Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Sexism you have personally experienced or have heard of? *READ POST 1*

Options
13567337

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,207 ✭✭✭jaffacakesyum


    No it's not.

    My experience is that women don't take sexual rejection terribly well. Best case scenario, you'll just get persistence even after you've said no. Worst case you'll get verbal and/or physical abuse.

    Rejecting a partner/spouse/girlfriend is by far the most dangerous scenario.

    Perhaps you've been lucky or don't reject many women, but I've certainly experienced it a few times.

    Not discounting your experiences with women which sound pretty horrible :mad::( but I actually think you're being quite sexist here to assume that the majority of women who get turned down will resort to verbal or physical assault. I think that's pretty shocking :eek: It would be like me saying I fear turning down men because they're very likely to rape me if I do turn them down :eek:

    I'm not saying it doesn't happen that women resort to verbal or physical assault if a guy turns down her advances. I'm sure it does happen and I'm sure it happens far more often than it should or than you would think. (On a side note, the amount of men I've seen who take rejection extremely hard to the point of persistance and nusiance and stalking...thankfully never seen any resort to physical violence however).

    But to suggest somebody is lucky that they got away with not getting verbal or physical abuse from rejecting women is a huge exaggeration, in my opinion.

    No doubt about it though that it's incredibly sexist that women get away with hitting men wheras vice versa is seen as horrific.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Politics Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 81,309 CMod ✭✭✭✭coffee_cake


    Yes, Martin isn't as bad, it's true. I'll keep obsess for goodkind :p


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,269 ✭✭✭GalwayGuy2


    Robin hobb doesn't obsess over rape and child rape like George rr Martin so I don't see the comparison. She dealt with it briefly, and other authors like Jordan, kerr, Elliott can write about it without the extremes of Martin or goodkind
    Not sure about it being a 'movement towards' dark - the Gor books are from the 60s. Just crops up now and then, I suppose

    I wouldn't really lump him with Goodkind, you know because Goodkinds is rather awful and I think Goodkind does get a kick out of what he writes. (Forced myself to read the first book, and the more I hear the happier I am I didn't continue the series)
    I think there is a movement towards the dark when taken as a whole across all genres. In my opinion, it's partly the stigma of abuse being removed, the knowledge of abuse, and also the loss of faith in society, and most definitely authority, in general. But, that's just my opinion.
    Why did you ask why there was no backlash against Hobb then?

    Hmmm, have you read the Liveship Trilogy?

    And Goerge rr Martin does come from a society that venerates war and covers up the fact that rape is committed during war, so I do think that is a part of it also.
    I think obsess is an OTT way to describe it. Fact is that in medieval socities rape was common place especially in times of war. Children grew up quicker, were married off or given away when quite young and were certainly not exempt from rape if a town or village was raided. George RR Martin's world of Westeros is very much based on a real medieval society rather than the more fantasy based Hobb. Granted I havent read a lot of Hobb as I thought she was very much fantasy by numbers.

    You really don't have to go into the medieval to see horrendous abuse during warfare. The republic of Congo is the modern example but ethnic conflicts are horrible for the abuse of women in general, and there are some horror stories of the Nazi invasion of Russia that would make anybodies blood run cold.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,390 ✭✭✭clairefontaine


    Not discounting your experiences with women which sound pretty horrible :mad::( but I actually think you're being quite sexist here to assume that the majority of women who get turned down will resort to verbal or physical assault. I think that's pretty shocking :eek: It would be like me saying I fear turning down men because they're very likely to rape me if I do turn them down :eek:

    I'm not saying it doesn't happen that women resort to verbal or physical assault if a guy turns down her advances. I'm sure it does happen and I'm sure it happens far more often than it should or than you would think. (On a side note, the amount of men I've seen who take rejection extremely hard to the point of persistance and nusiance and stalking...thankfully never seen any resort to physical violence however).

    But to suggest somebody is lucky that they got away with not getting verbal or physical abuse from rejecting women is a huge exaggeration, in my opinion.

    No doubt about it though that it's incredibly sexist that women get away with hitting men wheras vice versa is seen as horrific.

    It happens with both genders that sexual rejection within unhealthy relationship can be a tricky area and can lead to all sorts of abuses from the blatant physical ones to the more subtle punitive ones like the sulks or other such little blackmails. I don't think it's particularly female or male,but particularly manipulative or spoiled insecure brat, but obviously if you are heterosexual you will only experience it from the other gender.

