London Irish Centre to host hateful radical feminist event

clairefontaine

tsiehta wrote: »

I clearly said I didn't agree with him telling his son that what he did was rape. What I did say is that I agree with teaching kids about consent, and what rape and sexual assault are from a young age. Is it this you do not agree with?

Not at four no. When its time for sex ed, yes.

moneymad

tsiehta wrote: »

You have to talk to children about sex at some point, what's so wrong with teaching them about consent?

People know what is right and wrong from a very early age.

Playboy

DarkJager wrote: »

Why would you even think of ruining their childhood with such discussions? Boys or girls don't need to know about rape or any sexual activity, that just stinks of feminist nonsense. 99.9% of people grow up without any inclinations towards these acts so why the **** would you even consider this?

ahem.. cough cough!! Dont you know that 1 in 4 men are rapists!?

PaurGasm

"I have honestly have been reassessing the fact that I am giving care to these little future rapists..."

That is just ridiculous...My day is ruined

DarkJager

PaurGasm wrote: »

"I have honestly have been reassessing the fact that I am giving care to these little future rapists..."

That is just ridiculous...My day is ruined

Ya I despair that such imbeciles are allowed to breath the same air as us. That's one person regardless of their gender who should be beaten up and down a road with a lead pipe.

tsiehta

moneymad wrote: »

People know what is right and wrong from a very early age.

I disagree with your assertion.

Are you suggesting we should never talk to kids about consent because they already know right from wrong? Should we ever teach our kids about morality at all?

eviltwin

We DO teach kids about consent from an early age. We tell our kids its not okay if someone touches them against their will. We can also teach them not to touch someone else. Obviously it needs to be age appropriate but there is no reason why it can't be phrased in a way that gets the message across without the need for sexual language.

tsiehta

So, this is only my own experience, but I was in primary school in the 90s, and all I recall as far as education on consent was some "Stay Safe" programme videos on the subject of it not being ok for others to touch you against your will. IIRC it was fairly short lived, dated, and vague though. I had zero education on anything like this in second level.

I'm undecided on the subject of how young to start introducing discussions of this in relation to sex and sexual relationships with others. Perhaps it is something best left to the early teens, as long as kids are introduced to the concepts of consent and personal boundaries early on. I never had any such guidance on consent and how it relates to sex. I don't think all the nuances of consent as it relates to sex/sexual acts are implicitly obvious either, and there are so many misleading messages out there in how romance and sex are portrayed in the films and TV, in which consent is always implicit and rarely explicitly sought.

silvervixen84

Just read in today's Evening Standard (London Ed) that the event has been cancelled:

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/feminist-forum-axed-in-row-over-transsexuals-ban-8602424.html

Rev Hellfire

It will be interesting to see if they go through with their threat of attending the centre anyway.

PucaMama

the things ive seen written in the AVFM forums havnt been much better than what radfem say. of course, those threads are now deleted, along with the posts about how women are only to be used and all we have to offer are "holes" :rolleyes:

Woodward

PucaMama wrote: »

the things ive seen written in the AVFM forums havnt been much better than what radfem say. of course, those threads are now deleted, along with the posts about how women are only to be used and all we have to offer are "holes" :rolleyes:

AVFM can be very hit or miss. Anything by Paul Elam and a lot of John the Others recent stuff is pretty ****. Some of the other writers are pretty good

Playboy

PucaMama wrote: »

the things ive seen written in the AVFM forums havnt been much better than what radfem say. of course, those threads are now deleted, along with the posts about how women are only to be used and all we have to offer are "holes" :rolleyes:

So radfem are ok because the AVFM forums are bad too?

Woodward

Playboy wrote: »

So radfem are ok because the AVFM forums are bad too?

Where in my post did I say anything that even remotely gives that idea

iptba

Woodward wrote: »

Where in my post did I say anything that even remotely gives that idea

He wasn't replying to you, but to the logic of the previous post.

Playboy

iptba wrote: »

He wasn't replying to you, but to the logic of the previous post.

which is why I quoted that post

PucaMama

Playboy wrote: »

So radfem are ok because the AVFM forums are bad too?

Cant have avfm allowed to spout that rubbish and then restrict whst radfem can say.

Playboy

PucaMama wrote: »

Cant have avfm allowed to spout that rubbish and then restrict whst radfem can say.

No one is saying to allow anyone spout anything. If people on AVFM are saying those things then that is clearly wrong. It has nothing to do with radfem speaking at the London Irish Centre though.

iptba

There's a letter by somebody from RadFem in the Sunday Times (May 5) on this. It is in reply to an article from the April 21 edition of the paper.

They present themselves as victims and no mention is made of the issue of transgender women being excluded.

DamoKen

PucaMama wrote: »

Cant have avfm allowed to spout that rubbish and then restrict whst radfem can say.

PucaMama wrote:

the things ive seen written in the AVFM forums havnt been much better than what radfem say. of course, those threads are now deleted, along with the posts about how women are only to be used and all we have to offer are "holes"

From your first post I would have thought that by deleting the posts & threads it would seem that they're not really allowed?, although the fact that they were threads would suggest they could improve on their moderators reactiveness.

Not really familiar with the site, is it moderated voluntarily? It does happen on boards from time to time that a thread gets through a few pages before getting locked for good reason. Mods do a great job here but no forum system is perfect, maybe it's the same with less mods on avfm?

PucaMama

DamoKen wrote: »

From your first post I would have thought that by deleting the posts & threads it would seem that they're not really allowed?, although the fact that they were threads would suggest they could improve on their moderators reactiveness.

Not really familiar with the site, is it moderated voluntarily? It does happen on boards from time to time that a thread gets through a few pages before getting locked for good reason. Mods do a great job here but no forum system is perfect, maybe it's the same with less mods on avfm?

They were up there ages, not just posted then closed and deleted.

GalwayGuy2

They were up there ages, not just posted then closed and deleted.

Hmm, were they forum post, or articles wrote by contributors?

DamoKen

PucaMama wrote: »

They were up there ages, not just posted then closed and deleted.

Fair enough. As I said not really familiar with the site so wouldn't know what their policies are like. I do know threads like that would alienate myself as well as any other guy I know.

That's the problem with radical extremists of any sort. They tend to hijack movements and become the only voice heard and cited by the "other side". Any reasonable well founded and justified arguments put forward by any other are then drowned out and subsequently ignored.

Having said that I still think your initial point has no bearing. The Irish Centre did the right thing in denying a platform to a hateful extremist group irrespective of their politics. The gender they belong to is irrelevant as are examples of "the others do it" on the web. I'd feel the exact same if the centre had denied a gathering of the authors of those threads you mentioned.