Louise O Neill on rape culture.

me_right_one · 31-12-2016 11:39AM

Victim porn - I heard it all now. I'm an awful victim of that stuff.

31-12-2016 11:54AM

machiavellianme wrote: »

So is Louise O Neill finished raping our culture yet?
2016 is nearly over and I'd hate to think of her dragging her "issues" into 2017.

She will whinge as someone either doesn't suck up/praise her at a New Years eve party or someone inadvertently bumps into her at a busy/full pub/club and claimed she was assaulted

kunst nugget · 31-12-2016 02:37PM

Whatever the original intention of this thread was has become lost in the murky depths where people are taking bullying potshots at the woman and patting each other on the back. It's turned into one of the nastiest, most spiteful threads I've ever come across on here.

py2006 · 31-12-2016 02:41PM

kunst nugget wrote: »

Whatever the original intention of this thread was has become lost in the murky depths where people are taking bullying potshots at the woman and patting each other on the back. It's turned into one of the nastiest, most spiteful threads I've ever come across on here.

When somebody spews hatred, sexist generalisations against men using the label 'feminist' as justification. Don't expect snowflake reactions...

neonsofa · 31-12-2016 02:46PM

py2006 wrote: »

When somebody spews hatred, sexist generalisations against men using the label 'feminist' as justification. Don't expect snowflake reactions...

Snowflake reactions?

hatrickpatrick · 31-12-2016 02:47PM

I have regularly wondered what kind of feminist somebody who believes in gender equality but from a culturally libertarian rather than authoritarian standpoint would be labelled as, or if feminists would even accept such a person as a real feminist at all. For instance, I believe in equality, but as a cultural libertarian that means I believe that both men *and* women are fair game to be the targets of vile humour, song lyrics, TV shows etc, because I don't believe in any form of censorship or cultural limitations. The former would make me a feminist, technically, but the latter puts me at odds with mainstream feminists in an extreme way (so much so that expressing such views will typically get one banned from most large feminist discussion forums). So what does that make me?

(For example, rather than believing that objectifying TV ads should be censored, I just believe that it's ok for men to be targeted by such ads as well. And rather than believing that sexist song lyrics should be banned, I believe that if a song is as sexist against men as some feminists say some songs are against women, that's ok too, because culture should not be subject to any form of 'decency standard').

Essentially, I wonder what one calls a person who adamantly believes in gender equality, but vehemently opposes pretty much every other cause feminism fights for?

31-12-2016 02:57PM

kunst nugget wrote: »

Whatever the original intention of this thread was has become lost in the murky depths where people are taking bullying potshots at the woman and patting each other on the back. It's turned into one of the nastiest, most spiteful threads I've ever come across on here.

I take it you've never read her articles or her vilifying the "ucd 200" with no proof and then no intention of apologising when no evidence found

kunst nugget · 31-12-2016 03:05PM

Sasha Wide Squash wrote: »

I take it you've never read her articles or her vilifying the "ucd 200" with no proof and then no intention of apologising when no evidence found

I have and if you read through anything I've contributed on this thread you'll know i don't agree with what she's written and I've frequently been aghast at what she's come out with. The bullying of this woman has become pretty and vicious and it leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

31-12-2016 03:14PM

Fair enough, I find most (99%) of the comments here are just criticising her about her beliefs and rubbish she sprouts out, and they shouldn't go unchallenged....if a man had written "I hate women" on his social media bio and wrote articles on hating women, he would more than likely criticised and in trouble

Wibbs · 31-12-2016 03:17PM

kunst nugget wrote: »

Whatever the original intention of this thread was has become lost in the murky depths where people are taking bullying potshots at the woman and patting each other on the back.

Whoa there Ted. What's with dropping the B word? How is it "bullying" to point out the obvious and/or contradict a publicly disseminated as part of their paid job opinion piece(s), particularly when such pundits are all too quick to shout "harassment" rather than actually debate arguments they know they'll lose, never mind vilify any deviation from their fcuked up gospel. Or is it more that she's a woman and this makes you feel worse than if it was a man spouting such nonsense? I suspect there's much in that and I've certainly witnessed male professional trolls being torn apart online and indeed in here and nobody pulled the "poor them being bullied" angle.

