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
“Ireland has a rape culture”
Options
Comments
-
Oh my bad I thought you just wanted an example of someone in government who said that, if its only in Ireland and you need over a certain number of people its handier if you put those conditions in.
Ignore him. There's no point of arguing with him.
Edit: Actually, that was a little bit harsh.0 -
CrankyHaus wrote: »That heterosexual sex was rape (violation in her words) was a thesis of her book Intercourse, though she inserted the caveat that this was only true in a "male supremacist society". However since she viewed pretty much all societies in existence in those terms it therefore follows that she asserted that all heterosexual men at least were rapists.
I suspect you know this though and that's why you're attempting to reduce the question to a literal word for word statement. I responded to you in good faith for the purposes of discussion, not to "win" some internet argument so I'll leave you to it if these are the sorts of responses you'll make. Have fun.
That’s interesting. I did indeed not know this already. She isn’t big in my life so I’m glad you were able to tell me about her. I’ll take your word for it that some woman somewhere (America?) thinks all heterosexual men are rapists.
I think the fact that we have to reach for some author somewhere and some MP in Sweden demonstrates that we’re really, really not experiencing an epidemic of people who think “all men are rapists”.
In my life, that sort of guff only exist on the internet and is only said by men who don’t think it’s true.0 -
El_Duderino 09 wrote: »That’s interesting. I did indeed not know this already. She isn’t big in my life so I’m glad you were able to tell me about her. I’ll take your word for it that some woman somewhere (America?) thinks all heterosexual men are rapists.
I think the fact that we have to reach for some author somewhere and some MP in Sweden demonstrates that we’re really, really not experiencing an epidemic of people who think “all men are rapists”.
In my life, that sort of guff only exist on the internet and is only said by men who don’t think it’s true.
Lads, I'm going in.
In anglo saxon cultures (perhaps all catholic cultures) there does seem to be the notion that all men have the possibility to be rapists. So they should be blocked form porn, short dresses, or the new Joker film.
I think this does go without saying tbh.0 -
Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »Ignore him. There's no point of arguing with him.
Edit: Actually, that was a little bit harsh.
Be sure to let us know what you would put in a consent discussion. You told me I didn’t know what I was talking about so I told you what I’d put in and you haven’t answered in kind.
If you’re not willing to answer a reasonable question in kind, then your credibility is a bit low to be chucking around insults.0 -
El_Duderino 09 wrote: »Do they indeed? Im sure it will be no problem for you to find an example of the 3rd wave feminist and their enablers in media and government, saying that “all men are rapists” then.
But if you are stuck for time I’d be Particularly interested in the government example, since you brought it up.Linda Snecker, Swedish MP "We women adapt our lives and our behaviour to men's potential threats of violence. Because we cannot see whether you are a rapist or not, we assume that all men are rapists. That is the brutal truth. That's how a structural problem looks. That is why men must take their collective responsibility. All men"El_Duderino 09 wrote: »It’s a person in a government who said it alright. An MP in a different country is hardly an epidemic in Ireland though, is it?
I just gave you what you asked for man..0 -
Advertisement
-
I just gave you what you asked for man..
Sure. The original question I asked was whether a lot of people say "all men are rapists". The answers were an author somewhere and a foreign MP.
You answered the question. And I think the answers given demonstrate that while at least 2 people in the world do indeed say "all men are rapists" or something similar. It also shows that it's not a prevalent opinion.0 -
That's not even what she said though, is it?Oh my bad I thought you just wanted an example of someone in government who said that, if its only in Ireland and you need over a certain number of people its handier if you put those conditions in.
She didn't say all men are rapists. She said that women, in order to ensure maximum safety to themselves, must assume that all men are rapists. Which is something very different and the context is clear.
The issue here is two very different experiences clashing over the presumed knowledge of the other.
Women live routinely under this shadow. Under the shadow that a walk home alone may end up in attack, or rape, or whatever. That being alone with a man you barely know could end up with you being afraid for your life. Whether this is a rational way to live is somewhat irrelevant, it's a knowledge passed down, it's culturally embedded. Women are taught to protect their sexuality from men, and that it's their fault if they don't.
There is an analogue in theft. If you live in a city, you lock your car, you keep an eye on your wallet, you lock your front door and you stick on your alarm. If your house gets robbed because you left your back door unlocked, you'll blame yourself and some people will call you a gobsh1te.
