Louise O Neill

um7y1h83ge06nx · 02-08-2016 05:26PM

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Twitter is hilarious sometimes. Some guy called-out O'Neill because one of her characters is black, but the character on the cover of her book is a white woman

LINK REMOVED

I thought she might respond to this criticism by pulling pulling the 'patriarchy' card, which everybody knows trumps 'non-white man on twitter'. Instead, O'Neill O'Neill is shocked to discover this manifestation of her 'white privilege'.

https://twitter.com/oneilllo/status/760467887018639360

That goes beyond taking the p*ss, it really is always men's fault! :rolleyes:

mzungu · 02-08-2016 05:34PM

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

One thing I can say for certain: she's incredibly unlikely to change her views (or what she expresses as her views at least). Particularly when she has a growing financial incentive to inhabit this role as it contributes to a growing personal profile.

Aye. There is dosh to be made so fair play to her on that front. Not much different to that Milo chap really, they both just see the opportunity for a few bucks. I just think it is a shame that she uses her influence to spread a message of fear, panic and suspicion in those who look up to her. It is like 'reefer madness' was given a modern day identity politics makeover and ramped up to 11. That's just not healthy!

noaddedsugar · 02-08-2016 05:43PM

Wibbs wrote: »

Slight problem there. A man walking home from the pub is far more likely to be physically assaulted than you are to be sexually assaulted. Yes by other men, but the majority of men walking home from the pub aren't in a constant state of fear of assault. That's being a paranoid in the face of objective reality and it's all too damned common and muppets like these online rabble rousers with their 1 in 4(or 5, or 6, depending on the wind) are raped stuff* rev this fear up. Americans seem to live in fear of what's beyond their doors and we're catching up.

I had links to Irish and UK stats, but apologies I can;t find them, but here's a Canadian government study.

In 2008, overall rates of police-reported violent victimization were comparable between men and women, but the nature of their victimization differed.

In that year, men were more likely than women to be victims of the most serious forms of physical assault (levels 2 and 3) and have a weapon used against them.

Men were almost twice as likely to be the victims of assault level 2 than women (215 versus 114 per 100,000);

Though aggravated assault (level 3) occurs much less frequently than the less serious forms of assault, the rate of aggravated assault for men is over three times greater than that of women (18 versus 5 per 100,000)

Young men under the age of 18 are 1.5 times more likely to be physically assaulted than young girls.

Male victims were most often physically assaulted by a stranger or by someone else outside of the family. In 2008, men were the victims of 80% of all reported attacks by strangers.

Men were more likely to be robbed than women. They were victims in 65% of robberies in 2008.

Male teens aged 15 to 17 reported the highest robbery rates among all child and youth age groups and nearly 1.5 times higher than the rate for men aged 18 to 24.

Men were more likely than women to be a homicide victim, accounting for almost three quarters (74%) of homicide victims during a 5-year period between the years 2004 to 2008.

Men were 2.5 times more likely to be sexually assaulted in an institutional setting (school, non-commercial or non-corporate area) than women.

*the 1 in 4 is a provable nonsense statistic BTW. If you want I can.

So it is our fault that we are afraid to walk home alone in the dark because we are irrational women? Perhaps it is men who are irrational by not being afraid? Given the figures you have quoted I would say that men being the irrational ones is far more likely.

Penny Tration · 02-08-2016 05:51PM

noaddedsugar wrote: »

So it is our fault that we are afraid to walk home alone in the dark because we are irrational women? Perhaps it is men who are irrational by not being afraid? Given the figures you have quoted I would say that men being the irrational ones is far more likely.

Wibbs didn't say women are irrational. He said men are more at risk of random unprovoked assault, which is true.

What's the point in living your life in fear? If the worst happens, most women/men will eventually move forward with their lives, with a lot of help. Yes, being attacked is horrific, I know all about it (though my assailant was my boyfriend), but living your life in fear is no better!

Take precautions, be wary, look over your shoulder. But don't be afraid anytime you're alone. That's no way to live.