Sand · 31-12-2016 03:20PM

Widdershins wrote: »

Interesting article on feminism.Echoes a lot of my own views.
https://areomagazine.com/2016/12/29/why-i-no-longer-identify-as-a-feminist/

Its a very good article. I'd agree with it in a general sense I wouldn't identify as a feminist for the reasons she writes but part of me wonders if they're making a strategic error by abandoning feminism as a 'brand' to the lunatic fringe. It has a generally very positive image up to the last 20 years. Abandoning it leaves the lunatic fringe able to claim their views are just a continuation of what went before, instead of being highlighted as wholly opposed to feminism.

They do need some way of differentiating the safe space/triggered/first world problems group though and making it clear *they* are not feminists.

Wibbs · 31-12-2016 03:20PM

Sasha Wide Squash wrote: »

if a man had written "I hate women" on his social media bio and wrote articles on hating women, he would more than likely criticised

In a national Irish media outlet? He'd be sacked. No ifs, buts or maybes. Women, well white middle class ones anyway, are Western sacred cows as far as the mainstream media goes. On the surface anyway. The same mainstream media will happily pander to and encourage women's insecurities to sell them more Shít They Don't Need© to keep the greasy tills ringing out.

suicide_circus · 31-12-2016 03:55PM

Wibbs wrote: »

Whoa there Ted. What's with dropping the B word? How is it "bullying" to point out the obvious and/or contradict a publicly disseminated as part of their paid job opinion piece(s), particularly when such pundits are all too quick to shout "harassment" rather than actually debate arguments they know they'll lose, never mind vilify any deviation from their fcuked up gospel. Or is it more that she's a woman and this makes you feel worse than if it was a man spouting such nonsense? I suspect there's much in that and I've certainly witnessed male professional trolls being torn apart online and indeed in here and nobody pulled the "poor them being bullied" angle.

Women are victims. Every single time.

deaddonkey15 · 31-12-2016 04:05PM

Wibbs wrote: »

In a national Irish media outlet? He'd be sacked. No ifs, buts or maybes. Women, well white middle class ones anyway, are Western sacred cows as far as the mainstream media goes. On the surface anyway. The same mainstream media will happily pander to and encourage women's insecurities to sell them more Shít They Don't Need© to keep the greasy tills ringing out.

Indeed, imagine a 30 year old male "journalist" writing an article about his 22 year old student girlfriend behaving like a 22 year old student? Interestingly enough, the Louise O'Neill version is no longer online. Maybe someone realised what a crock of sh*t it was.

Ulysses Gaze · 31-12-2016 04:12PM

deaddonkey15 wrote: »

Indeed, imagine a 30 year old male "journalist" writing an article about his 22 year old student girlfriend behaving like a 22 year old student? Interestingly enough, the Louise O'Neill version is no longer online. Maybe someone realised what a crock of sh*t it was.

Louise should stick to writing fictional novels. She has quite a bit of talent at that.

me_right_one · 31-12-2016 04:19PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Essentially, I wonder what one calls a person who adamantly believes in gender equality, but vehemently opposes pretty much every other cause feminism fights for?

A Feminazi. I thought everyone knew that?:(

Or indeed a Feminasty.

hatrickpatrick · 31-12-2016 05:27PM

me_right_one wrote: »

A Feminazi. I thought everyone knew that?:(

Or indeed a Feminasty.

Isn't that the opposite of what I'm referring to - a feminist who is also a cultural authoritarian?

Personally I feel that the war over cultural freedom has taken precedence over feminism, anti-racism, LGBT rights etc over the last few years and that's an absolute disgrace. The people who peddle that crap are damaging the movements they claim to support far more than the actual opponents of those movements.

I mean to digress from feminism for a moment, let's take anti-racism. I doubt there's anyone here who would disagree that racism is an absolutely appalling aspect of humanity which should be eradicated at all costs. It is inexcusable that some people think it's still ok to hold a negative opinion of an individual based on absolutely nothing but a racial stereotype of that person's demographic, and even worse to actively discriminate against or abuse such an individual. All agreed here I presume?

Now add a sprinkle of cultural authoritarianism: It's not ok for a white person to wear dreadlocks or take a stab at trying to write or perform a hip hop song, because this is "cultural appropriation". Each culture "owns" the genres and styles it has created in a sort of "demographic copyright", and anyone who is not part of that demographic is "not allowed" to participate.

