Louise O Neill on rape culture.

Widdershins · 16-11-2016 01:56PM

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

If a man wrote a book about male gang rape.. I'd think it was inappropriate if they dressed like a member of Right Said Fred when doing interviews regarding the book and attempting to get a discussion going on such a serious topic . It's not about "control" .. it's about suitable attire. Swimmers at the Olympics stride around in their underwear, but have you ever heard someone castigating them for that? Of course not because the clothing is something which is appropriate for that occasion.

People should of course be able to wear what the hell they want to wear but there are suitable ways of dressing for certain occasions, for both men and women, and while we should have the right to always make that choice ourselves (outside of certain employments) it is not unreasonable to infer disrespect or an ulterior motive when someone dresses in a way which we in western society deem to be largely unsuitable for specific settings. Go to a funeral a white party dress or a white suit for example and you're going to garner some negative reactions. To complain about that afterwards is either showing someone is extremely naive or playing dumb as to not to do so would be to admit nefarious calculation.

This is sensible. In an article, Louise said ''what's a part dress, anyway? And can someone please tell me where I can get one of them''. I don't think she understands or accepts that a particular dress that would be seen as typical or acceptable for a party, would not pass muster in many other situations.

ohnonotgmail · 16-11-2016 02:02PM

Widdershins wrote: »

This is sensible. In an article, Louise said ''what's a part dress, anyway? And can someone please tell me where I can get one of them''. I don't think she understands or accepts that a particular dress that would be seen as typical or acceptable for a party, would not pass muster in many other situations.

who decides what is and isnt acceptable?

BoatMad · 16-11-2016 02:10PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

who decides what is and isnt acceptable?

womens celebrity magazines

Widdershins · 16-11-2016 02:41PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

who decides what is and isnt acceptable?

It's just conventional wisdom/taste and common sense. It's not written in stone.
I don't follow fashion in any way but I've no issue with basic universal codes of dress like not attending a funeral in a bikini.

Widdershins · 16-11-2016 02:42PM

BoatMad wrote: »

womens celebrity magazines

Not really..they decide what's ''hot and what's not'' and what is fasionable this season. It is rubbish.

ohnonotgmail · 16-11-2016 02:43PM

Widdershins wrote: »

It's just conventional wisdom/taste and common sense. It's not written in stone.
I don't follow fashion in any way but I've no issue with basic universal codes of dress like not attending a funeral in a bikini.

do you think it is acceptable to criticise somebody because you dont approve of how they are dressed?

MeatTwoVeg · 16-11-2016 02:49PM

gizmo555 wrote:

, who slaughtered her husband as he slept with a shotgun and received only a manslaughter conviction and a 3 1/2 year sentence? .

Why was the husband sleeping with a shotgun?
Its surely dangerous and was probably a contributing factor.

kunst nugget · 16-11-2016 02:52PM

BoatMad wrote: »

in my experience the term is used by women far more then men , to describe other women

And those women are shítheads as well.

givyjoe · 16-11-2016 02:54PM

MeatTwoVeg wrote: »

Why was the husband sleeping with a shotgun?
Its surely dangerous and was probably a contributing factor.

Eh, what? It's only dangerous is someone picks it up and shoots you with it. Fairly sure he didn't accidentally blow his own head off!

Maybe he was sleeping with it as he was already wary of her.

kunst nugget · 16-11-2016 02:55PM

givyjoe wrote: »

Eh, what? It's only dangerous is someone picks it up and shoots you with it. Fairly sure he didn't accidentally blow his own head off!

Maybe he was sleeping with it as he was already wary of her.

I'm pretty sure it was joke.

givyjoe · 16-11-2016 02:57PM

kunst nugget wrote: »

I'm pretty sure it was joke.

Ah.. :eek:

http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/fe/fe6e47d4f96b82d947c56de2fe47efa508236ba1c07998cda00bbd6ae1b010aa.jpg

Widdershins · 16-11-2016 02:58PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

do you think it is acceptable to criticise somebody because you dont approve of how they are dressed?

I really don't know. Personally I wouldn't pass remarks on it. Maybe privately to my OH if it was something like the mini skirt and fishnet at a Christening and we knew the person, but nothing vicious. Just to say it was an unusual choice maybe

kunst nugget · 16-11-2016 03:05PM

Widdershins wrote: »

I really don't know. Personally I wouldn't pass remarks on it. Maybe privately to my OH if it was something like the mini skirt and fishnet at a Christening and we knew the person, but nothing vicious. Just to say it was an unusual choice maybe

Ah, yeah. I wouldn't say anything to the person wearing the clothes but I'll probably say it to the missus later on tbh.

timmy880 · 16-11-2016 03:09PM

Just reading over the last 4-5 pages of this thread and all I can say is what the actual f*ck is going on?