Ectoplasm · 02-08-2016 05:52PM

I really tried to stay out of this thread as discussions about sexism on Boards are usually unbelievably frustrating and largely pointless with people so entrenched in their positions that it seems like they rarely even read other people's posts.

I like Louise O'Neill. I think she's an incredibly talented author. I prefer her books to her columns but I read them. That doesn't mean I agree 100% with everything she writes in her columns but I do like that they make me think.
The fact is, the stuff she chooses to write about is uncomfortable for a lot of people and she's never going to be the most popular but some of the comparisons I've seen made on this thread are downright ridiculous and it's interesting that quite a lot of the criticism is directed at her personally.

If you don't like her writing, there really is a simple solution...

The Rape of Lucretia · 02-08-2016 05:53PM

A lot of people jumping on a bandwagon to bash Louise it seems. How many are really stopping to consider that she may indeed be correct ?
Through force, men have created a male dominant society, and only over the last century and even decades, legislated for equality rather than subjugation of women. We still need laws to punish violence and rape against women, and laws to ensure equality of opportunity to education and careers. But scratch that very recent and delicately thin surface, and men are fundamentally the same as they always were. And it does not take much for this true nature to come to the fore again at times. And women pay a price - and live with this ever present risk and threat. As P Flynn once said - try it some time. You may not find it quite so pleasant.

Maximus Alexander · 02-08-2016 05:54PM

noaddedsugar wrote: »

So it is our fault that we are afraid to walk home alone in the dark because we are irrational women? Perhaps it is men who are irrational by not being afraid? Given the figures you have quoted I would say that men being the irrational ones is far more likely.

The only absolute figures he gave were:

215 per 100,000 for 'Assualt Level 2' in a year.

and

18 per 100,000 for 'Aggravated Assault' in a year.

That works out at a risk of being assaulted on a given night of 0.000638%. I would posit that anyone, regardless of sex, who is actively experiencing fear on that basis is being irrational.

ancapailldorcha · 02-08-2016 05:56PM

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

A lot of people jumping on a bandwagon to bash Louise it seems. How many are really stopping to consider that she may indeed be correct ?
Through force, men have created a male dominant society, and only over the last century and even decades, legislated for equality rather than subjugation of women. We still need laws to punish violence and rape against women, and laws to ensure equality of opportunity to education and careers. But scratch that very recent and delicately thin surface, and men are fundamentally the same as they always were. And it does not take much for this true nature to come to the fore again at times. And women pay a price - and live with this ever present risk and threat. As P Flynn once said - try it some time. You may not find it quite so pleasant.

TLDR: A pile of sexist bollox.

02-08-2016 05:56PM

Penny Tration wrote: »

Wibbs didn't say women are irrational. He said men are more at risk of random unprovoked assault, which is true.

It's such a self-evidently stupid comparison though, "PT".

Risk aversion on grounds of rape is not comparable to black-eye risk aversion.

I've been assaulted walking down Dame Street at night-time, it was frightening I guess, but I never think twice about taking the same route. I never even think about the assault. Because non-sexual assaults with minor bruising tend to have a lower weight of seriousness than rape!

The catastrophic effects of rape are so obviously more serious than a non-serious assault (or even some serious assaults) that a greater degree of vigilance is justified when trying to avoid being raped.

kunst nugget · 02-08-2016 05:57PM

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

As P Flynn once said - try it some time. You may not find it quite so pleasant.

Try what? Being hysterical and overblown? I'd imagine it isn't that pleasant…

Specialun · 02-08-2016 05:58PM

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

A lot of people jumping on a bandwagon to bash Louise it seems. How many are really stopping to consider that she may indeed be correct ?
Through force, men have created a male dominant society, and only over the last century and even decades, legislated for equality rather than subjugation of women. We still need laws to punish violence and rape against women, and laws to ensure equality of opportunity to education and careers. But scratch that very recent and delicately thin surface, and men are fundamentally the same as they always were. And it does not take much for this true nature to come to the fore again at times. And women pay a price - and live with this ever present risk and threat. As P Flynn once said - try it some time. You may not find it quite so pleasant.

