Louise O Neill on rape culture.

Outlaw Pete · 27-01-2017 12:21PM

See a female journalist at the Times recommended six books to read while trying to cope in these Trumpain times...

But she had the audacity not to include a book written by a woman :eek: Not even one by Louise O'Neill :eek:

https://twitter.com/antiroom/status/824732754361417729

https://twitter.com/oneilllo/status/824734028754513920

https://twitter.com/oneilllo/status/824925226156826624

The last tweet here really sums these people up. Now this female journalist is been sneered at and it's sneakily being suggested that's she's not in the same league as her colleagues and all because she made a short list of 6 books and didn't include one written by a woman.

These people are obsessed by gender. They are obsessed with viewing everything through the prism of gender equality, constantly keep score, with OCD level fixation. I would imagine even a trip to the cinema has them counting how many members of the cast were male, how many female. 'Was the director female?' 'Or at least writer?' You would have imagined that the journalist clearly being anti-Trump would have been enough for them to be excused their faux pas.. but no, out of the sisterhood she was turfed by the coven regardless.

pumpkin4life · 27-01-2017 12:35PM

Widdershins wrote: »

The spotlight from this part of the world was on America, when there are so many global problems that deserve highlighting. I can understand the American marches focusing on Donald Trump. I don't understand why ours had to.

I know I'm supposed to think he's the devil incarnate and all women should hate him. I am more bothered by other leaders and regimes and attitudes.

Mental illness.

The result of the U.S election and its impact on the vociferous left over the past few weeks has been nothing less than astonishing; certainly far faster than anything I've ever seen or expected. The projections; the dumbing down; the victimhood; weird celebrity meltdowns; wans on my facebook taking the hatred up tae 11; you want to look away, but it is impossible to do so. Suddenly, I know what this guy had to go though:

Clockwork'71.jpg

It's crazy house stuff, well and truly.

So, what happens when a mentally damaged, narcissistic minority group of people start losing their place in society, especially after they have gained prominent positions in that society? They become more aggressive and more feral. Lads might think I'm a bit bonkers here; mad pumpkin, but lets just say that if yous come across a Louise O Neil blue jelly in her hair type then yous should leg it the fùck out of there. These people and these SJW organizations (profits and SJWs are two ideals in complete conflict with each other) are becoming increasingly flat out insane. Anti facist and Pegida? Wtf is a lad thinking?

This won't end well. None of it will. It will end in depression and death for some. I guess that is why O Neill has gotten a thread this big: she's the epitome of that SJW, that dangerous person who is ruining the craic for everyone.

Stay the bloody fùck away from these people.

pumpkin4life · 27-01-2017 12:48PM

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

These people are obsessed by gender. They are obsessed with viewing everything through the prism of gender equality, constantly keep score, with OCD level fixation. I would imagine even a trip to the cinema has them counting how many members of the cast were male, how many female. 'Was the director female?' 'Or at least writer?' You would have imagined that the journalist clearly being anti-Trump would have been enough for them to be excused their faux pas.. but no, out of the sisterhood she was turfed by the coven regardless.

Projecting themselves onto others in my opinion.

Sidenote: I bet Louise O Neill's bookshelf is full of teenage fantasy novels. I'd bet dollar to donut she's a massive Shadowhunters fan.

Widdershins · 27-01-2017 12:56PM

pumpkin4life wrote: »

Mental illness.

The result of the U.S election and its impact on the vociferous left over the past few weeks has been nothing less than astonishing; certainly far faster than anything I've ever seen or expected. The projections; the dumbing down; the victimhood; weird celebrity meltdowns; wans on my facebook taking the hatred up tae 11; you want to look away, but it is impossible to do so. Suddenly, I know what this guy had to go though:

It's crazy house stuff, well and truly.

So, what happens when a mentally damaged, narcissistic minority group of people start losing their place in society, especially after they have gained prominent positions in that society? They become more aggressive and more feral. Lads might think I'm a bit bonkers here; mad pumpkin, but lets just say that if yous come across a Louise O Neil blue jelly in her hair type then yous should leg it the fùck out of there. These people and these SJW organizations (profits and SJWs are two ideals in complete conflict with each other) are becoming increasingly flat out insane. Anti facist and Pegida? Wtf is a lad thinking?

This won't end well. None of it will. It will end in depression and death for some. I guess that is why O Neill has gotten a thread this big: she's the epitome of that SJW, that dangerous person who is ruining the craic for everyone.