    Women also get away with hitting each other.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,923 ✭✭✭Playboy


    No
    bluewolf wrote: »
    Why did you ask why there was no backlash against Hobb then?
    I don't think it's ott, especially not when goodkind started going off the rails altogether and wrote about virginity vs rape all the time.

    I didnt.. think you are getting me confused with another poster. I was refering to Martin and not to Goodkind.. Dont read Goodkind either as I also found his stuff pretty poor too.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,923 ✭✭✭Playboy


    No
    GalwayGuy2 wrote: »


    You really don't have to go into the medieval to see horrendous abuse during warfare. The republic of Congo is the modern example but ethnic conflicts are horrible for the abuse of women in general, and there are some horror stories of the Nazi invasion of Russia that would make anybodies blood run cold.

    I'm not saying anything to contradict that. My response was trying to illustrate that Martin is trying to paint a somewhat realistic picture of a medieval society and rape (including child rape) was part and parcel of that.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    Not discounting your experiences with women which sound pretty horrible :mad::( but I actually think you're being quite sexist here to assume that the majority of women who get turned down will resort to verbal or physical assault.
    I never said nor suggested that. I do think it's not as uncommon as the poster I was responding to suggested, but I certainly didn't say anything about any majority of anyone.
    I think that's pretty shocking :eek: It would be like me saying I fear turning down men because they're very likely to rape me if I do turn them down :eek:
    I would fear turning down a partner/spouse/girlfriend though, as such rejections are taken very seriously - my experience of the consequences of this have ranged from two day sulks to one occasion where 'no' was not an acceptable response and physical force was used on me to 'comply'. When this failed verbal abuse was used. It was not pleasant nor sexy.
    But to suggest somebody is lucky that they got away with not getting verbal or physical abuse from rejecting women is a huge exaggeration, in my opinion.
    No, I still think they're lucky. Even if it's only a minority of cases, you're lucky if the hammer hits an empty chamber.


  • Registered Users Posts: 107 ✭✭henryd65



    When you enter pediatric spaces in hospitals for overnights, you are often sharing with another child and another parent. Perhaps this is a way of not getting into the complexities of mixed gender sharing personal

    No, that was not the case.

    The mothers were in other small rooms in different parts of the ward to where I was. The bed was kept free for them in case they wanted a rest.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,390 ✭✭✭clairefontaine


    henryd65 wrote: »
    No, that was not the case.

    The mothers were in other small rooms in different parts of the ward to where I was. The bed was kept free for them in case they wanted a rest.

    I can't see any reasoning in that.

    I hope your kid is ok.


  • Registered Users Posts: 107 ✭✭henryd65



    I can't see any reasoning in that.

    I hope your kid is ok.

    She is ok, thanks.

    The only reason is sexism, as per this thread.

    Reminds me of when my son was born 8 years ago. When he was 12 hours old, I was holding him while my wife had a shower.

    Female nurse on ward told me to put the baby down as I would spoil him and make life difficult for my wife. True story.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators Posts: 3,554 ✭✭✭Wise Old Elf


    Jesus, the hospital one is ridiculous.
    Not sure if it's really sexism or not, but similar to the inappropriate touching posts, I remember being out in Galway on a stag (quiet one, no stupid t-shirts, etc), when a hen night came in, each of them worrying cardboard cut outs of a penis.
    None of us took any notice until one of the lads made the point that if we had gone into the same pub with cardboard cutout fannies, it probably wouldn't have gone down well!


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,312 ✭✭✭Paramite Pie


    Apparently one curious area of gender discrimination occurs when one man sexually harasses another man in the workplace. There is no law preventing same gender sexual harassment. Instead complaints of same gender sexual harassment are dealt with under existing bullying laws.

    The perpetrator gets flagged as a bully on his record, not as a sexual harasser. This outright deceptive even if harassment is in fact bullying but it's much more specific. (I aint exactly straight so don't accuse me of being a 'phobe';))
    ncmc wrote: »
    Someone mentioned sexual harrassement in work, my husband in his last place of work was regularly being grabbed and groped and getting the most awful sexual innuendo hurled at him by a female member of staff. If the roles were reversed, he would have been fired. Simple as that.

