Unhelpful 'gendering' of social issues

Amirani

Apparently all us men are at fault that rape still exists: http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/telling-women-to-be-careful-gets-men-off-the-hook-1.1536337

"men must accept that most violent crimes perpetrated against women are by men, and that they have the power to stop this."

I'm sorry Una, but I'm in no better a position to stop rape than you are. I'm also no more responsible for its existence.

GalwayGuy2

^^^

Isn't that argument fairly common? I remember watching a video about why males should be feminists, and I don't think people realized that the article above, and the video mentioned, is pretty much the same argument.

ConFurioso

Jesus Christ! What an awful awful piece of writing! :eek:

Pawwed Rig

NiallSparky wrote: »

Apparently all us men are at fault that rape still exists: http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/telling-women-to-be-careful-gets-men-off-the-hook-1.1536337

That article is truly sickening.
I will just leave this here for anyone who wants to take it a little further

http://www.pressombudsman.ie/_fileupload/How%20to%20Complain%2009_10.pdf


Principle 8 – Prejudice
Newspapers and magazines shall not
publish material intended or likely to
cause grave offence or stir up hatred
against an individual or group on the
basis of their race, religion, nationality,
colour, ethnic origin, membership of
the travelling community, gender,
sexual orientation, marital status,
disability, illness, or age.

I think this article crosses the line on this multiple times.

Edit: I sent an e-mail to the online editor of the Irish Times. I will keep you all updated on any response I get. If none I will escalate to the press ombudsman. Does anyone know if the Times has signed up to the code of practice?

wonderfullife

NiallSparky wrote: »

Apparently all us men are at fault that rape still exists: http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/telling-women-to-be-careful-gets-men-off-the-hook-1.1536337



I'm sorry Una, but I'm in no better a position to stop rape than you are. I'm also no more responsible for its existence.

Dubious behaviour

Men, of course, argue that this generalisation is unfair, that it demonises blokes who are non-violent and deplore such behaviour. Yet every group of guys has a buddy who is a little wayward, and whose behaviour towards women is dubious. Many men remain silent when the lads suggest a strip club on a stag night, even if they are uncomfortable with it. Most guys probably have a suspicion that a male close to them has bought sex.

The whole article is a travesty but the above is hilarious.

It would basically be the same as a man saying this:

"Every group of girls has a friend who is a little bit of a slut. Many girls remain silent when the girls start touching the strippers genitals on a hen night, even if they are uncomfortable with it. Most girls probably have a suspicion that a female close to them has slept with a guy purely because he has lots of money."


I really despair at times at what our schools and University systems are producing talent wise - made more evident when you have the likes of this woman writing a piece that is ill-informed, grossly unfair, fully sexist and effectively reads like an 8 year old turning in their homework they wrote over their weetabix before school.

Something like "In the famine, many people died due to no spuds. Everyone knows all Irish people like potatoes."

Tremendous.

Setun

Perhaps some of you have read Una Mullally's recent Irish Times article - "Telling women to be careful gets men off the hook". In it, she makes some openly ridiculous claims leveled at 'men' that largely obscure an otherwise useful point about how society should understand acts of sexual violence. It contains the following statement, which for me, turns the complex and terribly ugly issues of sexual violence and harassment into a binary/blanket gender issue:

So, women, be careful? How about men, don’t rape? Men, don’t murder your exes or partners. Men, don’t beat up your wives or girlfriends. Men, don’t assault someone you’ve just met that night. Men, don’t shout at women across the road just because you can. Men, stop hanging your threat of rape over dark streets.

Thanks for that Una, I hadn't realised the above before, I'll try harder to not "hang my threat of rape over dark streets" in future. Victim-blaming is of course not the answer to tackling sexual violence, but neither are grossly over-simplified counter-arguments that include the unqualified quote "Most guys probably have a suspicion that a male close to them has bought sex." Blimey.