The above, in my opinion, is 100%, absolute f*cking bullsh!t. It's not just invalid, it's a horrible, repressive and fascist ideology which places some kind of cultural value over individual freedom of speech. Not only that, but it throws up barriers to collaboration and the sharing of ideas between humans to create new ideas - one of the most basic aspects of humanity which defines us as a species when we do it.

I'm not sure if I could say this to a group of liberal activists without being accused of being a racist, misogynist Trump supporter. That's the problem. It seems to be impossible to utterly reject some aspects of the modern social justice movement while still adhering to the basic underlying concept of equality and not be villified.

RabbleRouser2k · 31-12-2016 06:15PM

http://www.independent.ie/entertainment/music/being-a-feminist-can-be-so-upsetting-when-even-your-ipad-playlist-is-full-of-misogyny-34946393.html

I'd forgotten this article existed-not by LON, but just as bat crap insane. I mean, seriously, she made the playlist, and now she's claiming it's oppressing her?

mzungu · 31-12-2016 06:26PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Essentially, I wonder what one calls a person who adamantly believes in gender equality, but vehemently opposes pretty much every other cause feminism fights for?

Old fashioned egalitarian? Although, to get it to fit around the cultural libertarianism side of things you might want to start experimenting with the terms. A post-cultural libertarian egalitarianist? Or maybe a post-post-egalitarianist cultural libertarian?

mzungu · 31-12-2016 07:23PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Personally I feel that the war over cultural freedom has taken precedence over feminism, anti-racism, LGBT rights etc over the last few years and that's an absolute disgrace. The people who peddle that crap are damaging the movements they claim to support far more than the actual opponents of those movements.

I came across an article a while ago regarding political movements. The author's line of thought was that when a movement achieves its desired aim(s) it usually then assimilates comfortably into the mainstream to continue the fight there. But if it decides to go on continue on then it runs the risk of getting involved in meaningless debates that stray far from its original policies and do much to discredit the original work. The author was of the view that this was because vested interests wanted to keep the ship afloat. With all this business of identity politics and cultural appropriation you now have a race to the bottom to see who can be the most oppressed.

The people who peddle most of the BS are a minority, but they are a loud minority with media approval and they make a nice earner from doing it. I guess hiding behind the banner of being liberal/progressive etc is a handy way to spout hateful tripe and get away with it. Outside of the usual 'activists' and their hangers on, not very many subscribe to it. I guess the question is how can a vocal minority gain such traction? I would hazard a guess that it is because this stuff comes from academia and with education being a business in the US (where all this comes from) nobody really wants to point out the flaws while the gravy train is still running. Oh...and the media feeds it too. The media loves crazy like Motley Crue loved shooting smack and smoking' crack in the 80s. And thats a lotta love.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I mean to digress from feminism for a moment, let's take anti-racism. I doubt there's anyone here who would disagree that racism is an absolutely appalling aspect of humanity which should be eradicated at all costs. It is inexcusable that some people think it's still ok to hold a negative opinion of an individual based on absolutely nothing but a racial stereotype of that person's demographic, and even worse to actively discriminate against or abuse such an individual. All agreed here I presume?

Now add a sprinkle of cultural authoritarianism: It's not ok for a white person to wear dreadlocks or take a stab at trying to write or perform a hip hop song, because this is "cultural appropriation". Each culture "owns" the genres and styles it has created in a sort of "demographic copyright", and anyone who is not part of that demographic is "not allowed" to participate.

The above, in my opinion, is 100%, absolute f*cking bullsh!t. It's not just invalid, it's a horrible, repressive and fascist ideology which places some kind of cultural value over individual freedom of speech. Not only that, but it throws up barriers to collaboration and the sharing of ideas between humans to create new ideas - one of the most basic aspects of humanity which defines us as a species when we do it.