    I remember in my first job that some of the women would leave boxes on the floor and then ask me to pick them up. The second I bent over they whistled, jeered and once even slapped my bum. I was 19 and they were in their 40s and 50s. One lady who had started the whole thing (it grew as I didn't speak out) repeatedly mentioned that she was looking for a toyboy.:cool:

    AWKARD
    ncmc wrote: »
    On a much less serious note, does it bother the men here when ads say things like ‘mum’s favourite multi vitamin for their kids’ or ‘mum’s prefer this kind of yoghurt’. As a woman, it drives me mad.

    Never noticed that... despite working in the dairy department in Dunnes!!:P we men rarely complain about these things though, and would be ridiculed if we did!! It's perpetuating stereotypes of both genders. What if 'Mum' doesn't want to have kids!! :D

    What bothers me is the typical 'useless' man seen on TV regarding anything to do with cleaning.
    DamoKen wrote: »
    physical assault? well not an assault per say but I've had the whole finger jabbed in the chest accompanied by being called gay, frigid and my personal favourite, a dry shi*e when I turned down drunken advances.

    That happens to me occasionally. I've been called a '******' from time to time cos I reject them. To balance things out my friend once had a guy follow her on a 15minute walk from the takeaway to our hotel (we were in Brussels) after a night out, repeatedly begging her to go back to his. He was pathetic.:rolleyes:


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,006 ✭✭✭donfers


    No
    I have had the "are you gay?" thing multiple times if i didn't respond to a woman's advances, sometimes they use it as a defense mechanism to justify the "rejection", guys don't really use this tactic so much although I must mention it to some mates that the next time they get turned down they should look increduously at the lady in question and say "are you lesbian or something?"


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32,865 ✭✭✭✭MagicMarker


    donfers wrote: »
    Do people think that if we lose tomorrow that Kidney will resign soon after the game and foley/kiss will take charge as caretakers for the italy game, a game we will win thus enabling the IRFU to justify selecting those two as their management team going forward?
    Indeed.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,872 ✭✭✭strobe


    No it's not.

    My experience is that women don't take sexual rejection terribly well. Best case scenario, you'll just get persistence even after you've said no. Worst case you'll get verbal and/or physical abuse.

    Rejecting a partner/spouse/girlfriend is by far the most dangerous scenario.

    Perhaps you've been lucky or don't reject many women, but I've certainly experienced it a few times.

    When I'm single and tend to head out on the town the majority of weekends... I'd probably (like most reasonably picky men) have need to 'reject' several drunk women a week, often a night. I'm in my late twenties now so over the course of my life it probably amounts to hundreds, maybe? Including the friends etc I'd have been out with over all the years what are we talking... several thousand women?

    Never have I felt that I, or anyone else I was out with would 'have to be a brave man' to reject a woman's (drunken) sexual advances or that 'often' it would be likely to result in a physical assault. It happens, I've seen it happen, but it's not in anyway a common occurrence. No one with their head out of the clouds would think they were 'lucky' a woman didn't physically attack them when they turned her down.

    Wait... but maybe I'm jumping the gun here... you're not a Klingon, by any chance?


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,201 ✭✭✭ongarboy


    strobe wrote: »
    When I'm single and tend to head out on the town the majority of weekends... I'd probably (like most reasonably picky men) have need to 'reject' several drunk women a week, often a night. I'm in my late twenties now so over the course of my life it probably amounts to hundreds, maybe? Including the friends etc I'd have been out with over all the years what are we talking... several thousand women?
    And to think there's a notion out there that women don't like being the hunter??:D

    I've also experienced that double standard sexism where women would grab/pinch/slap your backside on nights out and it's all a bit of a "laugh" yet if I did it to a girl, it's like there would be a perverted element to it. While I guess I don't feel violated or too bothered about etc when someone does it, it's still not something I encourage or welcome.

    I kind of equate this double standard to the whole element of how differently male and female sexualisation is treated in the media. e.g. Male strippers are considered a source of humour or giggles for the girls even as they ogle the men yet female strippers being ogled by men is viewed as seedy and sordid.

