Feminist mob attempt to shut down talk on equality for males - MOD NOTE POST 10

Pawwed Rig · 24-12-2012 10:20AM

GalwayGuy2 wrote: »

Once he said C I stopped listening.

I think that is a good way to describe a group of people on live TV laughing about a person who has been mutilated in a way that will affect him for the rest of his life (presuming he didn't actually die).
Sharon Osbourne described it as "Fabulous". Bear in mind that she was a victim of domestic violence in the past you would imagine she would have a bit more empathy. So Yes, c*** is a strong word but perfectly justified in this case.

py2006 · 03-01-2013 01:59PM

Here is the actual segment from the female panel on "The Talk":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91O3wDSy_HE

At the end of the clip, Darlene from Roseanne does try to highlight the obvious here but it is dismissed. Sharon Osbourne should be sacked for her comments.

After she laced her husband's food with an unknown drug or poison, he lay down, believing something was wrong with the food, according to police reports. Her husband then woke up tied to the bed as Becker cut off his penis with a knife. She then threw the genitalia in the garbage disposal and turned the disposal on

Source

um7y1h83ge06nx · 03-01-2013 02:03PM

py2006 wrote: »

At the end of the clip, Darlene from Roseanne does try to highlight the obvious here but it is dismissed. Sharon Osbourne should be sacked for her comments.

Fair play to her, it is so blindingly obvious. Imagine the justified uproar if they was a programme that had a good laugh about that horrific gang rape in India?

py2006 · 03-01-2013 02:08PM

Javier Elegant Leprechaun wrote: »

Fair play to her, it is so blindingly obvious. Imagine the justified uproar if they was a programme that had a good laugh about that horrific gang rape in India?

The following week, they offered their attempt at an apology:

(Skip to 5.10)

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

Male genital mutilation is funny apparently.

Pawwed Rig · 03-01-2013 02:11PM

py2006 wrote: »

Here is the actual segment from the female panel on "The View":

I can't see the video on my work laptop but is it The Talk you meant? The View is a different daytime programme

py2006 · 03-01-2013 02:12PM

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

I can't see the video on my work laptop but is it The Talk you meant? The View is a different daytime programme

Yes, sorry I meant The Talk

py2006 · 03-01-2013 02:17PM

Picture this situation:

A day time talk show for men hosted by men discussing how a man, on hearing his wife wants to leave him, drugs her then ties her up. Then when she wakes up he is mutilating her vagina with a knife, cutting it off (if that's possible) and destroying it so it can not be surgically replaced. Then the panel of 6 men start laughing and joking and suggesting she deserved it.

What would be the outcome?

um7y1h83ge06nx · 03-01-2013 02:22PM

From watching that video you have to wonder why is something like that broadcast?

1. Is it the media's fault for allowed female crazies airtime? I mean there is no way male crazies would be allowed on air joking about rape. And if they did the uproar would probably result in them being sacked.

2. Or is the media just bending under the power of society and providing what society wants?

3. Or is there a difference in women's psyche where a greater percentage of them see violence towards the opposite sex acceptable than men? Therefore that view point gets greater leverage in the media.

I really don't know the answers to the above.

um7y1h83ge06nx · 03-01-2013 02:27PM

py2006 wrote: »

Picture this situation:

A day time talk show for men hosted by men discussing how a man, on hearing his wife wants to leave him, drugs her then ties her up. Then when she wakes up he is mutilating her vagina with a knife, cutting it off (if that's possible) and destroying it so it can not be surgically replaced. Then the panel of 6 men start laughing and joking and suggesting she deserved it.

What would be the outcome?

I wonder have these women heard about how female genital mutilation is still practiced by some cultures, particularly in Africa?

I would love to ask them what they think of teenage girls being forced into allowing their clitoris being sliced off.

Genital mutilation is absolutely barbaric, some toolboxes they are to laugh about it. :mad:

Pawwed Rig · 03-01-2013 02:39PM

Javier Elegant Leprechaun wrote: »

From watching that video you have to wonder why is something like that broadcast?

I might be wrong but I believe it was broadcast live. CBS have officially distanced themselves from it but the anchor (the asian girl) is the network owners wife and Sharon Osbourne is the only (real) celebrity* on it and being fairly popular is most likely deemed unsackable.

*still not sure why she is famous.

skyfall2012 · 03-01-2013 02:44PM

This woman did a vile and terrible thing to her husband and should be taken seriously and not used as comedy material. My stomach turned while watching them laughing at this. It is beyond inappropriate topic for a comedy show. The producer should be sacked, Sharon Osborne is an idiot, she didn't know any better.

donfers · 03-01-2013 08:20PM

This kind of stuff goes on all the time, females in the media have carte blanche to say what they like about men - did you see their excuse when genital mutilation of a woman was cited as a comparable example "ah but that's different" - equal when it suits, unequal when it suits

these type of "feminists" are not about equality, they are about hate and ridicule of men and they are openly tolerated - it's disgusting that so few have the courage to call them up on it

iptba · 03-01-2013 08:31PM

donfers wrote: »

This kind of stuff goes on all the time, females in the media have carte blanche to say what they like about men - did you see their excuse when genital mutilation of a woman was cited as a comparable example "ah but that's different" - equal when it suits, unequal when it suits

Yes.
Also, combine this with the fact that many men will often tell other men to stop complaining/mock them for doing so, quicker than they would women on average I think, and it's not surprising that men's issues don't get highlighted.

donfers wrote: »

these type of "feminists" are not about equality, they are about hate and ridicule of men and they are openly tolerated - it's disgusting that so few have the courage to call them up on it

Yes, agree.

It is frustrating to me when at a time when there are people paid to look out for sexism and misogyny that they can't simply use the same standards to out out for sexism against men and misandry.

py2006 · 03-01-2013 08:47PM

donfers wrote: »

did you see their excuse when genital mutilation of a woman was cited as a comparable example "ah but that's different" - equal when it suits, unequal when it suits

In fairness the comparison was that of a womans breast and not her genetalia. Which is very different.

donfers · 03-01-2013 11:35PM

py2006 wrote: »

In fairness the comparison was that of a womans breast and not her genetalia. Which is very different.

true, but that makes it even worse - basically they were comparing the genital mutilation of a man saying it was lolworthy while the cutting off of a breast of a woman (not the genitalia) would be totally frowned upon if anyone tried to eek any comedy out of it

when they claimed "oh but that's different" they were suggesting to make fun of a female victim would be completely unacceptable (100% agree) even though the compared crime wasn't the mutilation of the woman's genitalia

I'm not sure why there is a mindset out there among certain people who claim to be far-out right-on liberals that making fun of this kind of stuff is ok if the action is perpetrated by a woman against a man - I fail to understand it and can't see any logic or integrity in that kind of worldview yet it often goes unquestioned

The Corinthian · 04-01-2013 12:40PM

donfers wrote: »

I fail to understand it and can't see any logic or integrity in that kind of worldview yet it often goes unquestioned

You presume that people question their own beliefs. Very, very few ever do. The vast majority go with the flow, with what is popularly right or wrong, seldom asking why it is right or wrong beyond the most simplistic of terms and so when faced with scenarios like the Catherine Kieu Becker case they can't make the connection.

In other cases, to make the connection, might contradict another existing belief, so they react in a way that they can either rationalize or ignore the fallacy in this belief - that a woman could be a perpetrator rather than victim is so completely alien to some that they rationalize some form of victim-hood to justify it ("she was driven to it") or simply go into a strange form of catatonic denial.

With the Catherine Kieu Becker case and the above talk show, I suspect a combination of the two was at play.

Wibbs · 04-01-2013 04:19PM

The Corinthian wrote: »

You presume that people question their own beliefs. Very, very few ever do. The vast majority go with the flow, with what is popularly right or wrong, seldom asking why it is right or wrong beyond the most simplistic of terms

This is sooooo true in my experience TC. I can count on the fingers of one hand involved in a previous lawnmower accident the number of people I've known who have questioned and then revised their beliefs without external pressure.

GalwayGuy2 · 04-01-2013 06:39PM

You presume that people question their own beliefs. Very, very few ever do. The vast majority go with the flow, with what is popularly right or wrong, seldom asking why it is right or wrong beyond the most simplistic...

It reminds of the whole a racist doesn't think they're a racist thing. They'd, besides the few who see it a mark of pride, would probably get insulted at being called a racist and go inside themselves, blame you or blame the society as a whole.

iptba · 13-01-2013 04:27AM

January 6 Warren Farrell article in USA Today, "Column: Guns don't kill people — our sons do"
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2013/01/06/guns-newtown-sandy-hook-adam-lanza-boys/1566084/
- don't think it is particularly radical or offensive to women.

iptba · 27-01-2013 03:44PM

iptba wrote: »

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/justice/criminal_law/criminal_offences/law_on_sex_offences_in_ireland.html

Here's a case where there was a prosecution of a 15 year old boy/young male for having sex with a 14 year old girl/young female: http://www.independent.ie/national-news/courts/romeo-and-juliet-sex-law-is-unfair-court-told-1978656.html

Supreme court agreed with law: http://www.thejournal.ie/poll-should-laws-on-underage-sex-be-the-same-for-boys-and-girls-364706-Feb2012/

Kevin Myers: Equality is just a toxic piety that is ruthlessly promoted, just like the catechism once was
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/kevin-myers/kevin-myers-equality-is-just-a-toxic-piety-that-is-ruthlessly-promoted-just-like-the-catechism-once-was-3364249.html

It includes talk of the different rules based on gender in the statutory rape laws.

iptba · 31-01-2013 04:49AM

Another piece about censorship connected to the original post about the Toronto protest:

http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/feminist-lies-feminism/the-crucifixion-of-erika-jarvis/

TORONTO STANDARD MAKES ITS OWN NEWS, THEN BURIES IT IN AN ATTEMPT TO COVER UP THE TRUTH.

Erica Jarvis is hanging on a cross.

On January 3, 2013, the Toronto Standard ran an article she penned, an interview with me [Paul Elam] which represented a first of sorts for the mainstream media. In a departure from the now standard mainstream narrative, and set against the backdrop of the University of Toronto student protest against Warren Farrell’s talk on the Boy Crisis, Jarvis actually put in a good effort toward balanced and ethical journalism.

Zombrex · 31-01-2013 04:46PM

A quick Google of Warren Farrell shows a lot to not like.

But the protestors shouting "F**k Warren Farrell" followed by "No hate speech on campus" is up there with "Behead those who say Islam is violent" in terms of cognitive dissidence.

Put this in the Social Justice Sally pile.

I'm also still waiting for the you-shouldn't-say-that-word brigade to realize that f**k is a sexual aggressive abuse term. It seems to be their fav word, on the AtheismPlus forum someone was told to "got f**k yourself" because they used the word "economy", which is apparently deeply offensive to poor people. :rolleyes:

The Corinthian · 31-01-2013 05:34PM

Zombrex wrote: »

A quick Google of Warren Farrell shows a lot to not like.

Genuine question, but what?

Zombrex · 31-01-2013 06:04PM

The Corinthian wrote: »

Genuine question, but what?

Well The Myth of Male Power for a start seems, again after a brief Google, rather objectionable thesis. I haven't read the book, so I don't know maybe the title is meant to have some deeper meaning, but if the idea is that male power is a myth then that is ridiculous. Society is utterly dominated by the male perspective.

The Corinthian · 31-01-2013 06:09PM

Zombrex wrote: »

Well The Myth of Male Power for a start seems, again after a brief Google, rather objectionable thesis.

Ahh, I see now - a lot not to like because you disagree with his views. I thought you meant something more objective, like links with neo-Nazi groups, financial irregularities, or some-such.

I haven't read the book, so I don't know maybe the title is meant to have some deeper meaning, but if the idea is that male power is a myth then that is ridiculous. Society is utterly dominated by the male perspective.

Then read it, that's not what he means.

iptba · 31-01-2013 06:10PM

Zombrex wrote: »

Well The Myth of Male Power for a start seems, again after a brief Google, rather objectionable thesis. I haven't read the book, so I don't know maybe the title is meant to have some deeper meaning, but if the idea is that male power is a myth then that is ridiculous. Society is utterly dominated by the male perspective.

A summary of the book is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Myth_of_Male_Power

Zombrex · 31-01-2013 07:21PM

The Corinthian wrote: »

Ahh, I see now - a lot not to like because you disagree with his views. I thought you meant something more objective, like links with neo-Nazi groups, financial irregularities, or some-such.

Well those would be subjective as well, wouldn't they? You have to not like neo-Nazi's to not like people with links to neo-Nazis.

The Corinthian wrote: »

Then read it, that's not what he means.

Fair enough. Odd title though.

Zombrex · 31-01-2013 07:22PM

iptba wrote: »

A summary of the book is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Myth_of_Male_Power

Yup, that's what I read. Is that an accurate account of the book?

Reku · 01-02-2013 09:09AM

Zombrex wrote: »

Well The Myth of Male Power for a start seems, again after a brief Google, rather objectionable thesis. I haven't read the book, so I don't know maybe the title is meant to have some deeper meaning, but if the idea is that male power is a myth then that is ridiculous. Society is utterly dominated by the male perspective.

lol, just lol....:rolleyes:

Just a quick look at the media over the last month tells you that women are far more valued and protected than men:
“We have a major concern about the high rates of smoking among Irish women, particularly because lung cancer has now overtaken breast cancer as the main cause of cancer death among women in Ireland,”
And yet later in the article:

Lung cancer is now the biggest cancer killer in Ireland among both men and women, with 1,708 people dying in 2010, 702 of whom were women.

In other words the ratio of female to male deaths by lung cancer is: 702:1006, just over 2:3, yet they're making a fuss over the less affected group.

Then this week it's come out that men are 33% more likely to die of cancer in the UK (which we can be pretty sure is also the case here), where's the big fundraising action and government grants towards research into men's cancers? We have Movember but that's it, every other week there's some fundraiser for breast/cervical cancer (yes I am aware that men can also get breast cancer but it is still a mostly female condition). Do I hear any mention of free screening for testicular/prostate cancer like women get?

In Ireland, there are two free screening programmes, run by the National Cancer Screening service:

Breast Cancer (BreastCheck)
Cervical Cancer (CervicalCheck)

And a free bowel cancer (colorectal) cancer screening programme is due to start in January 2012.

There's wonderful new quota's to help women get ahead in boardrooms and politics, yet nothing similar to help men get ahead in teaching or other similarly female dominated sectors. Nor is there any push by feminists to get women into the more dangerous fields, but then I guess that again comes back to men just being less valued.

When a woman feels slighted, regardless of how imagined the slight she has numerous feminist lobby groups to turn to, when a mens' group tries to speak up about something they get shouted down (as you can see in this thread) by feminist groups who supposedly support equality. Jebus but Orwell would have a field day with what the average feminist group considers "equality".
They've even seized control of the whole rape and domestic violence issue to the point that many people can't even take the idea of female on male rape/violence seriously, never mind offering the victims any real hope of justice, instead a woman cutting off a man's genitals and throwing them into the garbage disposal is just something to be laughed at.

The Corinthian · 01-02-2013 09:27AM

Zombrex wrote: »

Yup, that's what I read. Is that an accurate account of the book?

Somewhat. The basic argument is that Patriarchy was not so simplistic as men having every advantage and women having none and that increasingly, due to the partial breakdown of patriarchy, men are losing the old advantages of patriarchy, but not the disadvantages.

Is this an objectionable position for you?

Feminist mob attempt to shut down talk on equality for males - MOD NOTE POST 10

Comments