Accusations of sexual assault on "reality" tv show, double standards?

Special Circumstances wrote: »

That's a paddlin.

I should ruddy-well think so, squire - at least!

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Not on boards.ie anyway hahaha the mods would disappear it so fast your head would spin.

Ah hardly. Look at the Gentlemen's Club. And it's perfectly right that there be a space for men to discuss men's issues.

PucaMama

py2006 wrote: »

Interestingly, in the last few months it seems, some feminists have adjusted their detest of men to just straight white men. Not all but some of them. Not sure why, trump?

It's been around a lot longer than the last few months

Goya wrote: »

Ah hardly. Look at the Gentlemen's Club. And it's perfectly right that there be a space for men to discuss men's issues.

As long as it's not after hours right?

Special Circumstances wrote: »

As long as it's not after hours right?

Men aren't permitted to discuss issues that affect men, here on After Hours? Well that's not true. They're doing it on this thread for one.

Goya wrote: »

Men aren't permitted to discuss issues that affect men, here on After Hours? Well that's not true.

There's all sorts of things and viewpoints that are verboten on after hours.
I honestly can't see a "what's the fuss about this guy rubbing himself off yer wan, it's only bantz like" thread lasting too long?

Does "mens rights" not fall under the "alt-right" umbrella these days? It's kinda the opposite of what boards is about isn't it?

Special Circumstances wrote: »

There's all sorts of things and viewpoints that are verboten on after hours.

There are, but not men's rights.

I honestly can't see a "what's the fuss about this guy rubbing himself off yer wan, it's only bantz like" thread lasting too long?

Such threads have lasted the course - I remember (from a previous life obv.) one about a girl who wrote some social media thing about her skirt being pulled up and being sick of such behaviour on nights out, and there was non stop dismissal of her.

I agree the woman in this case was being a horrible bint and that there is a double standard but my point to that person is that some are only interested in saying "It's silence from feminists" and "If you reversed the genders..." which is true, but it's not exactly constructive and getting to the root of the problem to focus on that alone.

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Does "mens rights" not fall under the "alt-right" umbrella these days? It's kinda the opposite of what boards is about isn't it?

We don't need no steenkin' "Rights" - we see something we like, we take it. Meat, arses, Zimbabwe, whatever - Hurraawh!!

Goya wrote: »

There are, but not men's rights.

Such threads have lasted the course - I remember (from a previous life obv.) one about a girl who wrote some social media thing about her skirt being pulled up and being sick of such behaviour on nights out, and there was non stop dismissal of her.

I agree the woman in this case was being a horrible bint and that there is a double standard but my point to that person is that some are only interested in saying "It's silence from feminists" and "If you reversed the genders..." which is true, but it's not exactly constructive and getting to the root of the problem to focus on that alone.

Pulling up the girl's clothes like that is outrageous behaviour and COMPLETELY off the reservation, so to speak.

Elemonator

LexieOnRale wrote: »

Chloe is a ****ing liberty. She's hilarious, but is extremely vulgar with no self respect for herself or other people. I love her on Geordie shore and follow her snapchat but she's not at all embarrassed about her boobs falling out of her dress, or walking around with no/very little underwear on. She's gone down on a girl she's randomly sharing a bed with on live tv, she's regularly kissing and sharing vibrators with another girl on GS who was in a relationship and Chloe's actions were causing problems so while I don't think she meant to sexually assault him, she has no boundaries and less respect.

It is completely unacceptable. If a man did that to me, I'd be very upset and rightly so. It shouldn't have happened, and I'm surprised she wasn't called to the diary room for it because if roles were reversed your man would have been reprimanded

In other words, Chloe is an attention seeker?

Elemonator wrote: »

In other words, Chloe is an attention seeker?

The young one probably has psychological problems beyond the wildest dreams of most analysts. If I were young Grimes in that situation, I'd be cringing for her, the poor thing. Not "Offended".

wakka12

Its true that the double standards are ridiculous but the reality is that most men wouldnt really care that much if she did that to them. Im not even attracted to women and it might have put me off her a bit as a person but I wouldnt think she was a sex offender or had sexually assaulted me. I would mind if a man did the same though, I don't know why this is but its just how I feel about it and clearly a lot of others feel the same way !

Goya wrote: »

There are, but not men's rights.