Barbara Ellen's article referencing the tumblr "Men Taking Up Too Much Space on the Train" in The Guardian last week - while dealing with a much less serious issue, also managed to sidestep a basic point. It doesn't have to be about gender, reduced to alpha male crotch thrusting and dominating body language in shared public space. If we're going to start taking pictures of people occupying more than their dismal share on public transport, why turn it into a issue apparently solely perpetrated by men? I'm a regular user of public transport, and my experience of people sticking their legs out across the aisle, lying spreadeagled across a chair and a half, or sticking their bags on the seat beside them is *not* an issue that needs to be gendered.

It's a shame that such conversations that certainly require public debate end up muddied and side-stepped through a simplified gendered reading of the issue.

py2006

NiallSparky wrote: »

Apparently all us men are at fault that rape still exists: http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/telling-women-to-be-careful-gets-men-off-the-hook-1.1536337.

Men, don’t rape
Instructing women to be careful gets men off the hook. The potential perpetrators of attacks are seldom asked to be as conscientious, apart from occasional innovations such as the Don’t Be That Guy campaign. So, women, be careful? How about men, don’t rape? Men, don’t murder your exes or partners. Men, don’t beat up your wives or girlfriends. Men, don’t assault someone you’ve just met that night. Men, don’t shout at women across the road just because you can. Men, stop hanging your threat of rape over dark streets.

Lost for words...

and..

Men, of course, argue that this generalisation is unfair, that it demonises blokes who are non-violent and deplore such behaviour. Yet every group of guys has a buddy who is a little wayward, and whose behaviour towards women is dubious. Many men remain silent when the lads suggest a strip club on a stag night, even if they are uncomfortable with it. Most guys probably have a suspicion that a male close to them has bought sex.

The Corinthian

You will always have extremists, those who peddle simplistic messages of hate, on all sides, regardless of ideology.

What disturbs me is that in Western society, such misandrist viewpoints have essentially become mainstream; not only in the media, but increasingly in politics and the NGO's. It's no longer a bunch of fringe extremists giving the rest of feminism a bad name - the lunatics have taken over the asylum, as it were, and the rest of the feminist movement, regrettably, does not appear to have objected much.

I'd be curious as to how more moderate feminists rationalize this inaction.

py2006

This lady also wrote an article on Miley Cyrus and the twerking incident on MTV. A lot of men are to blame undertones.

I had aspirations at one stage of being a writer but assumed I was nowhere near that standard. After reading some of her articles, I realise I was wrong.

pwurple

"Gendering" of issues would be something I would expect most feminists would have a huge problem with in the first place.

"All men do this", or "all women do that" statements are extremely frustrating for anyone who believes in equality.

The Corinthian

pwurple wrote: »

"Gendering" of issues would be something I would expect most feminists would have a huge problem with in the first place.

"All men do this", or "all women do that" statements are extremely frustrating for anyone who believes in equality.

Then why has it become so acceptable in mainstream feminism? Why isn't it being attacked by feminists who believe in equality?

Setun

pwurple wrote: »

"Gendering" of issues would be something I would expect most feminists would have a huge problem with in the first place.

"All men do this", or "all women do that" statements are extremely frustrating for anyone who believes in equality.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying that it's solely a "feminist" issue, as that would be a tad hypocritical. It's perhaps a tendency adopted by some (male and female) feminists under various strands of feminist rhetoric.

The tumblr I mentioned in the OP - http://mentakingup2muchspaceonthetrain.tumblr.com/ - is apparently run by a man. Many such blogs begin from a slightly ironic, or at least apolitical, starting point. When they become mentioned by columnists as a call to arms, as Yet Another Symbol Of The Patriarchal Oppressor, then indeed it is converted into a gendered issue, and immediately the responses are vitriolic and limited to viewing the issue from this gendered perspective. How can society approach such issues if "all men are bogeymen" is a recurring trope in mainstream discussions?

pwurple

The Corinthian wrote: »

Then why has it become so acceptable in mainstream feminism? Why isn't it being attacked by feminists who believe in equality?

It's not acceptable to me. I've no idea why the media believe it to be acceptable... possibly because it sells newspapers? It cannot be rationalised.

I agree wholeheartedly with the OP. It's totally inane to mark a trait of some people in general down to either one gender or another. Claiming that the feminist movement has caused this, is hypocritical indeed.