Now imagine that you were as likely to be raped or sexually assaulted as you were robbed. That's the reality for women (except worse). Do you get offended when your neighbour locks their door? Do you take it as a personal sleight when a culchie arriving in to a city gets a bit worried about being mugged? I doubt you do. Yet when women express concern about their safety, you take it as an attack on yourself.
Men are in general not aware of this. We don't live our lives like this, we don't live in fear, and we don't know that women live with this. We don't engage in this. We don't intimidate women, or pin them into corners. Or rape them. Where we see friendly banter, a women sees a sexual assault in the making. Where we see trying ourselves to chat a woman up in the corner of the club, she sees an enormous person far stronger than her who is blocking her only exit.
And this is where the clash occurs. When women bring up their experiences, they assume it's common knowledge. This is human nature, to assume what's common knowledge to your and your peers, is common knowledge to everyone.
Of course, men see exactly the opposite - a description of themselves and the men they know which doesn't reflect them. This shadow of fear is not something men are told about, and thus in the same vein we assume that because we've never heard of it before, then it must not exist, or it must not be as big a deal as is claimed.
And rather than accept what's being said - women are being sexually assaulted all the time - it gets hysterically called an attack on men or radical feminism.
This is where people need to drop the personal offence and listen to what's being said. Otherwise you end up misinterpreting words to say things they're not saying at all, and you think a Swedish politician is calling all men rapists, when in fact what she's doing is explaining the issue that exists and what needs to be done to address it. That is, so long as men are unaware of the fear that women live under, it will continue to exist.
That's kind of the intent. As it arose in the US, no doubt it became the favoured term because it had the most impact. Provocative? Sure. But if it was called something like "sexism culture", we probably wouldn't be here discussing it.Homelander wrote: »Of course people have an issue with the term 'rape culture', how could they not - the very term suggests a huge level of complicity or acceptance among general society.
Of course, as has been explained ad nauseum to those who will listen, the "culture" part is not about an acceptance of rape. Nobody is saying that there is widespread rape or acceptance of it, in Ireland.
It's about how the acceptance and normalisation of certain behaviours serve as a support base for worse behaviours. That is, if a society is broadly accepting of behaviours which can be considered "minor" personal violations such as making lewd comments, making sexist jokes, then the more serious behaviours get a little bit of a pass. This doesn't mean that the society tolerates rape. If it's OK for one guy to make lewd jokes to teh secretary under the guise of "flirting". Then the next guy might think he'll get away with a little pinch on the secretary's arse. Seeing this, the next guy might think that she'll be tolerant of a little grope in the pub. Or if he gets her alone in the corner he'll be able to convince her for a little shag. Which she might tolerate because she has no way to escape.
Yes, it's a facile example, but you get the idea of how one slightly innocuous and innocently-intentioned attitude can serve as support for others to take it further. Scale that up and out across a society, and you have a "culture".0 -
I am more of a porn man myself, women wouldn't let me touch them and I'm not sure I could be bothered being around a milenial woman, they are easier handled in 2D0
-
That's not even what she said though, is it?
She didn't say all men are rapists. She said that women, in order to ensure maximum safety to themselves, must assume that all men are rapists. Which is something very different and the context is clear.
The issue here is two very different experiences clashing over the presumed knowledge of the other.
Women live routinely under this shadow. Under the shadow that a walk home alone may end up in attack, or rape, or whatever. That being alone with a man you barely know could end up with you being afraid for your life. Whether this is a rational way to live is somewhat irrelevant, it's a knowledge passed down, it's culturally embedded. Women are taught to protect their sexuality from men, and that it's their fault if they don't.
There is an analogue in theft. If you live in a city, you lock your car, you keep an eye on your wallet, you lock your front door and you stick on your alarm. If your house gets robbed because you left your back door unlocked, you'll blame yourself and some people will call you a gobsh1te.
Now imagine that you were as likely to be raped or sexually assaulted as you were robbed. That's the reality for women (except worse). Do you get offended when your neighbour locks their door? Do you take it as a personal sleight when a culchie arriving in to a city gets a bit worried about being mugged? I doubt you do. Yet when women express concern about their safety, you take it as an attack on yourself.
Men are in general not aware of this. We don't live our lives like this, we don't live in fear, and we don't know that women live with this. We don't engage in this. We don't intimidate women, or pin them into corners. Or rape them. Where we see friendly banter, a women sees a sexual assault in the making. Where we see trying ourselves to chat a woman up in the corner of the club, she sees an enormous person far stronger than her who is blocking her only exit.