Stay the bloody fùck away from these people.

Unfortunately I know a few of em in person. I never knew they were crazy before I saw their internet posts.

Widdershins · 27-01-2017 12:58PM

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

See a female journalist at the Times recommended six books to read while trying to cope in these Trumpain times...

But she had the audacity not to include a book written by a woman :eek: Not even one by Louise O'Neill :eek:

https://twitter.com/antiroom/status/824732754361417729

https://twitter.com/oneilllo/status/824734028754513920

https://twitter.com/oneilllo/status/824925226156826624

The last tweet here really sums these people up. Now this female journalist is been sneered at and it's sneakily being suggested that's she's not in the same league as her colleagues and all because she made a short list of 6 books and didn't include one written by a woman.

These people are obsessed by gender. They are obsessed with viewing everything through the prism of gender equality, constantly keep score, with OCD level fixation. I would imagine even a trip to the cinema has them counting how many members of the cast were male, how many female. 'Was the director female?' 'Or at least writer?' You would have imagined that the journalist clearly being anti-Trump would have been enough for them to be excused their faux pas.. but no, out of the sisterhood she was turfed by the coven regardless.

https://twitter.com/oneilllo/status/824925226156826624?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

what a coo

CeannairBluexx · 27-01-2017 12:59PM

pumpkin4life wrote: »

Projecting themselves onto others in my opinion.

Sidenote: I bet Louise O Neill's bookshelf is full of teenage fantasy novels. I'd bet dollar to donut she's a massive Shadowhunters fan.

LON is mad into Twilight. So obvious!!!

orubiru · 27-01-2017 01:13PM

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

That's unbelievable. You couldn't make it up tbh.

This movement really gone off the rails into crazy territory.

I'd be genuinely worried about naive young women getting caught up in it.

It's not really THAT much of a leap if you think about their fundamental beliefs.

Women cannot be Sexist.
People of Color cannot be Racist.

If the Criminal Justice System is constructed by "White Men" then how far do we need to stretch to convince ourselves that Female POC cannot actually be "criminals".

After all a "criminal" is simply defined as someone who breaks "laws" but, as we learned last week from LON, dictionary definitions don't really cut it when dealing with complex issues.

If laws are defined by the Oppressive White Male Patriarchy and forced upon women and POC without their consent then can women or people of color REALLY be criminals?

Yeah this lady kidnapped and tortured and murdered a man but it was White Supremacy that criminalized her and took away her freedom.

If you can convince people that women cannot be sexist and that POC cannot be racist then how hard is it to convince true believers that although this lady did some bad things it's just not right for a government run by white men to ever put a black lady in prison?

Derrynaflank · 27-01-2017 01:29PM

I keep hoping 'Louise O'Neill' is some sort of comic persona played by a great satirist who is attempting to expose the absolute nonsense and hypocrisy of modern feminism in today's society. Sadly though, and time goes by, this seems less and less likely.

CeannairBluexx · 27-01-2017 02:13PM

Derrynaflank wrote: »

I keep hoping 'Louise O'Neill' is some sort of comic persona played by a great satirist who is attempting to expose the absolute nonsense and hypocrisy of modern feminism in today's society. Sadly though, and time goes by, this seems less and less likely.

I want her to be Chris Morris.

py2006 · 27-01-2017 05:06PM

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

These people are obsessed by gender. They are obsessed with viewing everything through the prism of gender equality, constantly keep score, with OCD level fixation. I would imagine even a trip to the cinema has them counting how many members of the cast were male, how many female. 'Was the director female?' 'Or at least writer?'

Was it our pal Louise or the other one Una who said that the recent star wars movies were misogynistic because the non-main characters were mainly men? She couldn't focus on the wonderful female hero lead in both movies.

Venom · 27-01-2017 06:48PM

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

See a female journalist at the Times recommended six books to read while trying to cope in these Trumpain times...

But she had the audacity not to include a book written by a woman :eek: Not even one by Louise O'Neill :eek:

https://twitter.com/antiroom/status/824732754361417729

https://twitter.com/oneilllo/status/824734028754513920

https://twitter.com/oneilllo/status/824925226156826624

The last tweet here really sums these people up. Now this female journalist is been sneered at and it's sneakily being suggested that's she's not in the same league as her colleagues and all because she made a short list of 6 books and didn't include one written by a woman.