I have never met anybody in person who subscribes to "cultural appropriation" but if I did the first thing I would ask would be to see their music collection. Most popular western artists would not exist but for the blues (Elvis, Stones, Beatles etc.). In one way or another, most things are culturally appropriated. So, trying to stop it is unworkable and would require we all revert back to being hermits. The entire notion of "cultural appropriation" is insane and shows very little knowledge of the history of these things.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I'm not sure if I could say this to a group of liberal activists without being accused of being a racist, misogynist Trump supporter. That's the problem. It seems to be impossible to utterly reject some aspects of the modern social justice movement while still adhering to the basic underlying concept of equality and not be villified.

That is because it is not a coherent ideology, but rather a string of rash and reactionary proposals put together by people who spend little time doing anything else other than being perpetually offended.

hatrickpatrick · 31-12-2016 07:34PM

Sand wrote: »

They do need some way of differentiating the safe space/triggered/first world problems group though and making it clear *they* are not feminists.

The common term is SJW, for Social Justice Warrior. Feminism's problem is that so far, most feminists insist that feminism be an all inclusive movement and that these assholes shouldn't be called out and distanced from, which amounts to tacit support at best.

This doesn't just apply to feminism by the way, it applies to the entire liberal / progressive ideology, of which I am most certainly part. Liberal authoritarianism is an oxymoron - you can either be liberal or authoritarian when it comes to civil rights and social freedom. Too many of us, myself included up until recently, have been too intimidated by the SJW fringe and its threats of branding any critics as racist, sexist, homophobic etc to properly call them out on their bullsh!t and make it quite clear that they have no place and are not welcome in any left leaning ideology. They belong with those who would impose cultural censorship on religious or family values grounds - what they are pedalling is absolutely no different.

Wibbs · 31-12-2016 07:51PM

mzungu wrote: »

The media loves crazy like Motley Crue loved shooting smack and smoking' crack in the 80s. And thats a lotta love.

+1. That for me is one of the more troubling aspects of this kinda clickbait "journalism", it actively encourages neurotics and hysterics as positives and positive role models. It also handily makes them more teflon coated as it would seem at best churlish to point out that much of their oeuvre are the apparent rantings of lunatics. At worst criticism would be seen as mocking the afflicted or worse again these days questioning the near fetishisation of "mental health awareness".

Widdershins · 31-12-2016 07:56PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

The common term is SJW, for Social Justice Warrior. Feminism's problem is that so far, most feminists insist that feminism be an all inclusive movement and that these assholes shouldn't be called out and distanced from, which amounts to tacit support at best.

This doesn't just apply to feminism by the way, it applies to the entire liberal / progressive ideology, of which I am most certainly part. Liberal authoritarianism is an oxymoron - you can either be liberal or authoritarian when it comes to civil rights and social freedom. Too many of us, myself included up until recently, have been too intimidated by the SJW fringe and its threats of branding any critics as racist, sexist, homophobic etc to properly call them out on their bullsh!t and make it quite clear that they have no place and are not welcome in any left leaning ideology. They belong with those who would impose cultural censorship on religious or family values grounds - what they are pedalling is absolutely no different.

There's always been censorship on family values/morality grounds. Nothing wrong with that.

Dyr · 31-12-2016 09:44PM

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

Some people freaked out when a mall in Minnesota recently used a black Santa Clause (as in a black man dressed as Santa).

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/black-santa-racists-freak-out_us_5844fb5ee4b09e21702f631b

Ermehrgerd :mad::mad: cultural appropriation is NOT okay. This is sooo problematic.

Sweetemotion · 31-12-2016 10:23PM

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/entertainment/music/being-a-feminist-can-be-so-upsetting-when-even-your-ipad-playlist-is-full-of-misogyny-34946393.html

I'd forgotten this article existed-not by LON, but just as bat crap insane. I mean, seriously, she made the playlist, and now she's claiming it's oppressing her?

That is just insane, but this caught me most.

"Instead of having a conversation about sexual consent, I mumbled something about how you wouldn't get away with those lyrics today.

And as I did I could hear the collective sigh of the sisterhood as they despaired at my letting them all down."

The pressure is from other women not the "patriarchy"

And what the hell is the sisterhood? The only male version I know who use brotherhood are the KKK.

bodice ripper · 31-12-2016 11:11PM

Sweetemotion wrote: »

That is just insane, but this caught me most.

"Instead of having a conversation about sexual consent, I mumbled something about how you wouldn't get away with those lyrics today.

And as I did I could hear the collective sigh of the sisterhood as they despaired at my letting them all down."