MeatTwoVeg · 16-11-2016 03:12PM

Widdershins wrote:

I really don't know. Personally I wouldn't pass remarks on it. Maybe privately to my OH if it was something like the mini skirt and fishnet at a Christening and we knew the person, but nothing vicious. Just to say it was an unusual choice maybe

Wouldn't be an unusual choice for a Traveller Christening. Many of the women in very low cut tops, extremely short skirts and sky-high stilettos. Men hang around just outside back door drinking and smoking.
It certainty kept the ceremony interesting for me.

Widdershins · 16-11-2016 03:17PM

MeatTwoVeg wrote: »

Wouldn't be an unusual choice for a Traveller Christening. Many of the women in very low cut tops, extremely short skirts and sky-high stilettos. Men hang around just outside back door drinking and smoking.
It certainty kept the ceremony interesting for me.

I know! They're certainly different

And the 'Hooker Boots' as my traveller friend calls them

kunst nugget · 16-11-2016 03:19PM

timmy880 wrote: »

Just reading over the last 4-5 pages of this thread and all I can say is what the actual f*ck is going on?

Mothers are constantly give their 12 year old sons boners. It's anarchy…

16-11-2016 03:34PM

Mortpourvelo wrote: »

There’s a case going through court in the UK at the moment where the woman actively pursued the bloke, had sex twice – and DURING the third encounter said no as she saw a mobile and thought he was going to film her.

This is making a mockery of the rape laws.

You got a link?

It sounds bizarre. As surely the prospect of being filmed, the third time, wouldn't change the designation of the first 2 times, and she could have declined before the 3rd, filmed time.

ohnonotgmail · 16-11-2016 03:38PM

Deleted User wrote: »

You got a link?

It sounds bizarre. As surely the prospect of being filmed, the third time, wouldn't change the designation of the first 2 times, and she could have declined before the 3rd, filmed time.

or is the case that she said no the third time and he kept on going anyway.

goose2005 · 16-11-2016 04:57PM

midnight city wrote: »

It's really sad that her job is to write articles that put men in a bad light. Make no mistake about it. Her and her editor have agreed that her job is to write these inflammatory feminist articles. Most papers are doing the same.

Basically the mirror of Samantha Brick or Katie Hopkins

goose2005 · 16-11-2016 04:58PM

cookiexx wrote: »

And there are certain unmentionables that are blown out of proportion and made to be political issues when in reality they are just part and parcel of being a woman. If you wear skimpy clothing and off-the-shoulder tops and short skirts and knee-high boots you WILL get more male attention, often of the unsavoury kind - welcome to womanhood. "I just love fashion...I'll wear what I want" are good and well but I wouldn't rock up to work like that because it's not professional and attracts more attention to my appearance than my competence as an employee - a certain amount of self-awareness never goes astray like. Does it mean I deserve to be sexually assaulted? No. But that's not been my experience of dressing that way. I just wouldn't do it in a professional setting where I wanted to be taken seriously, that's all.

The thing is, exactly the opposite is true. "Acceptable dress" for a man is far more narrowly defined and even slight deviations will attract ridicule, or at least major attention.

Johngoose · 16-11-2016 07:48PM

She seems a bit head-wrecking I saw a clip of her reading from her book.It seems weird (maybe genius in an odd way) to make a career out of talking about rape.I think it's good to raise awareness about rape,but does anybody else feel that rape is getting too much air time lately?Also there are a lot of innocent men,particularly famous men who are almost ruined by false allegations.Think Louis Walsh and Cliff Richard.It could be dangerous to promote a culture of shouting "rape." I would be for 20 year sentences for cases where beyond a shadow of a doubt a rape has been committed.I feel for the Ulster rugby players who have been accused of rape. Women who sleep with men and are later forgotten by men,can use rape as a weapon to get back at a guy who doesn't make another date.

DredFX · 16-11-2016 08:54PM

Surprised this trainwreck hasn't been locked yet.

padd b1975 · 17-11-2016 01:15AM

midlandsmissus wrote: »

Who has the right to control what anyone else wears?

Anna Wintour.

Ralf and Florian · 17-11-2016 01:44AM

midlandsmissus wrote: »

I saw all the vile abuse spewed towards Louise O Neill on here,( can she sue by the way, there are precedents of people in the media suing due to derogatory comments on forums) and I went to read her articles and they're completely harmless. Its just a woman having an opinion. Some of you guys should be ashamed if this is bow you react to a woman having an opinion.

She's perfectly entitled to her opinions, stupid as many of them are. My problem with her is that she is given the platform of a column in a national paper to air her opinionated baloney and paid for it.

17-11-2016 09:53AM

Ralf and Florian wrote: »

She's perfectly entitled to her opinions, stupid as many of them are. My problem with her is that she is given the platform of a column in a national paper to air her opinionated baloney and paid for it.

agreed and she does (and anyone/everyone else) deserve to be called out/challenged on her opinions and hypocrisy. Its impressive she has no comment section on her articles (contrast to other articles) and automatically blocks/shuts down questioning on her Twitter page if it doesn't follow her opinion (you can have one as long as its matches mine) ...imagine if it was reversed at it was say Larry O Neill writing on how hes a misogynist..