    Check out the new Diet Coke ad where the guy gets his top soaked and strips it off in front of the eagled eyed girls. I guarantee there will be no furore like there was with the Hunky Dory girl ads a couple of years back. While these double standards don't necessarily bother me, it's interesting to highlight how the standards differ for the sexes and hence a form of sexism.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,269 ✭✭✭GalwayGuy2


    Check out the new Diet Coke ad where the guy gets his top soaked and strips it off in front of the eagled eyed girls. I guarantee there will be no furore like there was with the Hunky Dory girl ads a couple of years back. While these double standards don't necessarily bother me, it's interesting to highlight how the standards differ for the sexes and hence a form of sexism.

    I agree with your whole post , and it is really interesting to see how sexualisation of men and women in the media, but I think the Hunky Dory ad was more demeaning the actual women's team itself. I can kind of see why people were annoyed tbh, while thinking it went overboard, as it implied you'd only watch it to see boobs rather than watch the sport being played itself.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,207 ✭✭✭jaffacakesyum


    I would fear turning down a partner/spouse/girlfriend though, as such rejections are taken very seriously - my experience of the consequences of this have ranged from two day sulks to one occasion where 'no' was not an acceptable response and physical force was used on me to 'comply'. When this failed verbal abuse was used. It was not pleasant nor sexy.

    Ok, sorry maybe we misunderstood each other. So is it more when turning down/rejecting a spouse that you would fear rather than somebody hitting on you in a bar? In that case, I would think either gender in any sort of relationship (heterosexual or homosexual) wouldn't like to reject their spouse as it's inevitably going to result in upset and perhaps an argument (that would cover the verbal abuse part of it). However, in a healthy adult relationship, nobody should fear physical abuse from dumping a spouse. Perhaps you have had bad experiences with that and if that's the case I'm sorry you had to go through that.
    No, I still think they're lucky. Even if it's only a minority of cases, you're lucky if the hammer hits an empty chamber.

    Again, apologises as I feel I misunderstood you. When you said (and here say you would continue to say) someone is lucky for not getting verbally or physically assaulted when rejecting women, I thought you meant that he's lucky because the majority or women would resort to such abuse, not that he's lucky because he avoided a minority, rare situation. Could you please clarify which one you meant?

    Just that if I said (incorrectly) "You're a lucky woman being able to turn him down without getting raped" it would imply that I was inferring that in the majority of cases where a woman turns down a man's advances, she is likely to get raped. If I said that statement I don't think it would imply that "you're lucky you didn't get raped even though I know it's a minority of cases where you would be".

    Sorry I'm confusing matters here!!!


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,381 ✭✭✭✭Galwayguy35


    Playboy wrote: »
    Similar incidents have happened to me and my friends numerous times over the years. We generally just laugh it off and walk away. The reality I would imagine is that in these type of scenarios there are a large number of men who arent bothered by these type of incidents. Touch a woman though and all hell breaks loose. I'm not condoning either behaviour but I always found it interesting how the two sexes react differently to similar incidents. Maybe a woman reacts more strongly because she is or feels more vulnerable or society has conditioned her to be outraged at any slight on her chastity?

    It's true I guess that men don't think as much about it at the time, I had totally forgot about it happening to me until the other day but in fairness the same rules should apply to both sexes.

    But sometimes we men are our own worst enemies, there was a thread a few months ago about a man who was raped and a number of male posters came on making jokes about it as it wasn't taken as seriously as it would have been if it had been a woman.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,923 ✭✭✭Playboy


    No
    strobe wrote: »
    When I'm single and tend to head out on the town the majority of weekends... I'd probably (like most reasonably picky men) have need to 'reject' several drunk women a week, often a night. I'm in my late twenties now so over the course of my life it probably amounts to hundreds, maybe? Including the friends etc I'd have been out with over all the years what are we talking... several thousand women?

    Never have I felt that I, or anyone else I was out with would 'have to be a brave man' to reject a woman's (drunken) sexual advances or that 'often' it would be likely to result in a physical assault. It happens, I've seen it happen, but it's not in anyway a common occurrence. No one with their head out of the clouds would think they were 'lucky' a woman didn't physically attack them when they turned her down.

    Wait... but maybe I'm jumping the gun here... you're not a Klingon, by any chance?

    I think it depends on the context. Rejecting a woman who you may have been with previously is always dangerous territory and needs to be navigated with extreme caution. With strangers it depends on a) how drunk they are b) their personality and c) how you rejected them. It may be a case that you are a bit gentler in letting the ladies down than The Corinthian is.