Pawwed Rig

Transferred over related posts from Sexism you have personally experienced merging content

The Corinthian

pwurple wrote: »

It's not acceptable to me. I've no idea why the media believe it to be acceptable...

So you cannot say why it appears to be acceptable, yet somehow you can definitively say that you "would expect most feminists would have a huge problem with in the first place". How?

possibly because it sells newspapers? It cannot be rationalised.

The problem though is it's not limited to the press. You see it in politics, where every piece of gender related is designed to protect or enhance women's rights (despite some pretty blatant discrimination against men crying out for reform). And even in NGO's; how many anti-domestic violence organizations, for example, don't even acknowledge that women can be violent against men?

So, you see, there's a bit more to it than simply selling newspapers.

Claiming that the feminist movement has caused this, is hypocritical indeed.

Yet it is members of the feminist movement who have caused this. They may be a minority of radical misandrists, as is generally claimed, but that claim becomes undermined by the silence of the rest of the movement to their actions, and by the sheer influence that they appear to have amassed at this stage.

pwurple

The Corinthian wrote: »

So you cannot say why it appears to be acceptable, yet somehow you can definitively say that you "would expect most feminists would have a huge problem with in the first place". How?

How? Because the very definition of feminism is to gain general equality with men, not to be sexist and discriminatory.

The problem though is it's not limited to the press. You see it in politics, where every piece of gender related is designed to protect or enhance women's rights (despite some pretty blatant discrimination against men crying out for reform). And even in NGO's; how many anti-domestic violence organizations, for example, don't even acknowledge that women can be violent against men?

I don't want to engage in the whataboutery I am gettign dragged into, but assuming every piece of gender-bias is one-sided is blinkered. I agree all your examples those are valid, especially the domestic violence organisations. But that does not negate the existance of other insidous gender related muppetry which women experience.

Yet it is members of the feminist movement who have caused this.

Evidence for this claim please. You are simply using the term 'feminist' as a synonym for sexist.

The Corinthian

pwurple wrote: »

How? Because the very definition of feminism is to gain general equality with men, not to be sexist and discriminatory.

That's the theory, but how well does that stand under examination?

Remember, to gain equality with men, isn't simply a question of gaining rights so that they are equal to men's, but also losing them where they are currently more than equal.

For example, areas such as parental rights (and enforcement of those rights), or how a 13-year old boy who has sex with his 14-year old girlfriend may be prosecuted, yet she is immune from any such prosecution? Were feminism to truly seek to gain general equality with men then they would actively campaign for equality there also. Indeed, I would challenge anyone to find a single instance (in the last fifty years*) where feminism has actively campaigned for anything that would have resulted in a loss of rights for women.

If not, for whatever reason and however you wish to rationalize for it, then feminism isn't following your 'very definition' and is instead about gaining general equality with men, only where women are disadvantaged. Unfortunately, that is sexist and discriminatory.

I don't want to engage in the whataboutery I am gettign dragged into, but assuming every piece of gender-bias is one-sided is blinkered. I agree all your examples those are valid, especially the domestic violence organisations. But that does not negate the existance of other insidous gender related muppetry which women experience.

Absolutely and I completely agree with you. Women do still experience discrimination, but that doesn't excuse ignoring, underplaying and in some cases denying discrimination against men.

Evidence for this claim please. You are simply using the term 'feminist' as a synonym for sexist.

Sorry, my bad; I meant that feminism is equally guilty of this - either through active sexism or by remaining silent when fellow feminists are actively sexist.




* The Suffreget movement, to give it its dues, did do this, in some cases campaigning against things such as the common practice of wives controlling the family finances and for women to be treated the same as men where it came to capital punishment. Unfortunately, since second-wave feminism, this approach has not been seen.

Standman

Many men remain silent when the lads suggest a strip club on a stag night, even if they are uncomfortable with it. Most guys probably have a suspicion that a male close to them has bought sex.

So I as a man am responsible for violent crimes against women because some guys I know may have went to a strip club or bought sex? Beautiful logic.

iptba

I think some or a lot of this has its roots in Gender Studies/Women's Studies and feminism.