Such threads have lasted the course - I remember (from a previous life obv.) one about a girl who wrote some social media thing about her skirt being pulled up and being sick of such behaviour on nights out, and there was non stop dismissal of her.

I agree the woman in this case was being a horrible bint and that there is a double standard but my point to that person is that some are only interested in saying "It's silence from feminists" and "If you reversed the genders..." which is true, but it's not exactly constructive and getting to the root of the problem to focus on that alone.

Holy moly. Are you criticising Louise o Neill? Welcome to life outside the boards anointed ones club. You were doing so well there. You could have been bumped up to "mod warnings for anyone who disagrees with you" status in no time.

Threw it all away. Never will you reach the "make an absolute homes of an argument but don't worry mods will selectively delete posts to make you look good" level.

Peregrine

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Not on boards.ie anyway hahaha the mods would disappear it so fast your head would spin.

Special Circumstances wrote: »

That's a paddlin.

Special Circumstances wrote: »

As long as it's not after hours right?

Special Circumstances wrote: »

There's all sorts of things and viewpoints that are verboten on after hours.
I honestly can't see a "what's the fuss about this guy rubbing himself off yer wan, it's only bantz like" thread lasting too long?

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Does "mens rights" not fall under the "alt-right" umbrella these days? It's kinda the opposite of what boards is about isn't it?

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Holy moly. Are you criticising Louise o Neill? Welcome to life outside the boards anointed ones club. You were doing so well there. You could have been bumped up to "mod warnings for anyone who disagrees with you" status in no time.

Threw it all away. Never will you reach the "make an absolute homes of an argument but don't worry mods will selectively delete posts to make you look good" level.

Ruin a thread.

Then blame it on the mods and talk about censorship when there isn't any.

Job done.

Classic.

PucaMama

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Does "mens rights" not fall under the "alt-right" umbrella these days? It's kinda the opposite of what boards is about isn't it?

No. you can be concerned with men's rights and not be "alt" right.

"Alt" right are a mess of issues and there's no real direction.

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Holy moly. Are you criticising Louise o Neill? Welcome to life outside the boards anointed ones club. You were doing so well there. You could have been bumped up to "mod warnings for anyone who disagrees with you" status in no time.

Threw it all away. Never will you reach the "make an absolute homes of an argument but don't worry mods will selectively delete posts to make you look good" level.

What in the name of holy hell are you on about?

And the thread criticising Louise O'Neill has been kept open for how long now? Edit: two and a half months and over 2,500 posts.

mzungu

py2006 wrote: »

Interestingly, in the last few months it seems, some feminists have adjusted their detest of men to just straight white men. Not all but some of them. Not sure why, trump?

I believe this worldview stems from the altar of intersectionality. The basic idea rates people in terms of their societal oppression both in the past and present. So, the straight white male has come bottom of the pile on account of stuff like colonialism, slavery etc. So, when you see people on the net come out with stuff like "I am a Asian cis gendered trans gender fluid (wo)man with bipolar....etc" , what they are doing is placing themselves upon the oppression leaderboard of intersectionality.

It is also worth noting that since Trump, the straight white woman (especially "uneducated") has come under fire for voting for him in high numbers. So, while the movement might come under the umbrella of feminism, in reality it is anything but, and certainly a million miles away from the likes of the suffragettes et al. In short, intersectionality is a regression back to a time where people were judged on stereotypes and no form of individual thought that strays from the dogma is allowed.

Peregrine wrote: »

Ruin a thread.

Then blame it on the mods and talk about censorship when there isn't any.

Job done.

Classic.

Oh boohoo.
Would a fella have got away with this incident roles reversed.

Is it "grand grand what's the problem" for either sex?

Is it "a completely different thing" when a male does it to a female?

Was it just banter? Was he pretty much asking for it?

Goya wrote: »

What in the name of holy hell are you on about?

Where did I lose you? Implying the mods don't act even handedly or my surprise at you calling Louise o Neill a bint?

Peregrine

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Oh boohoo.
Would a fella have got away with this incident roles reversed.

No.

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Is it "grand grand what's the problem" for either sex?

No.

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Is it "a completely different thing" when a male does it to a female?

No.

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Was it just banter? Was he pretty much asking for it?

No.

Like, I agree with you dude. Chill out and drop the faux persecution.