    If a lady feels in anyway embarrassed especially in front of people then there is always a chance she will lash out physically or verbally. This to some extent I think is because maybe woman arent as used to rejection as guys. Guys tend to build up a thick skin from a young age as I always found females even from a young age liked to reject boys/men quite cruelly when in company of other females... we have all seen some poor soul take the walk of shame after plucking up the courage to go talk to a girl in a group and getting rejected to a gaggle of laughter.

    The majority of women are used to being pursued instead of pursuing and this can build up a confidence that isnt really merited. A lot of guys will chance their arm with anything when out on a night.. as a result there are lots of ladies out there who think they are a lot more attractive than they actually are and this encourages them to be more outgoing in their pursuit of a guy if they like him. This lack of a thick skin and false confidence can lead to women 'kicking off' when their advances are spurned as the human mind doesnt react well when its preception of reality is challenged.. instead of the person reseting their own view of themselves it is more natural to deny the reality and find fault with the other challenging that view which in this case is the person rejecting them.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    strobe wrote: »
    Never have I felt that I, or anyone else I was out with would 'have to be a brave man' to reject a woman's (drunken) sexual advances or that 'often' it would be likely to result in a physical assault. It happens, I've seen it happen, but it's not in anyway a common occurrence. No one with their head out of the clouds would think they were 'lucky' a woman didn't physically attack them when they turned her down.
    I never said it was common, any more than a similar reaction by a rejected man would be common, but even by your admission it happens. And if it happens and you don't fall foul to it then you are lucky, just as you would be lucky of anything bad not happening to you, regardless of whether it is common or not.
    Wait... but maybe I'm jumping the gun here... you're not a Klingon, by any chance?
    Very droll... tell me, do you crack jokes when the victim of an assault is a woman or just limit such humour to men?

    You seem intent on playing it down, first by using the straw man of claiming it's not commonplace, ergo nothing to worry about and then making fun of it. It's hardly surprising that reporting anything like this goes absolutely nowhere beyond ridicule with attitudes such as yours.
    Perhaps you have had bad experiences with that and if that's the case I'm sorry you had to go through that.
    I don't require your sympathy, thank you.

    The point I am making is that however unlikely it is a danger and numerous men on this thread have attested to this. A man is lucky to avoid such assault scenarios, just as a woman might be, throughout their adult life - this does not mean that anything other than a minority find themselves in such scenarios, but when you get reactions such as strobe's that seeks to dismiss and ridicule when it does happen, then that is where your sympathy is better directed, because it is this type of dismissive 'humour' that represents the sexism that men are subject to, not the assault - a post which you thanked, BTW.
    Again, apologises as I feel I misunderstood you. When you said (and here say you would continue to say) someone is lucky for not getting verbally or physically assaulted when rejecting women, I thought you meant that he's lucky because the majority or women would resort to such abuse, not that he's lucky because he avoided a minority, rare situation. Could you please clarify which one you meant?
    I certainly do not think it is a majority, but at the same time, neither do I think it's as rare as some have (desperately) attempted to make out. My guess is that in Anglophone societies, where binge drinking is commonplace and more aggressive 'laddish' behaviour by women is also encouraged in popular media, the rate of incidence is probably, roughly comparable to the rate of cases where the perpetrator is a man.
    Just that if I said (incorrectly) "You're a lucky woman being able to turn him down without getting raped" it would imply that I was inferring that in the majority of cases where a woman turns down a man's advances, she is likely to get raped. If I said that statement I don't think it would imply that "you're lucky you didn't get raped even though I know it's a minority of cases where you would be".
    No, my argument was (or should have been, as perhaps I miswrote at some stage) that someone is lucky that they've never had such an experience, not that they're lucky that on a specific occasion they didn't have that experience.

    In that respect, I do think that women are lucky also if they can go through life without ever suffering a sexual assault of some description - the odds may still be that they're unlikely to do so, but that doesn't mean that they weren't lucky nonetheless.
    Playboy wrote: »
    It may be a case that you are a bit gentler in letting the ladies down than The Corinthian is.
    You do realize you've just given the "he/she had it coming to him/her argument"? Would you suggest this if it was a discussion on male-on-female assault?