And this is where the clash occurs. When women bring up their experiences, they assume it's common knowledge. This is human nature, to assume what's common knowledge to your and your peers, is common knowledge to everyone.
Of course, men see exactly the opposite - a description of themselves and the men they know which doesn't reflect them. This shadow of fear is not something men are told about, and thus in the same vein we assume that because we've never heard of it before, then it must not exist, or it must not be as big a deal as is claimed.
And rather than accept what's being said - women are being sexually assaulted all the time - it gets hysterically called an attack on men or radical feminism.
This is where people need to drop the personal offence and listen to what's being said. Otherwise you end up misinterpreting words to say things they're not saying at all, and you think a Swedish politician is calling all men rapists, when in fact what she's doing is explaining the issue that exists and what needs to be done to address it. That is, so long as men are unaware of the fear that women live under, it will continue to exist.
That's kind of the intent. As it arose in the US, no doubt it became the favoured term because it had the most impact. Provocative? Sure. But if it was called something like "sexism culture", we probably wouldn't be here discussing it.
Of course, as has been explained ad nauseum to those who will listen, the "culture" part is not about an acceptance of rape. Nobody is saying that there is widespread rape or acceptance of it, in Ireland.
It's about how the acceptance and normalisation of certain behaviours serve as a support base for worse behaviours. That is, if a society is broadly accepting of behaviours which can be considered "minor" personal violations such as making lewd comments, making sexist jokes, then the more serious behaviours get a little bit of a pass. This doesn't mean that the society tolerates rape. If it's OK for one guy to make lewd jokes to teh secretary under the guise of "flirting". Then the next guy might think he'll get away with a little pinch on the secretary's arse. Seeing this, the next guy might think that she'll be tolerant of a little grope in the pub. Or if he gets her alone in the corner he'll be able to convince her for a little shag. Which she might tolerate because she has no way to escape.
Yes, it's a facile example, but you get the idea of how one slightly innocuous and innocently-intentioned attitude can serve as support for others to take it further. Scale that up and out across a society, and you have a "culture".
Christ, thats a grim nightmare world you've painted for me there.0 -
It's about how the acceptance and normalisation of certain behaviours serve as a support base for worse behaviours. That is, if a society is broadly accepting of behaviours which can be considered "minor" personal violations such as making lewd comments, making sexist jokes, then the more serious behaviours get a little bit of a pass. This doesn't mean that the society tolerates rape. If it's OK for one guy to make lewd jokes to teh secretary under the guise of "flirting". Then the next guy might think he'll get away with a little pinch on the secretary's arse. Seeing this, the next guy might think that she'll be tolerant of a little grope in the pub. Or if he gets her alone in the corner he'll be able to convince her for a little shag. Which she might tolerate because she has no way to escape.
Yes, it's a facile example, but you get the idea of how one slightly innocuous and innocently-intentioned attitude can serve as support for others to take it further. Scale that up and out across a society, and you have a "culture".
Once again, that does nothing whatsoever to even put forward a semi-credible answer as to why we could say Ireland has a 'rape culture'.
The 'gateway argument' is just silly for want of a better word. It didn't work for drugs and it certainly doesn't work for rape here either.
It's that classic 'what if' scare-mongering. "sure, what'll he/she be doing next" as if every perceived negative has an inevitable scale.
A true, arguable 'rape culture' would exist in places like the Middle East or certain parts of Asia where rape is more common and allegations by women are not taken seriously at all in the first instance, as opposed to be difficult to prove/prosecute in the western world. People in those countries would still also predominantly be very much opposed to rape, of course, but there is a clear societal issue/culture.
No matter what way you try and frame it or shift the goalpoints, any rational mind understands that Ireland simply does not have a 'rape culture'.0 -
Advertisement
-
Homelander wrote: »
A true, arguable 'rape culture' would exist in places like the Middle East or certain parts of Asia where rape is more common and allegations by women are not taken seriously at all in the first instance, as opposed to be difficult to prove/prosecute in the western world. People in those countries would still also predominantly be very much opposed to rape, of course, but there is a clear societal issue/culture.
No matter what way you try and frame it or shift the goalpoints, any rational mind understands that Ireland simply does not have a 'rape culture'.
The funny thing is, all these feminist/lefties/sjw are pushing for refugees from these countries to come here . If they think irish men have a rape culture , I can't wait to see wait type of culture north African men/ Muslim men have towards women.0 -
That's not even what she said though, is it?
She didn't say all men are rapists. She said that women, in order to ensure maximum safety to themselves, must assume that all men are rapists. Which is something very different and the context is clear.