The pressure is from other women not the "patriarchy"

And what the hell is the sisterhood? The only male version I know who use brotherhood are the KKK.

To be fair, she does seem to be letting the sisterhood down, just not the way she thinks she is...

Widdershins · 31-12-2016 11:59PM

I've used the term ''sisterhood'' with regards to women who need support. I don't expect my ''sisters'' to lecture their children on song lyrics.

Sweetemotion · 01-01-2017 12:28AM

Widdershins wrote: »

I've used the term ''sisterhood'' with regards to women who need support. I don't expect my ''sisters'' to lecture their children on song lyrics.

It's just crazy.

RabbleRouser2k · 01-01-2017 12:56AM

Like, I'll admit that Milo Yiannopoulos is hardly anyone to cite as anything, but one of the things that was thrown at him was that 'he hates women' cos he calls feminism 'cancer'. 'I love women, I just hate feminism because it prevents them from being as great as they can be' was his response..

I think we all grew up with women (most of us had moms, tho I know there are single dad's out there who look after their kids on their own). But most of our moms were not crazy 'men are responsible for everything wrong in the world' feminists. My nan lived to be 100 years old, and she did it without complaining about society-instead, she got on with the job that is life.
Raised her kids, helped raise the majority of her grandkids (some were living counties away from home, so she couldn't really help) and helped take care of her great grandkids. And she did it with a love of life, not crying 'victim' every five minutes. Instead, she laughed every five minutes- and she was wonderful. Pretty much spoke to everyone of her five children every day (my mom would speak to her every day, and they would laugh and laugh.

She helped out people in need, some of whom society shunned (an out of wedlock pregnant mother, or a traveller family who needed a decent meal-they would often get paid for things like tin buckets, and would get invited into dinner-though knowing my grandmother, the 'invite' was 'get in here and eat something cos I've got two or three apple tarts needing eating'. She hated seeing folks hungry. My grandfather was the same, they were well met, the kindest people, and no, I'm not saying that out of bias. It was help everyone out, because kindness is repaid tenfold-and it was, neighbours were always there to help out. And in a time before machines did most of the work, they were needed.). There was no fighting an 'imaginary' enemy, which is what the partriarchy is. There was 'helping others out, because nobody else would'-with real problems, not imaginary ones..

NI24 · 01-01-2017 06:28AM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Too many of us, myself included up until recently, have been too intimidated by the SJW fringe and its threats of branding any critics as racist, sexist, homophobic etc to properly call them out on their bullsh!t and make it quite clear that they have no place and are not welcome in any left leaning ideology.

This is bull**** and you know it. You've been railing against "SJWs" (translation: anyone you disagree with) on this site for at least a year and you're going to claim you've been intimidated?

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Now add a sprinkle of cultural authoritarianism: It's not ok for a white person to wear dreadlocks or take a stab at trying to write or perform a hip hop song, because this is "cultural appropriation". Each culture "owns" the genres and styles it has created in a sort of "demographic copyright", and anyone who is not part of that demographic is "not allowed" to participate.

The above, in my opinion, is 100%, absolute f*cking bullsh!t. It's not just invalid, it's a horrible, repressive and fascist ideology which places some kind of cultural value over individual freedom of speech. Not only that, but it throws up barriers to collaboration and the sharing of ideas between humans to create new ideas - one of the most basic aspects of humanity which defines us as a species when we do it.

I'm not sure if I could say this to a group of liberal activists without being accused of being a racist, misogynist Trump supporter. That's the problem. It seems to be impossible to utterly reject some aspects of the modern social justice movement while still adhering to the basic underlying concept of equality and not be villified.

Since when is it not ok for a white guy to wear dreads or sing hip hop? I mean, that guy may be called a poser and he is, but rarely would he be considered racist. In fact, the most liberal, hippy, granola eating birkenstockers wear dreads. Definitely not what anyone would call a racist.

You see, hatrickpatrick, the central problem to your arguments (and the arguments of those similar to you) is that it's never based in reality. You're not sure you could say that to a group of liberal activists because all your discussions take place in your imagination or online. Stop with the what if and what might possibly, perhaps, could happen scenarios and you'll realize that your theories crumble.

Louise O Neill on rape culture.

Comments