"men must accept that most violent crimes perpetrated against women are by men, and that they have the power to stop this."
Pawwed Rig wrote: » If is it is in the Irish Times and the article is claiming to speak for you then I would say Yes, you should at least have an opinion on it. Just to remind people what was actually written in the articleMen, don’t rapeInstructing women to be careful gets men off the hook. The potential perpetrators of attacks are seldom asked to be as conscientious, apart from occasional innovations such as the Don’t Be That Guy campaign. So, women, be careful? How about men, don’t rape? Men, don’t murder your exes or partners. Men, don’t beat up your wives or girlfriends. Men, don’t assault someone you’ve just met that night. Men, don’t shout at women across the road just because you can. Men, stop hanging your threat of rape over dark streets.
donfers wrote: » The good news, is that in a way, the pandering of the spineless media agents to feminist propoganda basically lets the likes of Mullaly to rant away to her heart's content without fear of censorship, and as these kind of radical views are being heard more and more because the media are too spineless to stand up to it, then more and more people are distancing themselves from feminism as they see it for the men-hating hypocritical self-interested pity-party it is - we should really be happy that the likes of Una are exposing Western priviliged feminism for the joke it really is. "Can you believe it - some guy oppressed me with his gaze for more than 1.5 seconds today" - yeah, carry on bleating about that while women are getting stoned to death or can't meet in public in Saudi Arabia pathetic charlatans
Pawwed Rig wrote: » If is it is in th Irish Times and the article is claiming to speak for you then I would say Yes, you should at least have an opinion on it.
Pawwed Rig wrote: » Just to remind people what was actually written in the articleMen, don’t rapeInstructing women to be careful gets men off the hook. The potential perpetrators of attacks are seldom asked to be as conscientious, apart from occasional innovations such as the Don’t Be That Guy campaign. So, women, be careful? How about men, don’t rape? Men, don’t murder your exes or partners. Men, don’t beat up your wives or girlfriends. Men, don’t assault someone you’ve just met that night. Men, don’t shout at women across the road just because you can. Men, stop hanging your threat of rape over dark streets.
kunst nugget wrote: » There's a lot of extreme nonsense spouted by guys that I don't agree with but don't bother to comment on precisely because I think it's nonsense. Does my silence mean then that I endorse and agree with it?
Pawwed Rig wrote: » Some have supported her (such as women's aid) and she is writing on the topic for the paper of record in Ireland. She is getting alot of attention anyway and if someone is claiming to speak for me I would be clear on whether they echo my sentiments.
After almost 50 years on this earth I have never heard it said. I seem locked into the idea that all Feminists live by the mantra "all men are rapists", fortunately that is far removed from reality.
Bah Feckin Humbug! wrote: » The best I could to that is that it is utter hyperbole! After almost 50 years on this earth I have never heard it said. I seem locked into the idea that all Feminists live by the mantra "all men are rapists", fortunately that is far removed from reality. As a father of two daughters I don't want them discriminated against because of their gender, I believe there should be no ceiling above which they cannot rise.
kunst nugget wrote: » Or could it be that the silence means that none of them are bothered paying any attention to her?
Ben Shekelberg wrote: » Men are being told day in day out they're primitive rapists who are the root of all society's problems.
old hippy wrote: » Feminism is about equality, pure and simple.
Pawwed Rig wrote: » Has any women's org spoken out against Miss Mulally's articles or can we take the silence to mean that this is actually the voice of feminism?
Bah Feckin Humbug! wrote: » You are assuming that Feminism is anti men, feminism was founded on principles of pro women's rights and pro female equality, not on principles of diminishing male rights rather diminishing male dominance and hegemony.
Ben Shekelberg wrote: » Exactly its anti-male rhetoric. If it was a movement directed against any other group other than men it would be called hateful.
iptba wrote: » I waited for that to happen for 20 years. Feminists continuously found more stuff to complain about.
newport2 wrote: » I think the optimal solution would be egalitarianism replacing feminism to work for both men and women reaching equal rights
iptba wrote: » I accept your point to an extent. However, I think at this stage we need Men's Rights Activists/similar to bring balance to debates. If one has a court case and only one side are represented, either the plaintiff or defendant, the side that is represented will more often win the argument in the eyes of the jury/public/judge(s) than if the other side is represented and another viewpoint is given including challenging the first side. One needs people specifically giving alternative perspectives to bring balance. This situation has arisen as clearly feminism isn't a balanced movement in terms of what it does or strives for. As cantdecide says:
newport2 wrote: » Exactly. Anyone who genuinely supports equality (as opposed to selective equality) should call themselves an egalitarian.
Equality is about equality. Feminism is fundamentally about selective equality for some. You can't say you're interested in equality for you and those you identify with and everyone else has to paddle their own canoe.
cantdecide wrote: » A bit off topic so apologies. Equality is about equality. Feminism is fundamentally about selective equality for some. You can't say you're interested in equality for you and those you identify with and everyone else has to paddle their own canoe. In my opinion, it's an outmoded idea and the world won't move until we call feminism on it's inherent exclusivity. As long as society tolerates and encourages a lopsided movement, we will continue to move away from equality. I'm talking about the media, of course. Radical "equality" should inherently be about equality and not hatred. It would be the same as a radical peace movement blowing up army barracks.
old hippy wrote: » The racist, misogynist bs.
Ben Shekelberg wrote: » Tired of what?
old hippy wrote: » Yep, reduce an entire social movement to the writings of one individual :rolleyes:Feminism is about equality, pure and simple. Something that women still strive for in some countries, corporations and other situations. You'll always have a few people going off the page - doesn't mean you should dismiss social change because of them.
old hippy wrote: » Oh, right. It's you again. Do you not get tired of this?
Ben Shekelberg wrote: » It's all a bunch of man-hating bs. Blah blah blah lets blames men for all our problems. Lets castrate all men so we won't be oppressed anymore. Like the blacks in America blaming whitey for everything.