Generally Gender Studies/Women's Studies courses are not neutral with regard to feminism; one is expected to analyse society through a feminist lens.

Feminist analysis doesn't like to blame women; men and patriarchy are generally seen as the ultimate cause of problems.

So people are taught/encouraged to think problems in society are ultimately due to men.

keeponhurling

I'm a little surprised that this threads in Gentlemans and not in Media or even Legal Issues.

That article published in the Times is a blatant case of incitement to hatred, and they were very foolish to publish it.

Frank Lee Midere

iptba wrote: »

I think some or a lot of this has its roots in Gender Studies/Women's Studies and feminism.

Generally Gender Studies/Women's Studies courses are not neutral with regard to feminism; one is expected to analyse society through a feminist lens.

Feminist analysis doesn't like to blame women; men and patriarchy are generally seen as the ultimate cause of problems.

So people are taught/encouraged to think problems in society are ultimately due to men.

Generally these degrees are for the not very brightest of the elites in any given society. If Una is so oppressed how come, even though she writes with the logic of a stupid 8 year old, she is writing for the Times and we are not?

To answe her illogicality.

1) a man is responsible for his own actions. If he knows a friend has bought sex - which is not the same as rape- it's not his business. He should report immoral actions like rape of course.
2) generalising about how all men are guilty because some are is disgraceful generalist stereotyping. Replace men with "black men" and you see how bad her logic is.
3) she asks what we are doing about rapists who are men? Well the "patriarchy" is arresting them, bringing them to trial, and jailing them where the evidence fits. I am unsure what more she wants.

iptba

An analogy:

Sometimes I hear of Dublin-based criminals undertaking robberies outside of Dublin.

The Gardai should not make any suggestions to outlets that might reduce the risk of robberies - that would be blaming the victims. Instead, what needs to happen is the people of Dublin need to sort out the problem. The people of Dublin encourage robbery-culture.

iptba

In response to talk about "rape culture" that all men are supposed to be to blame for, some men's rights activists are talking about "false rape culture" and by analogy saying all women are to blame, to make a point.

B0jangles

iptba wrote: »

In response to talk about "rape culture" that all men are supposed to be to blame for, some men's rights activists are talking about "false rape culture" and by analogy saying all women are to blame, to make a point.

Would that be Paul Elam AKA "A Voice for Men"?

He's quite a piece of work.

http://www.avoiceformen.com/mens-rights/jury-duty-at-a-rape-trial-acquit/

(BTW His YouTube account name is "TheHappyMisogynist", I think that is a bit telling.)

iptba

B0jangles wrote: »

iptba wrote:

In response to talk about "rape culture" that all men are supposed to be to blame for, some men's rights activists are talking about "false rape culture" and by analogy saying all women are to blame, to make a point.

Would that be Paul Elam AKA "A Voice for Men"?

He's quite a piece of work.

Other people too have made the point. The point can be discussed without talking about an individual. I think one can talk about "false rape culture" in the same way as "rape culture" and just as many/most men won't like to be blamed for "rape culture", similarly many/most women won't like to be blamed for "false rape culture". Some people can have difficulties seeing problems with analyses until the genders are reversed.

Talking about "false rape culture" also highlights that men can be victims of crimes also. Society isn't as black as white as the narrative put out there by many feminist/women's groups e.g. about domestic violence. So much of the discussion of gender is like having only one side represented in a trial (either for the plaintiff or for the defendant) - the jury (public opinion) would be more likely to side with that side if the other side isn't represented to give alternative analyses of the situation.

Henry9

pwurple wrote: »

How? Because the very definition of feminism is to gain general equality with men, not to be sexist and discriminatory

That's gas. There's a definition of feminism now?
I bet that it doesn't stand up to any serious scrutiny.
I further wager that the end result will be 'but that's not what feminism means to me'.

Are quotas not discriminatory? How about female offenders being treated more leniently? How about campaigning for the abolition of custodial sentences because prison is not a suitable place for a woman?
What say the feminist lobby on these issues?

How about girls outperforming boys in state examinations? How about female entrants outnumbering male entrants in 3rd level by 3 to 2? How about the unequal distribution of child custody awards?
Do the feminist lobby campaign to end these inequalities?