These people are obsessed by gender. They are obsessed with viewing everything through the prism of gender equality, constantly keep score, with OCD level fixation. I would imagine even a trip to the cinema has them counting how many members of the cast were male, how many female. 'Was the director female?' 'Or at least writer?' You would have imagined that the journalist clearly being anti-Trump would have been enough for them to be excused their faux pas.. but no, out of the sisterhood she was turfed by the coven regardless.

This is just another example of the complete lack of tolerance these left leaning nutjobs have for anyone who differs in even the slightest way from their echo chamber reinforced beliefs. It doesn't matter she's female or maybe anti Trump, she choose different authors to what LOoN would of so became open to attack, ridicule and harassment which I'm sure O'Neill has written is a awful sexist hate crime at some point or another.

Unless you 100% follow their chosen narrative and stick in your correct box on the oppression table you will be treated as public enemy number one. Take the women's march from last week as an example, no women who were pro choice were allowed to take part but it was ok for a man to punch a female reporter in the face and for someone to set fire to a woman hair all because they held different opinions!

Widdershins · 27-01-2017 06:54PM

Venom wrote: »

This is just another example of the complete lack of tolerance these left leaning nutjobs have for anyone who differs in even the slightest way from their echo chamber reinforced beliefs. It doesn't matter she's female or maybe anti Trump, she choose different authors to what LOoN would of so became open to attack, ridicule and harassment which I'm sure O'Neill has written is a awful sexist hate crime at some point or another.

Unless you 100% follow their chosen narrative and stick in your correct box on the oppression table you will be treated as public enemy number one. Take the women's march from last week as an example, no women who were pro choice were allowed to take part but it was ok for a man to punch a female reporter in the face and for someone to set fire to a woman hair all because they held different opinions!

If you criticise or just ask genuinely interested questions about the march on social media you'd better expect to be ganged up on and vilified. Try it and see..

py2006 · 27-01-2017 07:37PM

Widdershins wrote: »

If you criticise or just ask genuinely interested questions about the march on social media you'd better expect to be ganged up on and vilified. Try it and see..

They were idiots. They should have done that months ago, probably polling day. Not the day after his inauguration ffs. What's that going to change.

Outlaw Pete · 27-01-2017 07:40PM

Widdershins wrote: »

If you criticise or just ask genuinely interested questions about the march on social media you'd better expect to be ganged up on and vilified. Try it and see..

This guy shut a few of them up for a couple of minutes anyway.. :P

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ap2PWCzIrrE

sid waddell · 27-01-2017 07:46PM

pumpkin4life wrote: »

Mental illness.

The result of the U.S election and its impact on the vociferous left over the past few weeks has been nothing less than astonishing; certainly far faster than anything I've ever seen or expected. The projections; the dumbing down; the victimhood;

You think protestors against Donald Trump are the ones who are dumbed down, mentally ill and projecting victimhood?

And not Mr. Trump himself?

orubiru · 27-01-2017 08:05PM

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

See a female journalist at the Times recommended six books to read while trying to cope in these Trumpain times...

But she had the audacity not to include a book written by a woman :eek: Not even one by Louise O'Neill :eek:

It's a bit bizarre. Made worse by the fact that the writer of the article is a woman.

So a woman can't have an opinion online these days unless it's a Feminist opinion?

OK. The writer of the article is asked to pick 6 books that are in some way relevant to the recent election of Trump.

She picks 5 books that have a fair bit of political content and, to be honest, could be quite educational for people who don't know much about politics or political thought. The 6th book chosen is just a bit of craic, comparing Trump to the Queen of Hearts, to lighten the mood.

The first thing these absolute clowns go for is "where are the female authors"?

I could almost understand that if the 6 books were rubbish or something but we are talking about some highly regarded works of literature here.

I think it would be almost impossible to deal with these people in real life, can you imagine being asked what your favorite books are and then taking flak because the authors or the main characters aren't diverse enough?

The list was "six of the best books to read in Trumpian times":

It Can’t Happen Here by Sinclair Lewis (1935)
Animal Farm by George Orwell (1935)
Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell (1949)
Brave New World by Aldous Huxley (1932)
We by Yevgeny Zamyatin (1921)
Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll (1865)

Surely if anyone were to have a problem with this list it would be based on the content and how it specifically relates to Trump rather than "none of the authors are women and so your list is garbage"?

The saddest thing is that if this kind of "criticism" becomes commonplace people will actually think twice before making any kind of "best of" or "top ten" lists without first making sure that the list checks the correct boxes for diversity.