The issue here is two very different experiences clashing over the presumed knowledge of the other.
Women live routinely under this shadow. Under the shadow that a walk home alone may end up in attack, or rape, or whatever. That being alone with a man you barely know could end up with you being afraid for your life. Whether this is a rational way to live is somewhat irrelevant, it's a knowledge passed down, it's culturally embedded. Women are taught to protect their sexuality from men, and that it's their fault if they don't.
There is an analogue in theft. If you live in a city, you lock your car, you keep an eye on your wallet, you lock your front door and you stick on your alarm. If your house gets robbed because you left your back door unlocked, you'll blame yourself and some people will call you a gobsh1te.
Now imagine that you were as likely to be raped or sexually assaulted as you were robbed. That's the reality for women (except worse). Do you get offended when your neighbour locks their door? Do you take it as a personal sleight when a culchie arriving in to a city gets a bit worried about being mugged? I doubt you do. Yet when women express concern about their safety, you take it as an attack on yourself.
Men are in general not aware of this. We don't live our lives like this, we don't live in fear, and we don't know that women live with this. We don't engage in this. We don't intimidate women, or pin them into corners. Or rape them. Where we see friendly banter, a women sees a sexual assault in the making. Where we see trying ourselves to chat a woman up in the corner of the club, she sees an enormous person far stronger than her who is blocking her only exit.
And this is where the clash occurs. When women bring up their experiences, they assume it's common knowledge. This is human nature, to assume what's common knowledge to your and your peers, is common knowledge to everyone.
Of course, men see exactly the opposite - a description of themselves and the men they know which doesn't reflect them. This shadow of fear is not something men are told about, and thus in the same vein we assume that because we've never heard of it before, then it must not exist, or it must not be as big a deal as is claimed.
And rather than accept what's being said - women are being sexually assaulted all the time - it gets hysterically called an attack on men or radical feminism.
This is where people need to drop the personal offence and listen to what's being said. Otherwise you end up misinterpreting words to say things they're not saying at all, and you think a Swedish politician is calling all men rapists, when in fact what she's doing is explaining the issue that exists and what needs to be done to address it. That is, so long as men are unaware of the fear that women live under, it will continue to exist.
That's kind of the intent. As it arose in the US, no doubt it became the favoured term because it had the most impact. Provocative? Sure. But if it was called something like "sexism culture", we probably wouldn't be here discussing it.
Of course, as has been explained ad nauseum to those who will listen, the "culture" part is not about an acceptance of rape. Nobody is saying that there is widespread rape or acceptance of it, in Ireland.
It's about how the acceptance and normalisation of certain behaviours serve as a support base for worse behaviours. That is, if a society is broadly accepting of behaviours which can be considered "minor" personal violations such as making lewd comments, making sexist jokes, then the more serious behaviours get a little bit of a pass. This doesn't mean that the society tolerates rape. If it's OK for one guy to make lewd jokes to teh secretary under the guise of "flirting". Then the next guy might think he'll get away with a little pinch on the secretary's arse. Seeing this, the next guy might think that she'll be tolerant of a little grope in the pub. Or if he gets her alone in the corner he'll be able to convince her for a little shag. Which she might tolerate because she has no way to escape.
Yes, it's a facile example, but you get the idea of how one slightly innocuous and innocently-intentioned attitude can serve as support for others to take it further. Scale that up and out across a society, and you have a "culture".
A man and a woman are walking a street alone at night in a city. (pick anyone in the world because it's true everywhere)
Who is more likely to be attacked? The man.
Men are the majority of victims of violent crime
Think we need a bit of perspective here.0 -
A man and a woman are walking a street alone at night in a city. (pick anyone in the world because it's true everywhere)
Who is more likely to be attacked? The man.
Men are the majority of victims of violent crime
Think we need a bit of perspective here.
Did you know 2017 Was Especially Dangerous for Female Journalists? That's right, almost 1 in 5 journalists killed were women.
You'll often see horribly sexist articles like this.
It's obvious what they're trying to tell us:
Men are less valuable than women.0 -
Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »I think one of the largest evils of the world is that normal male behaviour is tied into rape.
This is comedy gold. What are you sh*ting on about? You have to be a troll!!Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »
In anglo saxon cultures (perhaps all catholic cultures) there does seem to be the notion that all men have the possibility to be rapists. So they should be blocked form porn, short dresses, or the new Joker film.
I think this does go without saying tbh.