Walofs

mzungu · 02-08-2016 06:00PM

EMF2010 wrote: »

I really tried to stay out of this thread as discussions about sexism on Boards are usually unbelievably frustrating and largely pointless with people so entrenched in their positions that it seems like they rarely even read other people's posts.

I like Louise O'Neill. I think she's an incredibly talented author. I prefer her books to her columns but I read them. That doesn't mean I agree 100% with everything she writes in her columns but I do like that they make me think.
The fact is, the stuff she chooses to write about is uncomfortable for a lot of people and she's never going to be the most popular but some of the comparisons I've seen made on this thread are downright ridiculous and it's interesting that quite a lot of the criticism is directed at her personally.

If you don't like her writing, there really is a simple solution...

It is the ideology that is being discussed though.

Wibbs · 02-08-2016 06:01PM

livedadream wrote: »

While i do not agree with maybe, 80% of what O Neill writes, i can say i 100% disagree with Milo and his views on everything to Islam, Women, Gay rights,rape culture and his action in general. and his shitestirring.

Oh he's a shíte stirrer alright and an unreal notice box, but I'd bet the farm a large chunk of your opinion on his scribblings comes secondhand.

MInd you I do find it bloody hilarious that a guy who leads with full on atomic powered British Bitchy Queen(™), set phasers to faaaabulous is now one of the demigods of Right wing American Mannists and Trumpists who usually have to write "no homo" in debates just in case you might judge their sexual leanings. You couldn't make it up. :pac::pac::pac:

While O neill is definitely a product of her generation -the all men are rapists and bad if they think differently to me snowflake ideal, i do have to make the point that as another poster said, as a female i am and have to be more careful of my surroundings than a male would be (in general).

No. I am afraid that is your perception and the panic signalling that has been aimed at women for the last 20 years in particular. If you had read my post earlier, including actual hard statistics, while women suffer far more sexual assault(outside large institutions like schools) a man, any man is in far more danger of being physically attacked than you as a woman. You may feel more threat, but the reality doesn't back up that fear. Much like recent panic about terrorism in Europe. The facts are that terrorism though much in the news and tragic with it is at a far lower rate than in the 1970's for example.

Oh and the "1 in 4" statistic is a nonsense, based on a woefully inadequate "study" that set out to prove a political conclusion the authors already believed. It has become a repeated meme in western society, on the back of repeated bullshít. It's even dafter when applied to university campuses where in the US they've had the beady eye on them since the 80's so are extremely trigger happy when it comes to sexual assault and guess what? The rates are lower than outside the college gates and like the general population rates are dropping and have been dropping since the 80's. You don't get those realities in Feminism Mk 3.9 SCARY NOISES!!!! You're going to be RAAAAPED *trigger warning*. Again these are Facts. Not feelings.

mzungu wrote: »

It is like 'reefer madness' was given a modern day identity politics makeover and ramped up to 11.

Good analogy. Yeah.

mzungu · 02-08-2016 06:01PM

kunst nugget wrote: »

Try what? Being hysterical and overblown? I'd imagine it isn't that pleasant…

I'll take P Flynn's house in Brussels anyday!

kunst nugget · 02-08-2016 06:05PM

mzungu wrote: »

I'll take P Flynn's house in Brussels anyday!

Ah, you'd have to hire maids and everything. It'd cost money and make you even more of a misogynist than you already are…

noaddedsugar · 02-08-2016 06:05PM

Penny Tration wrote: »

Wibbs didn't say women are irrational. He said men are more at risk of random unprovoked assault, which is true.

What's the point in living your life in fear? If the worst happens, most women/men will eventually move forward with their lives, with a lot of help. Yes, being attacked is horrific, I know all about it (though my assailant was my boyfriend), but living your life in fear is no better!