Mortpourvelo · 17-11-2016 10:42AM

Clothes aren't the issue - your behaviour is.

Don't f**king straddle someone in a club and then act the novice nun virgin.

orubiru · 17-11-2016 12:19PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

do you think it is acceptable to criticise somebody because you dont approve of how they are dressed?

I think it is absolutely acceptable.

I have a friend who lost their child a couple of years back. They had a service in the church and it was a pretty harrowing experience to be honest. Now, lets say I had shown up to the service wearing nothing but a pair of bright pink speedos. Would it be acceptable to criticise me? I am pretty damn sure that nobody at that service would have approved of my dress. I reckon I would have been accosted at the door and permanently ostracised from my social circles. Would it then be fair for me to whine on the internet that people shouldn't criticise others based on their clothing?

Basically, we are born into society at a certain point where certain rules and conventions are already in place. That does not meant that they are set in stone but any changes to the established norms will take some time. So when I was first applying for jobs I preferred to wear jeans and tshirts every day but for job interviews I switched to a suit and tie.

I would suggest that there is an element of communication that goes with clothing choices.

For example, you could be communicating respect or disrespect based on what you are wearing in a particular context.

When people make a choice that seems "inappropriate" for the occasion then you have to wonder if they are socially awkward, if they have just made an innocent error in judgement or if they are "attention seeking" or being deliberately antagonistic.

So lets say you are going to be making a documentary or giving a talk about sexual assault and rape. Is there an appropriate level of professionalism and severity that would come with that? Or is it an "anything goes" kind of situation? I reckon that the severity of the subject matter in the documentary would have some bearing on how the presenter would be dressed just as it would have some bearing on the tone of their voice, the language they use.

Was there music used in this documentary? If so, was there a specific "tone" that the music was intended to set? If that is the case then I would expect to see that same tone reflected in the outfits worn by people presenting the documentary, the interviewer etc.

From what I can see this person has taken a serious discussion about a serious topic and, through inappropriate communication choices, has turned it into a conversation about themselves and the content of their wardrobe.

I can't help but feel it would have been easy for her to release a statement saying the documentary was not about her or her clothes and she will not be addressing it. Instead she's trying to drum up interest in #shouldergate. What?

It raises the question of whether or not she is an appropriate person to lead society in a discussion about rape.

Skankhunt42 · 17-11-2016 12:22PM

It raises the question of whether or not she deserves a kick in the vagina.

ohnonotgmail · 17-11-2016 12:28PM

orubiru wrote: »

I think it is absolutely acceptable.

I have a friend who lost their child a couple of years back. They had a service in the church and it was a pretty harrowing experience to be honest. Now, lets say I had shown up to the service wearing nothing but a pair of bright pink speedos. Would it be acceptable to criticise me? I am pretty damn sure that nobody at that service would have approved of my dress. I reckon I would have been accosted at the door and permanently ostracised from my social circles. Would it then be fair for me to whine on the internet that people shouldn't criticise others based on their clothing?

Basically, we are born into society at a certain point where certain rules and conventions are already in place. That does not meant that they are set in stone but any changes to the established norms will take some time. So when I was first applying for jobs I preferred to wear jeans and tshirts every day but for job interviews I switched to a suit and tie.

I would suggest that there is an element of communication that goes with clothing choices.

For example, you could be communicating respect or disrespect based on what you are wearing in a particular context.

When people make a choice that seems "inappropriate" for the occasion then you have to wonder if they are socially awkward, if they have just made an innocent error in judgement or if they are "attention seeking" or being deliberately antagonistic.

So lets say you are going to be making a documentary or giving a talk about sexual assault and rape. Is there an appropriate level of professionalism and severity that would come with that? Or is it an "anything goes" kind of situation? I reckon that the severity of the subject matter in the documentary would have some bearing on how the presenter would be dressed just as it would have some bearing on the tone of their voice, the language they use.

Was there music used in this documentary? If so, was there a specific "tone" that the music was intended to set? If that is the case then I would expect to see that same tone reflected in the outfits worn by people presenting the documentary, the interviewer etc.

From what I can see this person has taken a serious discussion about a serious topic and, through inappropriate communication choices, has turned it into a conversation about themselves and the content of their wardrobe.

I can't help but feel it would have been easy for her to release a statement saying the documentary was not about her or her clothes and she will not be addressing it. Instead she's trying to drum up interest in #shouldergate. What?

It raises the question of whether or not she is an appropriate person to lead society in a discussion about rape.

wow. you dont like her clothes so her opinion can be ignored? I think you've just proven her point for her.

Louise O Neill on rape culture.

Comments