Mystic mac. Please explain your notion to this Catholic male of how I could possibly become a rapist? There is too much dumb going on in these posts of yours for them not to be of a trolls hand.0 -
I'm envious of women. I'm not saying your problems get solved; but at least you get taken seriously. You have 1800 numbers.. you have ribbons..groups.. people give a s***. Anything happens to a guy.. it's just considered funny! Some woman cuts her man's dick off and threw it in the garbage disposal and turned it on. People thought it was hilarious.
-Bill Burr
That'll teach him...
Fair play to Sara Gilbert for her strong moral principles.0 -
That's disgusting.0
-
Why?"Consent classes should be given in primary schools, she believes."
I'm not belittling this woman's experience, but when she suggests **** like this, I tune out
People constantly take the piss about ensuring consent on here, adding that it’s not possible to do it without killing the mood etc, when it’s actually very, very simple.
What have you got against the idea of young people learning how to respect the opposite sex or whoever they’re attracted to?
When people think consent classes are a stupid idea it goes to show that they’re so far removed from reality.0 -
Why?
People constantly take the piss about ensuring consent on here, adding that it’s not possible to do it without killing the mood etc, when it’s actually very, very simple.
What have you got against the idea of young people learning how to respect the opposite sex or whoever they’re attracted to?
When people think consent classes are a stupid idea it goes to show that they’re so far removed from reality.
I completely agree. I had a back and forth with someone who openly admitted hey think consent is all about rape. No room for all the other aspects of what consent actually is.
So if they were to talk about consent it would probably actually be a class teaching boys not to rape (they couldn’t actually say what they would discuss in a consent class).
There’s I’d suggest people start thinking about how to chat about consent with children. If not it’ll be Just the big scary feminists who talk to children about it.0 -
Why?
People constantly take the piss about ensuring consent on here, adding that it’s not possible to do it without killing the mood etc, when it’s actually very, very simple.
What have you got against the idea of young people learning how to respect the opposite sex or whoever they’re attracted to?
When people think consent classes are a stupid idea it goes to show that they’re so far removed from reality.
Well that’s about as good an argument as me suggesting that people who think consent classes are a good idea, are detached from a reality where children are taught almost from birth what the word “no” means. It means that consent is not given, whether it’s sex, or food, or a toy or anything else. No, means no.
Class dismissed.0 -
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,104 Mod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 59033
While I'll make a joke about damn near anything, so yep dick getting lopped off can be made or seen as funny, ditto for tits being lopped off, but when Sara piped up and fair fcuks to her, suggested that this might be a little one sided the silence from the audience was deafening and then Osborne pulled it all the way back to "funny" again. And Sara is a Gay woman a proud Feminist and pretty damned "right on" as Hollywood can be, so above reproach among the handwringers on that side, yet even a voice like hers produced an embarrassment of silence.Veritas Libertas wrote: »Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.
0 -
Advertisement
-
One eyed Jack wrote: »Well that’s about as good an argument as me suggesting that people who think consent classes are a good idea, are detached from a reality where children are taught almost from birth what the word “no” means. It means that consent is not given, whether it’s sex, or food, or a toy or anything else. No, means no.
Class dismissed.
And is that all you’d tell them? If so, you’d do a desperate disservice to both boys and girls.
But lucky for you, some other groups, who actually care about the content, would get involved and make their voices heard on what the course should cover. I wonder if you’d like the outcome. LOL0 -
The idea of consent bothers me, maybe someone can prove to me why consent classes are needed but I'm not seeing it.
The idea around consent does not protect someone from false accusations. Even with video evidence, a signed contract, the complainant could argue I consented to one thing, and not another or later I changed my mind.
I struggle to believe that large swathes of people don't understand the concept of consent. Perhaps a few outliers that probably won't change their behaviour anyway.
What good do consent classes do? What is their training and methodology based on?0 -
El_Duderino 09 wrote: »And is that all you’d tell them? If so, you’d do a desperate disservice to both boys and girls.
But lucky for you, some other groups, who actually care about the content, would get involved and make their voices heard on what the course should cover. I wonder if you’d like the outcome. LOL
What disservice would I be doing anyone? I’m not the person who assumes people are idiots that they need ‘consent classes’ in the first place, nor do I believe they are of any benefit to anyone who is of a mind to think only of themselves either.
I’m well aware of the content of these classes and I still see no utility in them whatsoever. Children are already taught about respect and responsibility for themselves and others by means of interactions with their families and their peer groups, and SPHE classes in school where they learn about concepts like respect for their bodies and minds, respect for other people’s bodies and minds and so on.
