to speak freely, or not to speak freely. that is the question.

by Milla

April, 2008

FROM (m) TO ME – [not the whole message] :::

Hi Milla,

I really hope you don’t get affended by this. I thougt a lot about
your interview, and in this situation, where your situation with the
male squatters is well-kown, I think it’s wise to have your comments
under a fake name. This is because, reading your name, will, according
to my belief, stop some people reading the article objectively. That
also stops your very, very good comments being heard. I hope you
understand my point, and the fact that I want to do this because I DO
want to make you heard, not the opposite.

—- part removed —

If you don’t want to be under fake
name, I’ll remove your part. Also other comments you would like to
make please before 12 am tomorrow! Thanks, have a good day and lots of
strength to you!


FROM ME to (m) >>

hello (m).

i’m not offended: milla, sandra, johannes – just a name.
i can’t think of anything i would change.


FROM ME to (m) >>

hmm. just thinking. and feeling. out loud.

but yeah. it’s kind of heavy to hear that you would remove what i say
if it would be under the name of the person/existence that i
represent. like i’m *really* persona non grata.

i still miss open political support. and recognition that what i do is

so. not having the name “Milla” there, is still working on “their”
conditions. working along with the system.

i’m not saying this in order to put pressure on you, i’m just saying
it the way i see it.

i still support what Kirsi says though 🙂


FROM (m) TO ME :::::

there’s another version if u have time to check it. U can still
comment this evening, I got a little bit more time. if u really feel
bad about leaving your name out, i’ll put it there. My point is not to
take sides in this article, but to be objective.


FROM ME TO (m) >>

Häirintätilanteessa on Kirsin mielestä tärkeää sanoa selvästi ei

the sentense that i find absolutely problematic is still there.

verbalisointi on hyvä tapa tunnistaa härintätila tekijälle

or basically anything else but “tärkeää sanoa selvästi ei”

cause “ei” is said clearly without nimeä kritisoi sano mitä tahdot.

the sentence screams “blame the victim” to me. i would never say
anything like that.

i would say: härintätilanteessa tekijä pitäis understand/take a no clearly.
not the other way around.

and yes. i would like to have my name in it. cause i’m sure elina
vaahtera is being impopular and disliked and not taken seriously as a
person for the things she talks about, so if she can be there with her
name, i don’t see why i couldn’t.

it would really make me feel as a solid person, free to speak and do
as i please. and not like i’m married to the squatting movement and
that everything i do is in relation to that.

it would mean a lot to me.

but as i said. if the option is: no speech. i’d rather have kirsi saying it.



One Response

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: