Louise O'Neill on manned mission to Mars: "Why not go to Venus?" (MOD Warning post 1)

givyjoe wrote: »

You have to be simply trolling at this stage, you say that you don't believe it's a tiny minority and instead say that YOU BELIEVE that it's somewhere between 20% and 60%. So how can you say you don't believe that it's a tiny minority, when you believe that it could be up to a majority (60% of men) doing it!!

This is mind boggling pedantry.

I'm merely re-posting the figures that you yourself offered up.

Wow you don't understand the concept of a range do you?

What would be the point in having intervals if you're automatically thought to be saying the maximum of that interval.

I guess ill try and explain again. 20-60 means 20-60. 60 means 60. 20-60 does not mean 60. 60 does.not.mean 20-60.

Are you getting it yet?

givyjoe wrote: »

I'm merely re-posting the figures that you yourself offered up.

Coincidentally, IMO, 20%-60% of women are fibbers. I'm not saying that in any way regarding any posters, I'm simply insinuating something so that I won't get in trouble yet still get to openly declare my biases. Clever, right. Thought of it all by myself, I did.

Sile Na Gig wrote: »

To be fair this is something that I worry about for my boys too. There’s got to be a happy medium though. Having them go to a mixed non-religious school with decent sex education, and keeping lines of communication open is a start. Now if we could just get everyone else to do the same for their kids...

But that would be negating parental choices? (what has religion got to do with anything?) The sex education has to be up to the parents as well-putting the pressure on the school is going to lead to problems. You'll have things like 'I was sick that day-missed that' rather than the parents speaking openly with the children.

There's very much a case of 'ah, the school didn't teach them that' and to that I would say 'your kids are not always going to be in school-its up to you to explain stuff to them-school doesn't teach everything'. Like, the amount of people I know who lack the basic life skills is absolutely astounding.
And that's the parents-it's not the school.

py2006 wrote: »

Oh no you didn't

No, of course not, obviously.

Boom_Bap wrote: »

What percentage of posts in this thread are a boring argument about percentages?

Might be 20% but I'm open to it being 50-60%

Grayson wrote: »

So when she said she was happy abroad she means not in Ireland because of the laws. So you managed to cut off the second half of her quote and take the quote out of context.

It was for the sake of brevity, just to answer your question directly. It's not out of context though at all to be honest, that poster has criticized all the men of Ireland pretty openly on here many times. Says she doesn't feel safe around them. Very very similar posting style to a poster called MidlandsMissus, who shared an identical attitude and wrote in the same vein. I'm sure that's a coincidence though.

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

Sile Na Gig wrote: »

To be fair this is something that I worry about for my boys too. There’s got to be a happy medium though. Having them go to a mixed non-religious school with decent sex education, and keeping lines of communication open is a start. Now if we could just get everyone else to do the same for their kids...

But that would be negating parental choices? (what has religion got to do with anything?) The sex education has to be up to the parents as well-putting the pressure on the school is going to lead to problems. You'll have things like 'I was sick that day-missed that' rather than the parents speaking openly with the children.

There's very much a case of 'ah, the school didn't teach them that' and to that I would say 'your kids are not always going to be in school-its up to you to explain stuff to them-school doesn't teach everything'. Like, the amount of people I know who lack the basic life skills is absolutely astounding.
And that's the parents-it's not the school.

I agree that parents have to be responsible and able to talk to their kids, but there’s value in having an open non judgmental space for discussion with your peers as well. It helps to cut through the bs misinformation and allows them to see and hear each other. There are too many adults- parents and teachers- shying away from having difficult conversations because they’re embarrassed. In the vacuum the kids learn from porn which isn’t going to help them form real loving relationships with real people.

My experience of religious sex education was to be taught abstinence, never being taught how to use contraception, as a girl the concept of expecting and achieving pleasure was completely not mentioned. So I’d rather not have that for my kids. For all I know, Christian schools might have done a 180 in the last 30 year’s but I’m not going to risk it.

Boom_Bap wrote: »

ah right, so 7 out of every 10.

Wow you don't understand the concept of a range do you?

What would be the point in having intervals if you're automatically thought to be saying the maximum of that interval.

I guess ill try and explain again. 20-60 means 20-60. 60 means 60. 20-60 does not mean 60. 60 does.not.mean 20-60.

Are you getting it yet?

py2006 wrote: »

I think one of the most repulsive and offensive things that that comes out of LONs colourful little mind is the phenomenon of 'Rape Culture' and its stranglehold on Ireland.

Its a vile and misandric attack on men

If anything, we have a drinking culture.

I think that her writing shows that both girls and boys are socialised to expect boys to look for sex and girls to withhold it, while using it as a tool for power. She paints a pretty grim picture but I don’t think that men are solely responsible. It’s just a vestigial pattern of behaviour that no longer serves us.

Omackeral wrote: »

That's exactly how I felt

I feel like this is Louise's Song, tbh.

py2006 wrote: »

Yes your typical of our patriarchal, misogynist, rape culture that hates all women. You probably wear blue and get paid more than women too!

#metoo

To be fair he deliberately named himself after people who were the defendants in a controversial rape trial and have apologized for the degrading language they used in regards to women.

If you wanted to find a poster that might be misogynist, that's the guy.

Grayson wrote: »

To be fair he deliberately named himself after people who were the defendants in a controversial rape trial and have apologized for the degrading language they used in regards to women.

I didn't even notice that! :eek:

Doesn't equate to misogynist though

py2006 wrote: »

Yep, all over the place!

What percentage do ya think?? :P:P

Between 98 and 99.