Louise O Neill on rape culture.

ivytwine · 31-01-2017 04:06PM

pumpkin4life wrote: »

So over the past while, I've been posting on why the LONs of this world are going feral and heading for a mental health Hiroshima level breakdown over the next year; how Trump has expedited the whole thing.

We've got this erroneous scenario whereby LONs and SJWs are binary thinkers: in the moral sphere, there is the all GOOD white verses the all EVIL black diluted thinking of SJWs. Nothing more, and being a hyperemotional cùnt, one must fight for the good at all times. This leads onto the following:

1: You're either in or you're out. If you slide any bit to the right, then that's it, you're out of the group. If you consider yourself a centrist, or a liberal in the classic sense, sorry lads, you're a right wing fascist. You will be made take a side.

I agree with this. It also serves to push people further away from causes such as true gender equality. They get fatigued and pissed off. People need to remember that being broadly on the same side- doesn't mean you have to agree with everything.

I have said a few times in this thread that I believe that there is a conversation to be had about consent, and how rape is dealt with as a criminal matter. This broadly puts me on the same side as third wave feminism- but some people in this movement no longer believe that's enough.

Something that was widely reported is that six year old girls believe that boys are smarter. While women definitely have it better than ever, there is something of a disconnect between reality and perception. This can be hard for women. I would argue though that this third wave school of victimhood absolutely does not help.

pumpkin4life wrote: »

2: Because these people are often highly narcissistic and have a real inability to admit they were wrong, they will do anything to confirm in their minds that they were right. In other words, I will look for every bit of confirmation bias that anyone to the right of me is a Nazi and anything that Trump does is as evil as that Adolf Hitler lad. Hence the madness in response to the immigration executive orders. This is important. These people are looking for as much evidence as possible that there is a Big Bad World out there where there are racists hiding out in the trees. In a perverse way, they want Trump to be the next Hitler.

I don't think Trump is Hitler and I don't think the regime is going to be as bad as Nazi Germany. Handwringing about that is irritating. I would say America is in for a nasty four years, but I think/hope it's not going to affect the world too much, but probably turn the States into a bit of a basket case. I read a piece somewhere that said Trump is establishing a sort of Latin American style corrupt regime, rather than Nazi Germany or Stalin's USSR. It also isn't the first time that America has gotten into these kind of scrapes; Prohibition (where the government actually flooded the black market with poisoned alcohol) and McCarthyism are two examples that spring to mind.

However it would be equally as foolish to presume that Trump is not dangerous. He is, and as we see with people like Dylann Roof and the kid in Quebec that the extreme right wing can lead to terrorism, and they're only going to be more emboldened by Trump.

The executive orders are a disgrace and should be condemned. They're bad laws at the very least.

We need to be very careful that we don't conflate irritants on the left totally with actual threats. I'm all for rational and logical debate, even if you get silenced, it shows them up.

pumpkin4life wrote: »

Nothing is going to appease these people; they don't think normally. So what do you do to get to them?

Attack their safe spaces. What is a LON safe space?

The media. Art and entertainment.

One of the common things that SJWs share is the entertainment they consume. I said earlier that Louise O Neill is probably a massive twilight fan.

Citation needed. Let's not turn her into a total monster :pac:

pumpkin4life wrote: »

Why? What is this entertainment made up of?

-Simple binary stories with an all good cast verses an all evil cast.

-A blank, empty protagonist where the reader can project their own personality onto. Ever wonder why these people are obsessed with Harry Potter? Twilight? Stranger Things? Orange is the New Black? Shadowhunters? Adventure Time?

-Despite this blank empty protagonist, that blank empty protagonist is a wonderful, highly successful person, just by existing and everybody worships him/her. Harry Potter, a hero because he deflected a spell when he was a baby? Not exactly the best example of The Hero's Story like.

-BTW The book Asking for It follows the above format to a tee, if you were unlucky enough to read it. It's SJW lite masquerading as deep literature. Quite the money market I must say.

So, what do we do?

Simple. You want to finish off SJWs and speed up the meltdown? You want Una Mulally and Louise O Neill to stop this nonsense? Attack their entertainment.

What on earth do you mean by this? How do you attack their entertainment? Boycott them? This makes you no better than the alleged feminists saying it's a betrayal to read a book by a man. Read and watch whatever the hell you enjoy.

Look these things- at least the ones that endure- are created by artists who did not create these things to be "issue based."

Take for example Stranger Things, created by two men, has no clear protagonist, unless you mean the pill-popping policeman or the poor single mother, or maybe the weird boy nobody in school likes, or the four male geeks? Eleven became a bit of a feminist hero, but she's not a protagonist. Adventure Time has tons of male fans. Also people who worship Hermione in Harry Potter clearly missed the bit where she sends a woman off to the woods to be raped by centaurs.

pumpkin4life wrote: »

Well there's a few problems. I'm worried that a lot of countries have been left with a violent, nutty extreme of these people.