How about male suicide statistics? How about male life expectancy versus female? How about male unemployment because of boom time industries being decimated?
Do the feminist lobby write articles for the IT saying something must be done? Or do they wave them away saying 'the jury is still out on that', or 'that's their own fault because they're not as emotionally intelligent as women', or laughably 'the economic downturn is hitting women disproportionately'?

So in other words, is feminism concerned with 'general equality', or with being an advocacy group for women?

cantdecide

I'm pretty sure that most violent crimes are probably perpetrated against men by other men... so where do we stand now? I think the only fair thing I can do is shoot myself as a precaution

The Corinthian

The Corinthian wrote: »

So you cannot say why it appears to be acceptable, yet somehow you can definitively say that you "would expect most feminists would have a huge problem with in the first place". How?

Because the media != "most feminists"

Lemming

bluewolf wrote: »

Because the media != "most feminists"

That it may be, but it [the media, or rather through it] is also the initial face of feminism that the general populace are presented with. "First impressions" and all that jazz.

clairefontaine

It's no big secret the media is saturated with lefty bean eating yuppies.

This is politics 101 and I've said the same thing on discussions around Islam, not that feminist are nearly on par with jihadists but there is a similar principal at work, like in any ideology.

The radicals and extremists are there to make the moderates look good, so they don't seem so bigoted and irrational, so their irrationalities can take hold in the perceptions of ordinary people who simply like to think of themselves as good people. So the more extreme on the continuum the ideology is, the more extreme the moderate scale can become while still appearing reasonable, to those who have swallowed the original sales pitch.

Yah yeah, it's not all Muslims, yeah yeah, it's not all feminists, yeah yeah I'm a Muslim and I condemn that, yeah yeah, I'm a feminist and I condemn that, all sinking in the slew of denial because the brainwashing worked. And no one likes to admit they are a fool. All denying the very essences and evidences of what's right in front of them. Peer pressure at its finest and most dangerous.

This is not just feminists fault, but also the fault of do goodie yippies.

clairefontaine

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

Generally these degrees are for the not very brightest of the elites in any given society. If Una is so oppressed how come, even though she writes with the logic of a stupid 8 year old, she is writing for the Times and we are not?

To answe her illogicality.

1) a man is responsible for his own actions. If he knows a friend has bought sex - which is not the same as rape- it's not his business. He should report immoral actions like rape of course.
2) generalising about how all men are guilty because some are is disgraceful generalist stereotyping. Replace men with "black men" and you see how bad her logic is.
3) she asks what we are doing about rapists who are men? Well the "patriarchy" is arresting them, bringing them to trial, and jailing them where the evidence fits. I am unsure what more she wants.

I bet she's sleeping with someone.

mollymosfet

A thread where people are seriously using the word "misandry". And one of these bolloxes runs the "Ladies Lounge". Willing to bet at least half of ye own fedoras as well.

Christ on a bike.

It's great when anti-rape campaigns tell women what to do, but when men get told what to do, they'll let you know who's boss. I bet half of you didn't even read the article past the first page(if even that far):

You can’t tar every man with the same brush, but men must accept that most violent crimes perpetrated against women are by men, and that they have the power to stop this.

It's not blaming all men for raping women. However it is saying men can do more to stop rape because rape is so amazingly common against women, most men are going to have a rapist in their social circle. Telling the women how to avoid rape instead of telling men to try do something from their end is extremely damaging.

mollymosfet

clairefontaine wrote: »

It's no big secret the media is saturated with lefty bean eating yuppies.

This is politics 101 and I've said the same thing on discussions around Islam, not that feminist are nearly on par with jihadists but there is a similar principal at work, like in any ideology.

The radicals and extremists are there to make the moderates look good, so they don't seem so bigoted and irrational, so their irrationalities can take hold in the perceptions of ordinary people who simply like to think of themselves as good people. So the more extreme on the continuum the ideology is, the more extreme the moderate scale can become while still appearing reasonable, to those who have swallowed the original sales pitch.

