Tribune – Comment, news and reviews from Britain's democratic left

If Martin Rowson wants to go on putting himself forward as a left wing cartoonist then he really should make a public apology to people with experience of mental health problems.

On 29 March 2010 the Guardian carried a cartoon of his in which he used the following words: “Hey everybody! This is the ‘psychotic yet tough union basher’ cozzie!”. I attacked his usage of the word “psychotic” in a response piece in the Guardian on 23 April 2010 on the grounds that it is offensive to use a psychiatric term as a term of abuse. Here is the link to my piece:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/apr/23/cartoon-mental-health-political-correctness

Guardian bloggers on Comment is Free respnded by calling me “nutter”, “psycho” and “retard” and they used more elaborate and offensive language to stigmatise people with mental health problems. Much of this has been taken down but there is still enough left to show the prejudice that does run deep within the Guardian’s community of bloggers.

Maybe Martin thinks the reaction of the bloggers is proof of support for his misusing such a sensitive term. He has never publicly apologised for using the term “psychotic” and he has never to my knowledge distanced himself from the people who defended him online by calling me “nutter”, “psycho” and “retard”. Some of the bloggers even told me to stop writing. The perverse thing is Martin does cartoons for Index on Censorship. I think if Martin really wants to carry on contrbuting that magazine he needs to distance himself from his supporters who want to muzzle mental health campaigners.

Martin, do you really need fans like these? Do the decent thing. Contact a mental health charity. I suggest Rethink because it champions people with severe mental health difficulties. Offer to do a cartoon for them for free. Let them flog it. Use this as a chance to say sorry in public for the offence you have used with a cartoon that was not your best. You have got talent. Use it wisely.

If Martin Rowson wants to go on putting himself forward as a left wing cartoonist then he really should make a public apology to people with experience of mental health problems.

On 29 March 2010 the Guardian carried a cartoon of his in which he used the following words: “Hey everybody! This is the ‘psychotic yet tough union basher’ cozzie!”. I attacked his usage of the word “psychotic” in a response piece in the Guardian on 23 April 2010 on the grounds that it is offensive to use a psychiatric term as a term of abuse. Here is the link to my piece:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/apr/23/cartoon-mental-health-political-correctness

Guardian bloggers on Comment is Free respnded by calling me “nutter”, “psycho” and “retard” and they used more elaborate and offensive language to stigmatise people with mental health problems. Much of this has been taken down but there is still enough left to show the prejudice that does run deep within the Guardian’s community of bloggers.

Maybe Martin thinks the reaction of the bloggers is proof of support for his misusing such a sensitive term. He has never publicly apologised for using the term “psychotic” and he has never to my knowledge distanced himself from the people who defended him online by calling me “nutter”, “psycho” and “retard”. Some of the bloggers even told me to stop writing. The perverse thing is Martin does cartoons for Index on Censorship. I think if Martin really wants to carry on contrbuting that magazine he needs to distance himself from his supporters who want to muzzle mental health campaigners.

Martin, do you really need fans like these? Do the decent thing. Contact a mental health charity. I suggest Rethink because it champions people with severe mental health difficulties. Offer to do a cartoon for them for free. Let them flog it. Use this as a chance to say sorry in public for the offence you have used with a cartoon that was not your best. You have got talent. Use it wisely.

Oh give it a rest Beatrice as it’s obvious from your shrill melodramatic self victimization on behalf of people with experience of mental health issues – people like me and most of my friends in fact – that it’s you trying to censor , censure and muzzle Martin Rowson here rather than the other way round.

You aren’t a victim you are a Post Graduate player connected to Government quango the National Mental Health Development Unit , it’s partnered service provider charities and the all party Parliamentary committee on mental health and none of those give you a mandate to bully and try to extract apologies from people on my behalf.

Furthermore I dont think Martin needs to apologise for anything here. He’s a fine political cartoonist and satirist in my book. OK?

You’re also connected to Rethink the charity you’ve asked Martin to provide a cartoon for.