What's that? Your top 5 most influential books were all written by men? Better shoehorn a lady into that list before you go public.

Think about this though. If a woman writes a list of the best books and the list has no female authors... is the woman who wrote the list sexist?

I think we need a poorly written article telling us whether or not women can be sexist towards women.

Widdershins · 27-01-2017 08:25PM

orubiru wrote: »

It's a bit bizarre. Made worse by the fact that the writer of the article is a woman.

So a woman can't have an opinion online these days unless it's a Feminist opinion?

OK. The writer of the article is asked to pick 6 books that are in some way relevant to the recent election of Trump.

She picks 5 books that have a fair bit of political content and, to be honest, could be quite educational for people who don't know much about politics or political thought. The 6th book chosen is just a bit of craic, comparing Trump to the Queen of Hearts, to lighten the mood.

The first thing these absolute clowns go for is "where are the female authors"?

I could almost understand that if the 6 books were rubbish or something but we are talking about some highly regarded works of literature here.

I think it would be almost impossible to deal with these people in real life, can you imagine being asked what your favorite books are and then taking flak because the authors or the main characters aren't diverse enough?

The list was "six of the best books to read in Trumpian times":

It Can’t Happen Here by Sinclair Lewis (1935)
Animal Farm by George Orwell (1935)
Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell (1949)
Brave New World by Aldous Huxley (1932)
We by Yevgeny Zamyatin (1921)
Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll (1865)

Surely if anyone were to have a problem with this list it would be based on the content and how it specifically relates to Trump rather than "none of the authors are women and so your list is garbage"?

The saddest thing is that if this kind of "criticism" becomes commonplace people will actually think twice before making any kind of "best of" or "top ten" lists without first making sure that the list checks the correct boxes for diversity.

What's that? Your top 5 most influential books were all written by men? Better shoehorn a lady into that list before you go public.

Think about this though. If a woman writes a list of the best books and the list has no female authors... is the woman who wrote the list sexist?

I think we need a poorly written article telling us whether or not women can be sexist towards women.

They're believers in the idea of cultural appropriation. They don't know or care about literature.

Their goal is to have women everywhere regardless of their individual abilities or suitability. Just for the sake of having women. The corollary being that men must be stamped on or pushed out.

Venom · 27-01-2017 08:30PM

Widdershins wrote: »

If you criticise or just ask genuinely interested questions about the march on social media you'd better expect to be ganged up on and vilified. Try it and see..

Oh no, no, no. Blind obedience and conformity is the requirement for these lefty types. They can't be tolerating people being able to criticize and ask questions.

Good god, if you allowed people to ask questions, you would have to give answers, which would require logic and facts and being able to back up any wild accusations you have made.

No, better for the cause to shout them down as sexist and racist and what ever other "ist" fits the agenda.

Arne_Saknussem · 27-01-2017 08:33PM

orubiru wrote: »

I think we need a poorly written article telling us whether or not women can be sexist towards women.

Internalised Misogyny.

The one stop go-to answer whenever one of the 90%+ women who don't identify as feminists disagree with/deviate from feminist scripture.

Widdershins · 27-01-2017 08:37PM

Venom wrote: »

Oh no, no, no. Blind obedience and conformity is the requirement for these lefty types. They can't be tolerating people being able to criticize and ask questions.

Good god, if you allowed people to ask questions, you would have to give answers, which would require logic and facts and being able to back up any wild accusations you have made.

No, better for the cause to shout them down as sexist and racist and what ever other "ist" fits the agenda.

Yep. They've no shame about it either.

Venom · 27-01-2017 08:50PM

Widdershins wrote: »

Yep. They've no shame about it either.

I think that there so used to getting a free pass when straight white men have been the target, it doesn't even register with them the person their attacking might be a member of one of their so called protected groups like women, minorities or the LGBT community.

It's amazing to see the pure hatred they have for someone who refuses to stay put in their allocated place on the repression chart and goes off narrative.

Widdershins · 27-01-2017 08:53PM

Venom wrote: »

I think that there so used to getting a free pass when straight white men have been the target, it doesn't even register with them the person their attacking might be a member of one of their so called protected groups like women, minorities or the LGBT community.

It's amazing to see the pure hatred they have for someone who refuses to stay put in their allocated place on the repression chart and goes off narrative.