Take precautions, be wary, look over your shoulder. But don't be afraid anytime you're alone. That's no way to live.

What is being paranoid in the face of objective reality if not irrational

I don't think anyone is saying that they are 'afraid anytime they are alone' are they?

Specialun · 02-08-2016 06:15PM

I just had a read of her twitter feed. They give out about abuse towards herthen when questioned they abuse and think its ok

Wibbs · 02-08-2016 06:17PM

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Through force, men have created a male dominant society, and only over the last century and even decades, legislated for equality rather than subjugation of women.

OK following the script on the nose so far...

We still need laws to punish violence and rape against women, and laws to ensure equality of opportunity to education and careers.

You do realise that the average Irish woman is better educated and paid more than the average Irish man?

But scratch that very recent and delicately thin surface, and men are fundamentally the same as they always were. And it does not take much for this true nature to come to the fore again at times. And women pay a price - and live with this ever present risk and threat.

There you go folks, in plain black and white; men are fundamentally rapists. I'll bet the farm she self identifies as a moderate "feminist"

[sarcasm]OK so, I reckon women have proven too delicate and weak to survive in a society without constant male protection, so I say lads, let's all band together and put them back behind shuttered windows, take away nonsense like the vote, because their feelings get in the way.[/sarcasm]

Hell of those who convert to Islam the majority by a long way are women. Yep. You'd think it would be men given how much we want women to be second class citizens, but nope.

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

That works out at a risk of being assaulted on a given night of 0.000638%. I would posit that anyone, regardless of sex, who is actively experiencing fear on that basis is being irrational.

Nail on head. There does seem to be more fear around in general mind you.

Wibbs · 02-08-2016 06:23PM

noaddedsugar wrote: »

What is being paranoid in the face of objective reality if not irrational

Human beings are for the most part irrational and easily spurred to fear. It served us well when big hairy things with teeth were trying to kill us, but it can be hijacked very easily by modern media. As I noted European terrorism was much more a problem in the 60's and especially the 1970's, but people seemed to mostly get on with it. Were they harder? Nope, they were less informed and less speedily informed, so felt detached from it. These days one nutter blows up somewhere and our devices and conduits light up like christmas trees. It feels more real, more dangerous.

The "rape culture" stuff imported from the US where it really dug in because of near constant exposure has a similar affect, namely engineering fear and suspicion and paranoia. So even when you show facts and figures that prove it a nonsense people don't quite believe you and the cycle revs ever upwards. O'Neill's take on something that didn't happen a good example. It's like the Loch Ness monster, people want to believe it so they keep seeing it where it isn't. It might be true.

Ulysses Gaze · 02-08-2016 06:32PM

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

A lot of people jumping on a bandwagon to bash Louise it seems. How many are really stopping to consider that she may indeed be correct ?
Through force, men have created a male dominant society, and only over the last century and even decades, legislated for equality rather than subjugation of women. We still need laws to punish violence and rape against women, and laws to ensure equality of opportunity to education and careers. But scratch that very recent and delicately thin surface, and men are fundamentally the same as they always were. And it does not take much for this true nature to come to the fore again at times. And women pay a price - and live with this ever present risk and threat. As P Flynn once said - try it some time. You may not find it quite so pleasant.

We still need to enforce proper sentences for rape yes. But also for physical assault generally. Ireland is disgraceful in that regard.

Irish women are the best educated in Europe btw.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/education/young-irish-women-are-best-educated-in-european-union-30073846.html

In education and careers, medicine and law, two of the highest paid professions and ones that have always been male dominated, are now being dominated by young women.

http://www.thejournal.ie/female-doctors-ireland-1046065-Aug2013/

https://www.lawsociety.ie/News/Media/Press-Releases/Irish-solicitors-profession-reaches-major-landmark-in-gender-balance/

The Rape of Lucretia · 02-08-2016 06:33PM

Violence and exploitation of women happens. It is not a fictional Loch Ness monster. Ridiculing it with such a comparison, shows some men, and society, have a long long way to go when they dont even acknowledge the problem exists. And unfortunately, the sad truth may be that they never will - it is simply beyond the capability of the sex.

ancapailldorcha · 02-08-2016 06:34PM

The amount of fearmongering going around these days is unreal. I imagine it's being assisted greatly be technology. If it were recent, I could almost understand US gun culture.