I was also one of those who responded to your Guardian piece as a mental health service user pointing out how well connected professional victims like you are very critical of public figures and members of the public as a matter of policy but never criticise Government , services or the leading charities largely because they pay you.

Oh, and I have taken a mental health Trust to Court for Disability Discrimination Beatrice , not for money or publicity but on principle because mental health service users are till treated like objects by the system. You for all your lofty connections and academic qualifications have never stood up to power in your life. Try it some time. It’s fairly liberating.

Keep up the good work Martin.

Oh give it a rest Beatrice as it’s obvious from your shrill melodramatic self victimization on behalf of people with experience of mental health issues – people like me and most of my friends in fact – that it’s you trying to censor , censure and muzzle Martin Rowson here rather than the other way round.

You aren’t a victim you are a Post Graduate player connected to Government quango the National Mental Health Development Unit , it’s partnered service provider charities and the all party Parliamentary committee on mental health and none of those give you a mandate to bully and try to extract apologies from people on my behalf.

Furthermore I dont think Martin needs to apologise for anything here. He’s a fine political cartoonist and satirist in my book. OK?

You’re also connected to Rethink the charity you’ve asked Martin to provide a cartoon for.

I was also one of those who responded to your Guardian piece as a mental health service user pointing out how well connected professional victims like you are very critical of public figures and members of the public as a matter of policy but never criticise Government , services or the leading charities largely because they pay you.

Oh, and I have taken a mental health Trust to Court for Disability Discrimination Beatrice , not for money or publicity but on principle because mental health service users are till treated like objects by the system. You for all your lofty connections and academic qualifications have never stood up to power in your life. Try it some time. It’s fairly liberating.

Keep up the good work Martin.

Dave Neenan, Who said I wanted to muzzle Martin Rowson? I have asked him to produce another cartoon and sell it and give the funds to a mental health charity. I do not think that can be called an act of suppression. I am not behaving like a bully. I am simply standing up for people who just happen to have experienced psychosis.

The fact that I have experienced the condition gives me some right to do so. My long track record in mental health campaiging does also give me authority.

Martin wrongly assumed he could use the word “psychotic” as a joke word in a cartoon. Mr Neenan, you do not say whether that is right or wrong. Come off the fence. Do you accept the use of derogatory language or do you condem it?

Your criticisms of my stance seem to rest on a lot of mistaken assumptions about my career background and personal history. Quite what that has to do with the rights and wrongs of using derogatory language I do not know. I think these personal attacks are diversionary. You do not seem to want to answer the central question. Is it right or worng to use the word “psychotic” as a term of abuse?
Instead you style me as a “victim”. That conception is in your head.

Your personal accusations are based on fantasy. Where do you get your facts? You create this picture of me as some kind of paid mouthpiece of government and the charitable sector. Since 1992 I have lived on Incapacity benefit. I have never held a paid job for any charity or quango or government department. I have been paid travel expenses on occasion but I have always attended such meetings as a service user representative. In other words I have not been there as a mouthpiece for the government or for charities. It is a nonsense for you to say I have never criticised government. To say I have never stood up against authority is not true. I will stay silent about my own private battles for appropriate treatment. That for me is private but I do have a public record as a campaigner and advocate. As a NHS Trust service user governor, I make criticisms all the time about NHS services. I have been a Citizens Advice adviser (unpaid) so I have acted as an advocate for people in a wide variety of difficult circumstances. I have also written for the mental health press about shortcomings in services. In 1997 I wrote prize-winning essay for the Financial Times advocating the introduction of employment services for people with mental health problems.

Mr Neenan, your attitude that an individual can never learn to speak for a group is in itself very reactionary.

If you resent my track record let me tell you Mr Neenan that I worked hard to succeed as I did. I do not do all this out of some desire to promote my own selfish interests. I have not become rich. I have not acquired status. This is my way of using my talents to help other people and yes, I do always try and represent people who would not necessarily count themselves as my supporters. I am a democratically elected public represenative. I do not think it is my job to choose to ignore someone even if they are critical of me. You may resent me for thinking of your interests but I do not think your prospects are helped by stigma in the media. Martin Rowson did not help you by misusing a psychiatric term in a cartoon.

