Fintan O’Toole jumping on the bandwagon to score points against Irish men and boys.

El_Duderino 09

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Exactly. In fact, if one were to believe that up until the women's liberation movement of the 1960s the world was ruled by men for men i.e. the patriarchy theory, then it was men who first started punishing other men for rape and sexual assault in the form of the criminal justice system.
[/quote]

Well I’d say those things are true to an extent. It’s not really relevant to the point that we both don’t feel under attack when a man is punished for bad behaviour.

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Well just to be clear, I wasn't suggesting that you should. I think that all this feminist social engineering is unrealistic. But I was simply pointing out that men's behaviour doesn't happen in a vaccuum and that if feminists want to stop X behaviour then any solution must not just encourage negative reactions to X behaviour but also should discourage positive reactions to that behaviour

Isn’t this post saying that social engineering is unrealistic, but they should be trying to do the social engineering anyway just to be consistent? Education etc. is good but ultimately everyone is responsible for their own behaviour. If a man behaves badly, it’s no excuse to say that some women like bad behaviour. -likewise with grabby women. See later paragraph.

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

That is true. I don't agree with everything he has said. We are only united in disagreeing with leggo who paints anyone who disagrees with him as a misogynist.

That’s fair enough you don’t have to agree with each other. It’s just difficult for me to chat with you both and explore the ideas, when you when you disagree with me when actually you’re disagreement is with each other.

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

I am not, as you have pointed out, a big fan of this type of campaign because I don't necessarily think it reaches the right people, or perhaps that the people that transgress know that they are doing wrong but do it anyway so more education is not really the solution.

But if one is to have such campaigns, I don't find anything offensive in gender neutral campaigns. The problem is that these aren't gender neutral campaigns, they are ideologically charged to be against men and boys.

I think it helps to have realistic expectations for an education campaign. The point is to reach lots of people including the people who it affects and those it doesn’t. The information gets into the public and changes social perceptions of the the subject. You might be surprised how much soap operas can affect public perceptions of issues.

In any case, I think there’s a belief that any gender campaign is anti men. In a lot of cases the campaign are pro women and ignore men but they are perceived as anti men. The domestic violence campaign mentioned earlier is a good example. The focus of the campaign was to encourage victims to get help and abusers to see the consequences of the abuse, and for the public to see domestic abusers in a negative light.

The campaign wasn’t anti men, it just focused on one scenario. I didn’t feel under attack because the abuser was a man. He was representative of abusers, not men. So I didn’t identify with that character.

Likewise the consent course in Trinity was roundly regarded as anti man but EB reports that it was gender neutral. So I think that some men are too willing to dismiss these events as anti men.

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Yes and it's interesting that this statement is not a controversial one. A lot of men would react positively to such behaviour and if they do so they are in effect encouraging women on hen parties to do so. Is it wrong to say that? I don't think so. If all men objected to such behaviour, I don't believe that women would engage in it.

It’s not wrong to say so if it’s true. I think the thread about men being grabbed by women was really illuminating. The vast majority of posters who had been groped weren’t happy about it. They didn’t like it and wished it didn’t happen but they didn’t feel they could really complain about it. I didn’t read every single story, but I don’t think I saw any stories where one of the men said ‘don’t do that again ‘ or anything to that effect.

So while some men might actively encourage women to grope men, the behaviour is ultimately the individual women’s responsibility. And as a side measure I think it would be good to educate around the fact that men can be assertive and tell a grabby woman she’s out of order.

I think there’s a perception that men should like having their bits grabbed but the reality is that most men actively dislike it.

iptba

I think all the campaigns highlighting only domestic violence on women by men have caused some problems. For example, I have heard cases where men called the police as they were being attacked and not getting support from the police or even being treated as the aggressor.

El_Duderino 09

iptba wrote: »

I think all the campaigns highlighting only domestic violence on women by men have caused some problems. For example, I have heard cases where men called the police as they were being attacked and not getting support from the police or even being treated as the aggressor.

I think you’re being a bit liberal to suggest domestic violence campaigns have made the police less likely to take female on male domestic violence, seriously.

The police should have specific training in handling domestic situations of all kinds. A public information campaign is a 30second snippet to introduce the topic to the public.

Did I misunderstand your point or were you suggesting the recent campaigns turned the police against male victims? I think you’d need to bring some evidence to the table if it’s the latter.