And usually, I'd be sympathetic towards people with mental issues, hey life is tough, but these people would be happy out to fùck up my life just for expressing an opinion. I'm unfortunate enough to be in the company of a few right now.

So fire away.

I think there's an element of glorification in mental illness at present and that in an over-medicated and over-anxious society, feelings that are probably quite normal get conflated with mental illness.

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

Your last paragraph there really struck a chord, quite significantly.
Especially in light of this. Note how the author, losing the track of her own point, 'turns on Salma Hayek' in rather disturbing fashion.

Pure high school stuff.

mzungu · 31-01-2017 04:28PM

Wibbs wrote: »

"I didn’t want to have a debate on television as to whether or not rape culture exists – it does." that is the position of a zealot and should be flagged as one.

And here was me thinking that the documentary was meant to be all about "starting a discussion". :pac:

hatrickpatrick · 31-01-2017 06:06PM

pumpkin4life wrote: »

We've got this erroneous scenario whereby LONs and SJWs are binary thinkers: in the moral sphere, there is the all GOOD white verses the all EVIL black diluted thinking of SJWs.

All good white versus all evil black? As far as SJW thinking goes, you've got that backwards. :pac:

Venom · 31-01-2017 07:00PM

mzungu wrote: »

And here was me thinking that the documentary was meant to be all about "starting a discussion". :pac:

The last thing these people want is a discussion, as it would result in them having to deal with and try and counter facts, statistics and logic which is the last thing they want.

RabbleRouser2k · 31-01-2017 08:51PM

The more and more the 'facts' roll out about her documentary, a term I use loosely, the more and more I get absolutely sickened by it. It's just disturbing to see how there is no 'demand for discussion' when those who are calling for a discussion are blocking any and all attempts to do so.

And those 'lauding her' for bringing up this subject- they are people who have drank the Kool Aid so heavily, that I wonder are they even capable of rational thought.

If I wanna talk about an issue that affects me, be it mental health,or any other issues, I am open to discussion on the topic (bar the Scientology 'it don't exist' argument-they are the people who think Coffee causes AIDS, for crying out loud). But when every so often you find the 'I don't wanna talk about it' angle-then you're not 'starting a discussion', you're closing down every opportunity to do so.
That's not a discussion, that's an argument where one clearly does not wish to listen to the other.

darkdubh · 31-01-2017 09:58PM

I have a hunch LON might have read this a few times.

http://everydayfeminism.com/2015/01/reverse-oppression-cant-exist/

The_Valeyard · 31-01-2017 10:03PM

darkdubh wrote: »

I have a hunch LON might have read this a few times.

http://everydayfeminism.com/2015/01/reverse-oppression-cant-exist/

You know I can actually see ordinary average Joe Soaps reading that article and going, well if thats what the left are offering, im going to support Trump, faults and all.

RabbleRouser2k · 31-01-2017 10:10PM

It's a special kind of....something....that says the dictionary is lying to you.

The_Valeyard · 31-01-2017 10:13PM

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

It's a special kind of....something....that says the dictionary is lying to you.

I once found the meaning of life in a dictionary.

ivytwine · 31-01-2017 11:24PM

The_Valeyard wrote: »

You know I can actually see ordinary average Joe Soaps reading that article and going, well if thats what the left are offering, im going to support Trump, faults and all.

I think there were more than a few people who thought like this. It also has the counterproductive effect of driving more men towards MRA etc.

There was so much ****e talked about Hillary, especially in regards to women voters. She was only ever a mediocre candidate, nobody got excited about her, and legit concerns and criticism were lumped in with the nuttier aspects of the campaign against her.

Even now, I've seen Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders and Barack Obama criticising Trump. Where's Hillary? It can be argued both candidates cared more about power than the actual country.

mzungu · 01-02-2017 12:09AM

ivytwine wrote: »

I think there were more than a few people who thought like this. It also has the counterproductive effect of driving more men towards MRA etc.

There was so much ****e talked about Hillary, especially in regards to women voters. She was only ever a mediocre candidate, nobody got excited about her, and legit concerns and criticism were lumped in with the nuttier aspects of the campaign against her.

Even now, I've seen Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders and Barack Obama criticising Trump. Where's Hillary? It can be argued both candidates cared more about power than the actual country.

To be fair, if she did start weighing in on it Trump would have a field day accusing her of sour grapes and whatnot. I think she is best off sitting this one out. Plus, there are plenty of others around to do the heavy lifting on this one.

mzungu · 01-02-2017 12:23AM

darkdubh wrote: »

I have a hunch LON might have read this a few times.

http://everydayfeminism.com/2015/01/reverse-oppression-cant-exist/

I suppose when one has to reference an *Everyday Feminism article as "proof" that sexism towards men doesn't exist, and to justify their own sexism, then things have gone far beyond the bottom of the barrel stage.