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,923 ✭✭✭Playboy


    No
    You do realize you've just given the "he/she had it coming to him/her argument"? Would you suggest this if it was a discussion on male-on-female assault?

    I dont think I have and if I did I didnt mean it to come across in that way. In most confrontations there are two people involved. If a male or a female is rejected in a particularly cruel or embarrasing way (especially when alcohol is involved) then the liklihood for a verbal or physical confrontation is more likely. It is possible to deflect or diffuse a situation with a little tact... that doesnt mean the initial aggresive behaviour should be excused though.
    Would you suggest this if it was a discussion on male-on-female assault?

    Yes I would and I would see no reason why not to.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,390 ✭✭✭clairefontaine


    Playboy wrote: »
    I think it depends on the context. Rejecting a woman who you may have been with previously is always dangerous territory and needs to be navigated with extreme caution. With strangers it depends on a) how drunk they are b) their personality and c) how you rejected them. It may be a case that you are a bit gentler in letting the ladies down than The Corinthian is.

    If a lady feels in anyway embarrassed especially in front of people then there is always a chance she will lash out physically or verbally. This to some extent I think is because maybe woman arent as used to rejection as guys. Guys tend to build up a thick skin from a young age as I always found females even from a young age liked to reject boys/men quite cruelly when in company of other females... we have all seen some poor soul take the walk of shame after plucking up the courage to go talk to a girl in a group and getting rejected to a gaggle of laughter.

    The majority of women are used to being pursued instead of pursuing and this can build up a confidence that isnt really merited. A lot of guys will chance their arm with anything when out on a night.. as a result there are lots of ladies out there who think they are a lot more attractive than they actually are and this encourages them to be more outgoing in their pursuit of a guy if they like him. This lack of a thick skin and false confidence can lead to women 'kicking off' when their advances are spurned as the human mind doesnt react well when its preception of reality is challenged.. instead of the person reseting their own view of themselves it is more natural to deny the reality and find fault with the other challenging that view which in this case is the person rejecting them.

    It's probably a lot trickier rejecting someone you have agreed to spend your life with than someone you don't know in a bar. I'm sure this not gender specific and that it can lead to all sorts of tensions and weirdnesses in relationship for both men and women when they turn down a partner's advances.

    Saying that, I do think there can be a very subtle double standard at play, that the culture [both men and women] are guilty of - and that is the peer pressure for men to be ever sexually hungry beings and if they turn down sex must be gay or something wrong with them. Whereas a woman does not have the same expectations placed on her, so a rejection from a woman is not taken at the same level as rejection from a man.

    It's probably most obvious at adolescent or college level, but no doubt pervades across the ages where man hood is measured by sexual appetite.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    Playboy wrote: »
    Yes I would and I would see no reason why not to.
    Fair enough, but you must realize that the reaction of others, if you did, would likely be quite hostile.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,923 ✭✭✭Playboy


    No
    Fair enough, but you must realize that the reaction of others, if you did, would likely be quite hostile.

    I agree... But tbh if I approached a woman and was perfectly polite and nice and she was openely hostile and agressive to my approach then there is a good chance I would tell her to go **** herself. The same applies in reverse although I do think men in general treat women with much more respect when approached. I know I'm generalising but I have never known a man to belittle or embarress a woman when she approached him but I have countless examples of the reverse happening.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,872 ✭✭✭strobe


    I never said it was common, any more than a similar reaction by a rejected man would be common, but even by your admission it happens. And if it happens and you don't fall foul to it then you are lucky, just as you would be lucky of anything bad not happening to you, regardless of whether it is common or not.

    Very droll... tell me, do you crack jokes when the victim of an assault is a woman or just limit such humour to men?

    You seem intent on playing it down, first by using the straw man of claiming it's not commonplace, ergo nothing to worry about and then making fun of it. It's hardly surprising that reporting anything like this goes absolutely nowhere beyond ridicule with attitudes such as yours.

    I don't know, I wouldn't say I 'was lucky' if I didn't get stabbed to death walking to my local shop for milk this morning. It still seems a weird thing to say.
    Along with the 'brave man' thing your original post seemed to be conveying the impression that it was indeed common.

    "You'd wanna be a brave man to walk to the shop for milk. You'd be lucky to make it there safely, it can often result in getting stabbed"

    You see what I mean? People have been stabbed walking to the shop for milk, but does the language above seem suitable, or does it seem like I'm trying to give the impression milk purchasing and stabbing almost go hand in hand?
    But your latter posts have now backed away from that, so I'll leave it there.