It’s exactly as you said previously - consent is a very simple concept that is taught in less than 10 seconds with a one syllable word - no. It’s those groups you allude to who don’t appear to be able to take no for an answer, who could do with educating themselves.0 -
Veritas Libertas wrote: »The idea of consent bothers me, maybe someone can prove to me why consent classes are needed but I'm not seeing it.
The idea around consent does not protect someone from false accusations. Even with video evidence, a signed contract, the complainant could argue I consented to one thing, and not another or later I changed my mind.
I struggle to believe that large swathes of people don't understand the concept of consent. Perhaps a few outliers that probably won't change their behaviour anyway.
What good do consent classes do? What is their training and methodology based on?
From what I can see, large swathes of people don’t understand the concept of consent and that it’s not just limited to rape.
Would it stop false accusations? No. Would it stop actual rape? No, probably not.
Is there a chance that misunderstandings and more respect between sexual partners can be addressed without awkwardness? Of course it can.
Can it reduce the likelihood of this grey area between couples where one party isn’t overly happy with the situation they find themselves in, but the other party isn’t aware of this? Possibly. It’s hard to know.
Essentially, I don’t see why you shouldn’t have them. ‘It doesn’t stop false accusations’ is a red herring, because consent does not just limit itself to rape.
I honestly don’t understand why people would be opposed to them outside of ‘hurr rabid feminists’ (not saying you’re in this category, but there are many who are) and a lot of us could do with understanding the mindset of our partners, especially at that age.0 -
One eyed Jack wrote: »El_Duderino 09 wrote: »And is that all you’d tell them? If so, you’d do a desperate disservice to both boys and girls.
But lucky for you, some other groups, who actually care about the content, would get involved and make their voices heard on what the course should cover. I wonder if you’d like the outcome. LOL
What disservice would I be doing anyone? I’m not the person who assumes people are idiots that they need ‘consent classes’ in the first place, nor do I believe they are of any benefit to anyone who is of a mind to think only of themselves either.
I’m well aware of the content of these classes and I still see no utility in them whatsoever. Children are already taught about respect and responsibility for themselves and others by means of interactions with their families and their peer groups, and SPHE classes in school where they learn about concepts like respect for their bodies and minds, respect for other people’s bodies and minds and so on.
It’s exactly as you said previously - consent is a very simple concept that is taught in less than 10 seconds with a one syllable word - no. It’s those groups you allude to who don’t appear to be able to take no for an answer, who could do with educating themselves.
The fact you think it just centres around the word ‘no’ and can be taught in 10 seconds tells me that you have absolutely no idea what the content of these classes are.
Even if your version of events is accurate, what’s the harm?0 -
The fact you think it just centres around the word ‘no’ and can be taught in 10 seconds tells me that you have absolutely no idea what the content of these classes are.
Even if your version of events is accurate, what’s the harm?
I’m not sure if it’s the way I phrased it, or if you’re misunderstanding my post. I didn’t claim that consent classes themselves centre around the word ‘no’. I said that consent itself is very simple to understand - if a person wants to do something, and the person they want to do it to says no, then that person does not have the other persons consent to do whatever it is they want to do to that person. Children learn this throughout their lives and well into adulthood. Not just in a classroom environment but in every interaction throughout their lives.
I never suggested consent classes were harmful, I don’t believe they involve teaching young girls that boys are a danger to them for example, an idea floated by the Executive Director of Rape Crisis Network Ireland, I simply am of the opinion that they are an ineffective waste of resources as they are duplicating what children learn in and out of school already, which simply renders the idea of consent classes unnecessary.0 -
From what I can see, large swathes of people don’t understand the concept of consent and that it’s not just limited to rape.
Imagine if we needed consent to ask a question; we'd all be done!
Could you elaborate on these points, how do you know this and how do you know its not just limited to rape. You could change my mind, but I strongly disagree.0 -
While I'll make a joke about damn near anything, so yep dick getting lopped off can be made or seen as funny
The issue is the intent though.
I agree everything is fair game for a joke.
But this video reminded me of those English comedians in the 1980s who would make jokes about the Irish.
Their jokes weren't in good spirit - they were meant to degrade the Irish, the audience knew it and loved it.
I'm maybe reading into this a little bit, but the vibe I got from the video was "yeah, take that men, f-ck you".0 -
What the hell is rape culture!?0
-
Advertisement
-
Advertisement