*This is the same Everyday Feminism that runs ten week courses to cure you of your "toxic whiteness". Link: https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/toxic-whiteness-everyday-feminism-sandra-kim-interview

Widdershins · 01-02-2017 12:27AM

This is a new one on me

http://everydayfeminism.com/2013/10/lets-talk-about-thin-privilege/

lazybones32 · 01-02-2017 12:36AM

Having read this thread and some of the current stuff doing the rounds on Boards, I honestly think the World would be better off without the Internet. But it's only going to get worse.

mzungu · 01-02-2017 12:46AM

Widdershins wrote: »

This is a new one on me

http://everydayfeminism.com/2013/10/lets-talk-about-thin-privilege/

Maybe a world record for the amount of times the word "privilege" has been used in an article.

NI24 · 01-02-2017 06:08AM

osarusan wrote: »

And again, can I ask you where you got the bit about bodily autonomy being used as a defence for drinking in the article.

Seeing as how hatrickpatrick decided to contribute further to this discussion, I'm wondering if he would like to actually defend his ridiculous opinion on this article and actually answer the question posed to him. Or would he rather ignore it like he does every time he's caught posting bull****?

Better yet, can he explain what the article he posted had to do with rape culture?

deaddonkey15 · 01-02-2017 09:45AM

Widdershins wrote: »

This is a new one on me

http://everydayfeminism.com/2013/10/lets-talk-about-thin-privilege/

Oh f*ck me.

sydthebeat · 01-02-2017 09:53AM

deaddonkey15 wrote: »

Oh f*ck me.

Snowflakes with a platform

The end is nigh.

ivytwine · 01-02-2017 09:55AM

mzungu wrote: »

To be fair, if she did start weighing in on it Trump would have a field day accusing her of sour grapes and whatnot. I think she is best off sitting this one out. Plus, there are plenty of others around to do the heavy lifting on this one.

Yeah you're definitely right there. The way she was presented as the new messiah was irritating.

Widdershins · 01-02-2017 10:01AM

Is it just me or are all of the facets (factions?) of the oppression movement starting to look, from a safe distance, like a movement to remove personal agency and personal responsibility from people?

It looks like it to me, but I'm not sure where it could be heading.

ivytwine · 01-02-2017 10:02AM

lazybones32 wrote: »

Having read this thread and some of the current stuff doing the rounds on Boards, I honestly think the World would be better off without the Internet. But it's only going to get worse.

Beginning to come around to this way of thinking myself. Specifically without Twitter.

As for Everyday Feminism, this kind of garbage was where they lose me and probably a lot of people. Life can be a **** show for everyone, regardless of weight. I'm not going to allow myself to become morbidly obese to make people feel better.

I only skimmed through that piece but saying an eating disorder doesn't negate "thin privilege"?! Is this for real? Anorexia has the highest death rate of any mental illness.

It's been around for years, and the problem is that the use of this academic and semantic language is exactly how we've gotten ourselves landed with "alternative facts" etc. If you spend 30 years telling college students there's no objective reality, don't complain when they create their own.

Wibbs · 01-02-2017 10:24AM

Widdershins wrote: »

Is it just me or are all of the facets (factions?) of the oppression movement starting to look, from a safe distance, like a movement to remove personal agency and personal responsibility from people?

Common enough in victimhood politics to blame "the Man" and to want a utopia of rights without responsibilities, not just within modern feminism, but in modern feminism it reaches the very pinnacle of farce. As I've said before the mantra of modern feminism can be summed up as; "Women are always victims with no agency who need protection and it's always men's fault*" Pass any current feminist argument like found in LON's oeuvre through that sentence and it comes out a positive damn near 100% of the time. Even when male grievances and experiences are acknowledged, or certain women are seen as beyond the Pale, the "Patriarchy" gets the blame, so it is still men's fault. Never mind that this concept of women is incredibly old fashioned and chauvinistic, but then irony is something professional feminists seem laughably ignorant about.

*Though ironically again said protection is usually sought from men.

Wibbs · 01-02-2017 10:34AM

Widdershins wrote: »

This is a new one on me

http://everydayfeminism.com/2013/10/lets-talk-about-thin-privilege/

That crowd are a bunch of atomic powered loons who've escaped from some US campus liberal arts course. Online courses to help "healing from toxic whiteness". Articles like "The Impossible Demands of Dating Under the Pressures of Rape Culture". Dating? Jayzus, can you begin to imagine going out with one of these mental defectives? "Here Are 4 Ways to Navigate Whiteness and Feminism – Without Being a White Feminist" :rolleyes: They're the very caricature of "right on liberals". If stormfront nazis were "US college liberals" that would be one of their sites.

lazybones32 · 01-02-2017 11:01AM

Widdershins wrote: »

Is it just me or are all of the facets (factions?) of the oppression movement starting to look, from a safe distance, like a movement to remove personal agency and personal responsibility from people?