Yah yeah, it's not all Muslims, yeah yeah, it's not all feminists, yeah yeah I'm a Muslim and I condemn that, yeah yeah, I'm a feminist and I condemn that, all sinking in the slew of denial because the brainwashing worked. And no one likes to admit they are a fool. All denying the very essences and evidences of what's right in front of them. Peer pressure at its finest and most dangerous.

This is not just feminists fault, but also the fault of do goodie yippies.

I can't believe what I read the Guardian for example, what a scam. And the article referenced above. How is that anything but hate speech ? On the same country that has anti blasphemy laws. Woah what a infusing country.

Right wingers of course, are all good and honest people.

mollymosfet

iptba wrote: »

In response to talk about "rape culture" that all men are supposed to be to blame for, some men's rights activists are talking about "false rape culture" and by analogy saying all women are to blame, to make a point.

the whole point of rape culture is to make a point in the first place.

false rape accusations are far rarer than rape in the first place. these "men's rights activists" are just assholes looking to defend their privileges.

clairefontaine

mollymosfet wrote: »

Right wingers of course, are all good and honest people.

We are not talking about them. We are talking about feminism and this article.

Funny how the IT would never publish something like "Muslims. Stop blowing th gs up and chopping heads off in the Internet." It completely adds credence to the claims the white male is under attack that they published this.

iptba

mollymosfet wrote: »

these "men's rights activists" are just assholes looking to defend their privileges.

It can similarly be argued that some women's rights activists* are just "assholes"** looking to defend some of their privileges when they do and say some things, depending on your perspective.

I think it's more constructive to talk about specific issues rather than guess or impugn people's motivations.

* or if they're male, trying to use feminism to get into a woman's pants.

**to mirror the language you used

mollymosfet

It can similarly be argued that some women's rights activists* are just "assholes"** looking to defend some of their privileges when they do and say some things, depending on your perspective.

No it can't, because feminism is a legitimate movement with a legitimate history that can be traced back. Far too many "Men's Rights Activists" exist solely to be contrarian to that movement. It's not that the idea of "Men's Rights" is invalid, rather the form of MRA mentioned in the post I was quoting is simple, as I put, down to assholes looking to defend privileges they now feel have come under fire.

It is a false equivalence.

iptba

mollymosfet wrote: »

It's great when anti-rape campaigns tell women what to do, but when men get told what to do, they'll let you know who's boss.

The Gardai are doing no different than they do with other people who might be victims of crime: making suggestions that they think might help that person reduce the chance they will be a victim. The individual is perfectly free to ignore the advice.

Men on the other hand are having the finger pointed at them: it is not about reducing the chances they will be a victim of a crime.

iptba

mollymosfet wrote: »

No it can't, because feminism is a legitimate movement with a legitimate history that can be traced back.

Not sure what the point is about history: I think there are perfectly valid reasons for a men's rights movement to exist just as there were valid reasons for a feminist movement to start.

mollymosfet wrote: »

Far too many "Men's Rights Activists" exist solely to be contrarian to that movement. It's not that the idea of "Men's Rights" is invalid, rather the form of MRA mentioned in the post I was quoting is simple, as I put, down to assholes looking to defend privileges they now feel have come under fire.

I don't accept that making a point about not being happy for having the finger point at you for causing rape, simply because one is male, is trying to protect a "privilege".

Similarly I don't accept that raising the issue of false rape accusations is trying to protect a privilege.

In my opinion, you need to develop other arguments rather than mentioning "privilege" all the time.

iptba

mollymosfet wrote: »

A thread where people are seriously using the word "misandry".

Imagine that. Shouldn't be allowed. :rolleyes:

The Corinthian

bluewolf wrote: »

Because the media != "most feminists"

It's been pointed out, a few times, that this approach to feminism is not limited to the media, but also pervasive in many other areas of society.

As for "most feminists", I can't really say what the situation is there. Maybe "most feminists" are moderate, but if so why are extremist policies, such as quotas, becoming law? Or such misandrist articles being published without problems? Why is it not uncommon for NGO's to only give support to women and deny that men suffer the same issues?

Why are "most feminists" silent in the face of feminists who act and speak in their name in ways that they claim they oppose?