    But yes, since you asked, if a woman came on here and posted the equivalent in regards rejecting men I'd be cracking jokes too.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,023 ✭✭✭Fukuyama


    I actually don't mind SLIGHT sexism in everyday life. Ie. Light jokes, men stupid, women love shopping etc... blah blah blah.

    But in the workplace or in other formal setting it really pisses me off.

    I won't go into too much detail as my real name is plastered all over many of my posts. But doing 'dirty' work, fixing things, dealing with certain scenarios simply because I'm a man pisses me off. I'm not even talking about physical strength being required.

    There's nothing like scooping up another human beings **** and putting it where it belongs, the toilet, to make you contemplate equality. :mad:

    Worse still are the scoffs, passive aggressive remarks or looks you get if heaven forbid you fail to step up the the plate demanded of you.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,023 ✭✭✭Fukuyama


    Just thought of another thing.

    I was watching 'Teens React' on YouTube.

    (For anyone that doesn't watch it I highly reccomend it. There's a Kids React to. They basically show kids and teens videos, memes and some serious issues such as School Shootings, Politics etc... and get there reactions. Top quality stuff).

    Anyway, one episode was on My Little Pony. Apparently (and it came as much as a surprise to me as it did the 'Teens') there's a whole culture grown up around this show targeted at young girls where. Guys in their teens and 20s have apparently started watching the show. They call themselves Bronies.

    At first I was like 'da fuq?' but after watching some clips they showed to the teens I guess I can see how it'd be kind of entertaining when in that 'YouTube mindset', if you know what I mean. Not something I'd be inclined to get into myself but courses for horses (or ponies, sorry :o). The show seems to be taken as a metaphor for friendship. Guys seem to have difficulty expressing feelings in friendship relationship. I know I do - and the gap is often bridged by 'bro' sentiments.

    Anyway, I googled around a bit and some of the memes it's spawned are quite funny etc. There's a whole sub-culture around it.

    Unfortunately, there's also a lot of blog posts and articles (some of which are in mainstream newspapers websites) written by mainly, from what I can tell, females asking the question as to whether or not these guys are either gay or if there's something sinister behind it; pedophilia.

    Something about that really pissed me off. I sh1t bricks every time I have to come into contact with a child because I'm terrified of getting accused, or even thought to be, anything unsavoury. There's an undercurrent of "if a child falls in the street, go find the nearest woman to help" in recent years.

    I guess I'm rambling a bit here but the topic itself is quite complex.

    I've been known to stop flicking channels if Jimmy Neutron is on (:cool:), and I don't think I'd ever speak to a person again if they ever suggested or hinted I was a pedo because of it.

    But as adults a child's cartoon is watched with a completely different mindset and view on it.

    Yet as a society we instantly assume 'creepy old weirdo watching kids cartoons'. Make it a 'girls cartoon', and many people start calling on cops to investigate.

    HOMEWORK ASSIGNMENT: Type "Bronies are" into google and see what the suggested search says...


  • Registered Users Posts: 700 ✭✭✭nicowa


    Dean0088 wrote: »
    Just thought of another thing.


    [snip]

    HOMEWORK ASSIGNMENT: Type "Bronies are" into google and see what the suggested search says...

    :o Bronies are... Pedo? Christ!


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    I must agree with Strobe. 'Bronies' are a truly fascinating sub culture, I actually thought it was a weird parody at first, but after reading up on it (internet+free time=strange places) I have learned that it's totally legitimate. While I do still find it odd and kit's certainly not for me, I do feel much empathy for them when they are accused of using it as a front for being paedos. Just look at the forums I mod. Dinosaurs and Transformers are what I'm into. The odd close-minded person has made the 'likes hose things - those things are for kids - ergo, nonce' connection, but that is really their problem. To bring the post in line with the topic at hand, I cannot imagine anyone making such a connection with a woman who had the same interests. It's almost as most people cannot fathom that a woman could be a child molester. It's like when a female school teacher is convinced of statutory rape the reaction from a lot of people (well, men mostly) is that the kid was lucky to get some action at his age. Reverse the sexes and the teacher is (rightly) regarded as a monster.


Advertisement