It looks like it to me, but I'm not sure where it could be heading.

It's been that way for a long time but the removal of personal responsibility applies only to some and in certain circumstances: if a woman does something 'bad' she's not to blame, she only acted/spoke that way because of previous conditioning (someone else did something to her to make her act/speak that way). If a man says or does something bad, it's because he's bad. If a bad action by a woman can be interpreted positively, it is seen as a step towards liberation and empowerment - but only if committed by the female and once it wasn't against another female, unless the other female sides with men, then it's okay.

RabbleRouser2k · 01-02-2017 03:02PM

Wibbs wrote: »

That crowd are a bunch of atomic powered loons who've escaped from some US campus liberal arts course. Online courses to help "healing from toxic whiteness". Articles like "The Impossible Demands of Dating Under the Pressures of Rape Culture". Dating? Jayzus, can you begin to imagine going out with one of these mental defectives? "Here Are 4 Ways to Navigate Whiteness and Feminism – Without Being a White Feminist" :rolleyes: They're the very caricature of "right on liberals". If stormfront nazis were "US college liberals" that would be one of their sites.

And the weird thing is you get these one's saying something like 'It's so hard for women to date-because most of them date men, and men can kill you'. And No, that's not even a joke-it was an actual argument put forward by Louis CK as a comedian. (Yeah, he's trying to be funny-keep in mind there are a large number of accusations coming forward about his 'impropriety' towards women and women comedians. And he doesn't even deny it-which is worse. Ask me the same question I'd be like 'dear sweet Jesus, no, no way did I do any of that horrible stuff'. But Louis, a guy who seemed to champion himself as a male feminist-nope).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRzs7v0do_Q

Because his whole argument is that 'men are the greatest threat to women'- yet when you do even a ten minute search, of the leading cause of death in women-heart disease, stroke, and cancer are the top three-and in the top 10 comes 'unintentional injuries'-men don't even get into the top 10 'causes of deaths of women'.

https://www.cdc.gov/women/lcod/2011/index.htm

And I've heard the 'men are the leading cause of death of women'-from a crazy girl in her 20's.

Widdershins · 01-02-2017 03:19PM

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

And I've heard the 'men are the leading cause of death of women'-from a crazy girl in her 20's.

That's the fabulous Feminist grasp of nuance. Nevermind the circumstances, if there was a man involved (somewhere along the line) it's his fault.

midlandsmissus · 01-02-2017 03:20PM

So what do you think about the male dominated government that we have, and the outroar at suggesting a quota. Does that suggest an equal country to you?

Trump's ban of immigrants has stirred a lot of people to see that power and control over people is not ok , and yet I see alot of men sitting comfortably in their position in this country, while power has been taken off someone else.

The person who is very confident in themselves, does not need to keep another down in order to feel important.

Widdershins · 01-02-2017 03:22PM

midlandsmissus wrote: »

The person who is very confident in themselves, does not need to keep another down in order to feel important.

Is that why men have to be kept - or brought- down? because certain people are lacking confidence?

orubiru · 01-02-2017 03:26PM

midlandsmissus wrote: »

So what do you think about the male dominated government that we have, and the outroar at suggesting a quota. Does that suggest an equal country to you?

Trump's ban of immigrants has stirred a lot of people to see that power and control over people is not ok , and yet I see alot of men sitting comfortably in their position in this country, while power has been taken off someone else.

The person who is very confident in themselves, does not need to keep another down in order to feel important.

Honestly, do you think the world would be any different if women dominated the government?
(or if the government were split equally)

What are your thoughts on Margaret Thatcher, for example?

mzungu · 01-02-2017 03:36PM

midlandsmissus wrote: »

So what do you think about the male dominated government that we have, and the outroar at suggesting a quota. Does that suggest an equal country to you?

Equality of opportunity? For the most part, yes.

However, there are ways to improve by making a return to work after maternity leave easier etc.

midlandsmissus wrote: »

Trump's ban of immigrants has stirred a lot of people to see that power and control over people is not ok , and yet I see alot of men sitting comfortably in their position in this country, while power has been taken off someone else.

The person who is very confident in themselves, does not need to keep another down in order to feel important.

So, do you want Enda, Leo and Simon to declare war on the US? All have spoken out against the immigration ban.

May I ask, what do you think Theresa May should do, as she would be the one in the real position of influence and power. On the world stage, we Irish are small fry. But, as the leader of the UK, surely Theresa May should be spearheading these changes you wish to see?

Louise O Neill on rape culture.

Comments