Personally, I think that it's time that "most feminists" ask themselves these questions and genuinely take some responsibility for having let the lunatics take over the asylum. Instead of circling the wagons the moment that someone dares to criticize feminism, perhaps considering why these criticisms are increasingly being made would be a better idea.

After all, feminism hasn't been gaining support in recent years, it's been losing it and maybe, just maybe, it may be that it's lost it's way. Refusing to look at such fundamentals and dismissing any criticisms as simply anti-feminist, is unlikely to change that trend.

The Corinthian

The Corinthian wrote: »

It's been pointed out, a few times, that this approach to feminism is not limited to the media, but also pervasive in many other areas of society.

As for "most feminists", I can't really say what the situation is there

That's all lovely but has nothing to do with you acting like someone is contradicting themselves for saying they would expect most feminists to have an issue with gendering of issues, and that they don't know why it may seem acceptable to the media

Sleepy

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Edit: I sent an e-mail to the online editor of the Irish Times. I will keep you all updated on any response I get. If none I will escalate to the press ombudsman. Does anyone know if the Times has signed up to the code of practice?

Any response?

TBH, I'm not sure the editor of the IT is the right person for this. Would the Gardaí be a better place to report a case of incitement to hatred? Would be nice to see the author and her editor face criminal charges for such misandrist propaganda.

The Corinthian

bluewolf wrote: »

That's all lovely but has nothing to do with you acting like someone is contradicting themselves for saying they would expect most feminists to have an issue with gendering of issues, and that they don't know why it may seem acceptable to the media

I've not contradicted myself; if "most feminists" are oppose gendering of issues or supposedly radical, fringe feminism, yet do not actually do anything about it and seem happy, or at least silent, about being represented this way, then I really cannot say why "most feminists" are behaving this way.

You'd think that "most feminists" would turn around and attack such articles. Or reject radical gender-biased policies. Or condemn gender-biased NGO's. But "most feminists" don't seem to do so.

Why is what I cannot speak to, only speculate.

pwurple

Henry9 wrote: »

That's gas. There's a definition of feminism now?

It's gas indeed. Let me introduce you to a something called a dictionary. Not too fashionable these days, but they still exist I'm told.

The Corinthian

pwurple wrote: »

It's gas indeed. Let me introduce you to a something called a dictionary. Not too fashionable these days, but they still exist I'm told.

Then why don't you address my analysis of that definition? Or is independent thought not fashionable these days either?

The Corinthian

The Corinthian wrote: »

I've not contradicted myself;

I didn't say you were. Did you even read my post?

The Corinthian

bluewolf wrote: »

I didn't say you were. Did you even read my post?

You're right, I completely misread your post. Let me give it another try.

bluewolf wrote: »

That's all lovely but has nothing to do with you acting like someone is contradicting themselves for saying they would expect most feminists to have an issue with gendering of issues, and that they don't know why it may seem acceptable to the media

Well, let's look at it this way. If I ascribe to a movement or ideology, then that would be because I agree with the aims and actions of that movement or ideology.

Now consider people who also claim to ascribe to my movement or ideology, start to propose or do things in the name of my movement or ideology, that fly in the face of what I believe are its aims or what it should be doing.

What should I do?

kunst nugget

Sleepy wrote: »

Any response?

TBH, I'm not sure the editor of the IT is the right person for this. Would the Gardaí be a better place to report a case of incitement to hatred? Would be nice to see the author and her editor face criminal charges for such misandrist propaganda.

What are you going to say?

'Dear Mr. Garda Man, Some young girl wrote a completely illogical article and I'm now afraid I will be attacked in my home by angry feminists!'

I found the article to be insulting, woefully hamfisted and completely without logic and merit but to say it's incitement to hatred is completely ridiculous.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

aye, i always cringe when I see people aping the feminists with their 'incitement to hatred' bolloxology. there's no need for everyone else to stoop to their level.

ConFurioso

http://www.irishtimes.com/debate/letters/warnings-for-victims-and-attackers-1.1537500

Anyone here?

Woops, another one today I over looked as well.

http://www.irishtimes.com/debate/letters/warnings-for-attackers-and-victims-1.1538589