You say you have gone to court over disability discrimination. Who do you think campaigned for those laws? Disability charities did. Yes, the organisations you hold in such contempt. Without them you would not have right to go to court.

It is a pity that you, Mr Neenan, devote such energy to an attack on me when we would be better off talking tactics. Incase you had not noticed the government are imposing swinging cuts on mental health services. Mr Neenan, your interests are best served by joining in the campaign against cuts rather than by sitting on the sidelines and making such false and ludicrous allegations against people like me.

Martin Rowson will understand very well why I have called on him to draw a new cartoon and sell it for a mental health charity. He does have talent as I have said already. It is just a pity to misuse it.

Dave Neenan, Who said I wanted to muzzle Martin Rowson? I have asked him to produce another cartoon and sell it and give the funds to a mental health charity. I do not think that can be called an act of suppression. I am not behaving like a bully. I am simply standing up for people who just happen to have experienced psychosis.

The fact that I have experienced the condition gives me some right to do so. My long track record in mental health campaiging does also give me authority.

Martin wrongly assumed he could use the word “psychotic” as a joke word in a cartoon. Mr Neenan, you do not say whether that is right or wrong. Come off the fence. Do you accept the use of derogatory language or do you condem it?

Your criticisms of my stance seem to rest on a lot of mistaken assumptions about my career background and personal history. Quite what that has to do with the rights and wrongs of using derogatory language I do not know. I think these personal attacks are diversionary. You do not seem to want to answer the central question. Is it right or worng to use the word “psychotic” as a term of abuse?
Instead you style me as a “victim”. That conception is in your head.

Your personal accusations are based on fantasy. Where do you get your facts? You create this picture of me as some kind of paid mouthpiece of government and the charitable sector. Since 1992 I have lived on Incapacity benefit. I have never held a paid job for any charity or quango or government department. I have been paid travel expenses on occasion but I have always attended such meetings as a service user representative. In other words I have not been there as a mouthpiece for the government or for charities. It is a nonsense for you to say I have never criticised government. To say I have never stood up against authority is not true. I will stay silent about my own private battles for appropriate treatment. That for me is private but I do have a public record as a campaigner and advocate. As a NHS Trust service user governor, I make criticisms all the time about NHS services. I have been a Citizens Advice adviser (unpaid) so I have acted as an advocate for people in a wide variety of difficult circumstances. I have also written for the mental health press about shortcomings in services. In 1997 I wrote prize-winning essay for the Financial Times advocating the introduction of employment services for people with mental health problems.

Mr Neenan, your attitude that an individual can never learn to speak for a group is in itself very reactionary.

If you resent my track record let me tell you Mr Neenan that I worked hard to succeed as I did. I do not do all this out of some desire to promote my own selfish interests. I have not become rich. I have not acquired status. This is my way of using my talents to help other people and yes, I do always try and represent people who would not necessarily count themselves as my supporters. I am a democratically elected public represenative. I do not think it is my job to choose to ignore someone even if they are critical of me. You may resent me for thinking of your interests but I do not think your prospects are helped by stigma in the media. Martin Rowson did not help you by misusing a psychiatric term in a cartoon.

You say you have gone to court over disability discrimination. Who do you think campaigned for those laws? Disability charities did. Yes, the organisations you hold in such contempt. Without them you would not have right to go to court.

It is a pity that you, Mr Neenan, devote such energy to an attack on me when we would be better off talking tactics. Incase you had not noticed the government are imposing swinging cuts on mental health services. Mr Neenan, your interests are best served by joining in the campaign against cuts rather than by sitting on the sidelines and making such false and ludicrous allegations against people like me.

Martin Rowson will understand very well why I have called on him to draw a new cartoon and sell it for a mental health charity. He does have talent as I have said already. It is just a pity to misuse it.