 2022.

Let's recap. You professionally misunderstood what Patten was saying and spread a lie that insinuated there was no fact-checking towards the sexual violence Palestinians experience. That is, full fucking stop, rape denial. And you did it to further the idea that the UN was unfairly "picking on" the Jewish State due to antisemitism, an extremely fucking annoying statement considering how stupidly easy it is to fact-check the original tweet. Hell, you don't even have to do that. You can just correctly understand "it's not the responsibility of my office to do any verification" implies a different office verifies the information.

I will attempt to help you in turn. Why don’t you call that grocery store, make yourself some tea or coffee or whatever you use to stabilize your mind, and then do something creative?

thats good advice… think ill try doing that tmr? It getting late and i bee scrolling all day

I will attempt to help you in turn. Why don’t you call that grocery store, make yourself some tea or coffee or whatever you use to stabilize your mind, and then do something creative?

(the Nonsense being "well of course it's realistic in Gone With the Wind that Scarlett makes the curtain dress herself with patterns her mother formerly used to make clothing! plantation mistresses had to know how to make adult clothing from scratch so they could direct the enslaved women who made their clothes!")

Filtered through a heaping dose of the classic "well, women of the past could do everything and women of the present are spoiled and incapable!" Which in the US you see all the way back to the 19th century fiction of the totally self sustaining colonial household where the wife did absolutely every domestic task somehow 

Like just in case you had any suspicions that Margaret Mitchell did a lick of research when writing this. Please throw those suspicions in the trash 

There was a whole invisible, disregarded and mostly unrecorded economy of independent self-supporting businesswomen making clothes for sale. (The author had to pore over local records all over the UK just to pull together the information. Working women were not given much visibility or mention in those centuries.)

One thing that's really clear is most women did not make their own clothes.

Rich people had servants and professionals to make their garments, and later on couture houses. Many of them used enslaved labor which would have had to have been highly skilled.

Middling sorts had local dressmakers, sometimes professionals, sometimes a local woman or neighbor who would do it for pay. There were itinerant dressmakers too, who would come into houses and make up the family's wardrobe. And there were shops of readymade garments far earlier than most people realize.

Poorer people bought their clothes secondhand. There was a huge secondhand garment trade.

American pioneers in homespun is pure modern-day fantasy. Women in the territories had mail-order catalogues from which they could have clothes delivered by trains or by ship.

As far as I can tell, the idea of self-sufficient women doing a constant round of spinning, weaving, and sewing is a fantasy of the post-industrial age projected onto women. But spinning, weaving and clothing-making has long been a professional industry.

(via bsky)

Like, a personal example. When people make up some bollocks about my existence 'making them look bad' or that I 'look like a caricature' or that I'm 'lying' or whatever for bein' a trans woman who has a beard...

All they're doin' at the end of the day is tellin' a woman she needs t' shave.