Specialun · 02-08-2016 06:34PM

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Violence and exploitation of women happens. It is not a fictional Loch Ness monster. Ridiculing it with such a comparison, shows some men, and society, have a long long way to go when they dont even acknowledge the problem exists. And unfortunately, the sad truth may be that they never will - it is simply beyond the capability of the sex.

Hi louise

um7y1h83ge06nx · 02-08-2016 06:35PM

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

We still need to enforce proper sentences for rape yes. But also for physical assault generally.

Irish women are the best educated in Europe btw.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/education/young-irish-women-are-best-educated-in-european-union-30073846.html

In education and careers, medicine and law, two of the highest paid professions and ones that have always been male dominated, are now being dominated by young women.

http://www.thejournal.ie/female-doctors-ireland-1046065-Aug2013/

https://www.lawsociety.ie/News/Media/Press-Releases/Irish-solicitors-profession-reaches-major-landmark-in-gender-balance/

In fairness women need to fight to change the male domination in military front lines.

Arturo Bandini · 02-08-2016 06:36PM

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Violence and exploitation of women happens. It is not a fictional Loch Ness monster. Ridiculing it with such a comparison, shows some men, and society, have a long long way to go when they dont even acknowledge the problem exists. And unfortunately, the sad truth may be that they never will - it is simply beyond the capability of the sex.

Of course they do, no one is saying otherwise. Feminists like to blow these things massively out of proportion though, and that's the problem.

ancapailldorcha · 02-08-2016 06:37PM

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Violence and exploitation of women happens. It is not a fictional Loch Ness monster. Ridiculing it with such a comparison, shows some men, and society, have a long long way to go when they dont even acknowledge the problem exists. And unfortunately, the sad truth may be that they never will - it is simply beyond the capability of the sex.

Violence and exploitation of people in general happens. Nobody's denied that women face problems in modern societies but don't let that stop you misrepresenting anyone who disagrees with you.

El Caffo · 02-08-2016 06:39PM

Funny how a thread about a newspaper columnist turns into a "men are rapists and violent thugs" thread.

Wibbs · 02-08-2016 06:43PM

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

And unfortunately, the sad truth may be that they never will - it is simply beyond the capability of the sex.

Ahh more of the mask slips. It's apparently beyond the male mind to comprehend? That same male mind that stumbled and bumbled along creating damn near everything you experience around you. Riiiight. Might work for you in the echo chamber, but kinda falls flat on its arse in the face of even the merest challenge.

Can you imagine the heaving of chests and attacks of the vapours if I were to suggest that anything was beyond the capabilities of women? :pac: I wouldn't BTW, because that would be retarded.

ancapailldorcha · 02-08-2016 06:49PM

Wibbs wrote: »

Ahh more of the mask slips. It's apparently beyond the male mind to comprehend? That same male mind that stumbled and bumbled along creating damn near everything you experience around you. Riiiight. Might work for you in the echo chamber, but kinda falls flat on its arse in the face of even the merest challenge.

Can you imagine the heaving of chests and attacks of the vapours if I were to suggest that anything was beyond the capabilities of women? :pac: I wouldn't BTW, because that would be retarded.

All we need now are allegations of gaslighting and vitriolic abuse for anyone who disagrees as is I believe the standard course of action.

The_Valeyard · 02-08-2016 06:49PM

El Caffo wrote: »

Funny how a thread about a newspaper columnist turns into a "men are rapists and violent thugs" thread.

Must be some sort of theory or mathematical equation that we can work out or state, that the longer a thread goes on, the more bizarre and irrelevant to the OP it gets.

Louise O Neill

Comments