I know..I've got it in the neck lately. It's lucky they aren't my own circle 'cause I'd say they'd leave your mind in a mess if they were.

jameorahiely · 27-01-2017 08:56PM

Venom wrote: »

I think that there so used to getting a free pass when straight white men have been the target, it doesn't even register with them the person their attacking might be a member of one of their so called protected groups like women, minorities or the LGBT community.

It's amazing to see the pure hatred they have for someone who refuses to stay put in their allocated place on the repression chart and goes off narrative.

People that disagree literally caused the holocaust, if you're to believe todays right on fb post shared by lon

Widdershins · 27-01-2017 09:21PM

jameorahiely wrote: »

People that disagree literally caused the holocaust, if you're to believe todays right on fb post shared by lon

If she wanted to remember the Holocaust she'd stop misusing it as her personal political football and pretending things she disagrees with resemble anything to do with the Holocaust.

sid waddell · 27-01-2017 09:34PM

I'd say if Louise O'Neill ever logged in here, she'd get some laugh from the fact there are 181 pages of ranting about her by permanently offended men.

Not sure if many of them would get the irony, mind.

It's like a snowflakes' convention in here.

Widdershins · 27-01-2017 09:46PM

sid waddell wrote: »

I'd say if Louise O'Neill ever logged in here, she'd get some laugh from the fact there are 181 pages of ranting about her by permanently offended men.

Not sure if many of them would get the irony, mind.

It's like a snowflakes' convention in here.

If I remember correctly Louise O'Neill has written an article about this thread. That's the thing about writing for a newspaper. People tend to talk about what you wrote. Not you, per se. Although you might get the odd mention if you talk about yourself in the most nutty of ways.

I doubt she'd ''get a laugh'' though, she doesn't seem the type to see any humour in it.

The thread started about her claims about a rape culture, not because she's all that important or interesting, but because the concept of a rape culture is.
If you were observant you'd have realised she has little to do with the thread at this point. She's a public figure for the hypocrisy of so called feminists, nothing more.

As for snowflakes, I don't think you understand what it means. Nobody's offended over anything minor, just discussing controversial attitudes like the ones LON writes about. I see you're assuming our gender there, how misandrist of you. I'm female.

jameorahiely · 27-01-2017 09:49PM

sid waddell wrote: »

I'd say if Louise O'Neill ever logged in here, she'd get some laugh from the fact there are 181 pages of ranting about her by permanently offended men.

Not sure if many of them would get the irony, mind.

It's like a snowflakes' convention in here.

Did you just assume my gender?

Reverse snowflakism

sid waddell · 27-01-2017 10:10PM

Widdershins wrote: »

If I remember correctly Louise O'Neill has written an article about this thread. That's the thing about writing for a newspaper. People tend to talk about what you wrote. Not you, per se. Although you might get the odd mention if you talk about yourself in the most nutty of ways.

I doubt she'd ''get a laugh'' though, she doesn't seem the type to see any humour in it.

The thread started about her claims about a rape culture, not because she's all that important or interesting, but because the concept of a rape culture is.
If you were observant you'd have realised she has little to do with the thread at this point. She's a public figure for the hypocrisy of so called feminists, nothing more.

As for snowflakes, I don't think you understand what it means. Nobody's offended over anything minor, just discussing controversial attitudes like the ones LON writes about. I see you're assuming our gender there, how misandrist of you. I'm female.

I understand exactly what it means.

It's a nonsense cliche term used by people who are permanently offended at anybody else taking offence at anything.

Which is why I've used the term ironically here in a ridiculing, condescending sort of way.

Widdershins · 27-01-2017 10:21PM

sid waddell wrote: »

I understand exactly what it means.

It's a nonsense cliche term used by people who are permanently offended at anybody else taking offence at anything.

Which is why I've used the term ironically here in a ridiculing, condescending sort of way.

So you're condescending to people who offend you because you think they are offended (permanently!) at someone else being offended about people being offended.

What do you get out of it? Keep trying! I don't feel ridiculed yet, as I'm a fairly confident woman who is firm in her convictions, unlike LON and her ilk who really are permanently offended and actually write about it for a living!

red ears · 27-01-2017 10:28PM

sid waddell wrote: »

I'd say if Louise O'Neill ever logged in here, she'd get some laugh from the fact there are 181 pages of ranting about her by permanently offended men.

Not sure if many of them would get the irony, mind.

It's like a snowflakes' convention in here.

The thread only mentions her occasionally.

Louise O Neill on rape culture.

Comments