Is feminism a dirty word?

One eyed Jack wrote: »

People, regardless of their gender, have a natural aversion to utter shìte talk, and that's exactly what the above is (in fact, utter shìte talk has formed the basis of much of the content of your posts in this thread), so when you say above that "people will listen to women before they'll listen to men". you do realise that men are people too, right?

Of course they do but the issue is do people listen to women more than they listen to men.

From my experience people listen to women more.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Seriously, for your own sake, stop with all your MHRM nonsense, because you're just continuing to add to the stereotype of the bitter little man that hates women, whatever your man's name is, is a classic example, and that's why people (regardless of their gender) tune out and couldn't be arsed listening to you.

I am not now or have ever been a misogynist, but I get that some people think............feminism = women.

Just to shock you to your core but it is not the same thing.

Feminism is a Marxist ideology

Your opinion is bogus of Elam

Have you ever spoken to him?

Why not go onto AVfM and ask him directly his opinions on rape and women?

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It's not because people don't care, it's because you're continuing to come out with incoherent waffle instead of making any substantive point, and your posts are proving more difficult to understand as they go on. I've tried to understand them, I really have, but now I'm just giving up, as you show no signs of caring whether anyone understands you or not.

Feminism is an evil Marxist ideology.

That clear enough?

One eyed Jack wrote: »

S.L.F I'm really trying here to engage with you, but instead of addressing any of my points, you climbed up on your soap box again, and reiterated the same waffle. Fair enough, I'm not going to bother addressing your points either (they've already been comprehensively addressed numerous times by other posters in this thread, and you haven't listened to a word!), but the above statement interests me. What's your problem with the new laws regarding sex work?

Would it not apply equally to both men and women? That's what you want isn't it?

Have you read the legislation and the preamble of it.

I have and it is anti-male.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

So you accuse me of being disingenuous, you have no figures, you make presumptions, you're claiming laws that apply to both genders equally is discrimination...


And you call what I posted BS?

The reason I posted that I was interested in why SLF had a problem with the new laws regarding sex work is because I genuinely AM interested in why SLF has a problem with them when they apply to both genders equally.

Read the law itself and see why I have an issue with it.

Read from 2.2

Final - A 22

"It not only restored my self - confidence but restored my faith in womankind in general ... I've found that sex workers are incredible people, kind, generous, honest and, most importantly, non - judgemental."

12

Another wrote that he was a mature man who was happily married with children, but that – for reasons he did not explain – he had had sexual intercourse with his wife only twice in the last five years. He visited escorts and said that they are:

"... bright, friendly, enthusiastic people going about their work. I believe in the main they are treated very respectfully by men in general and certainly by me in particular."

13 The mother of the man with a physical disability wrote:

"On a few occasions per year we employ the services of a lady who is very pleasant an d very well paid to spend the night with my son, in order to let my dear son feel the companionship and warmth of a beautiful woman which he cannot have in his real life ... The lady is perfectly happy to do this and is very well paid, I look upon her as a friend ... I have spoken at length to them and they are quite happy to do so and love their job."

14

Links234 wrote: »

You do understand that many women in the sex trade are victims of human trafficking being forced into the prostitution against their will? Not criminalizing these women is a practical measure so that they won't fear their own incarceration if they go to the authorities, identify gang members involved, etc. Seriously, have a read of this: A woman trafficked into the sex trade in Ireland tells her story

You mean some women are.

You do know what will happen if this legislation comes into effect?

It will drive the sex industry underground and the informal conversations between sex workers and the Gardai will stop.

The only people who will welcome this set of laws is the traffickers.

This will put sex workers at risk because they will not be able to approach them.

Yurt! wrote: »

Still cant post links but there's an article from The Guardian stating that 98% of NI sex workers oppose Nordic style sex laws. It also makes the very salient point that feminists in the South are now unlikely bedfellows with the Catholic moral right.

There's also a brilliant blog I came across a few months ago by a highly articulate Irish escort who tears strips off the official feminist narrative of TOTRL campaign and really cuts them apart for daring to try to speak on behalf of sex workers, infantalizing and patronizing them and generally accusing them of putting them even more in harms way. I'll try to dig it out because it really is well worth a read.

Was the blogger Laura Lee?

Northern Ireland is being smart about the prostitution legislateion.

They are looking at it properly so properly that Women's Aid has pulled out of it

One eyed Jack wrote: »

thread is about gender equality, or inequality if you prefer, so I'm just wondering how are the new laws that apply equally to both genders, and example of discrimination against one gender?

Do both genders engage in sex work?
Yes they do.

Do both genders purchase sex?
Yes, they do.

Will both genders be criminalised for the purchase of sex work?
Yes, they will.

Should men who purchase sex be treated any differently from women who purchase sex?
No, they shouldn't.

I ask you again, is this not gender equality in practice? Is this not what you want?

What exactly do you want?

SLF hasn't been back to the thread to clarify what he meant by mentioning the new laws with regard to gender discrimination, so I appreciate your helping me understand this one.

I've been busy, sorry to keep you waiting.

The new prostitution legislation is based on the Nordic model which basically makes all men guilty.

It came from Sweden where they are currently suffering from having the highest number of rapes per capita in Europe.....just thought I'd throw that in there.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Wait, you mean to tell me SLF was talking nonsense? Well colour me surprised. So there are no new laws regarding sex work being introduced at all then? I'm even more confused now!

I'm sure you spend a lot of time that way

http://www.oireachtas.ie/parliament/media/committees/justice/1.Part-1-final.pdf

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Well the same could be said for any law surely? The idea of course is that they apply to everyone, but will naturally have a disproportionate effect on one sector. Whether that's an overall benefit or not to all sectors of society is what's debatable. I've tried to follow your argument, and you seem to be suggesting that the laws SLF seems to be referring to that don't seem to have happened, would have criminalised more men than women for buying sex?

This article makes my point for me.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

What 'feminist movement' is this? Because as far as I'm aware, there is no agreement between feminists on the issue of women in the sex industry - some feminists argue that women in the sex industry are being exploited, some feminists argue that women working in the sex industry are being empowered.

It is the feminists who are leading the feminist movement

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I haven't heard any comment from MRAs, MHRMs, etc regarding men in the sex industry and whether they are being exploited or empowered. Perhaps you or SLF if they come back to the discussion would care to offer your opinion from that perspective?

As far as I am concerned whatever someone decides to do with their body is up to themselves.

It is important that we clarify the difference between someone who's been trafficked and a prostitute.

One has no choice and the other does.

This new set of laws will make working as a sex worker far more dangerous for all sex workers.

S.L.F wrote: »

...
It is important that we clarify the difference between someone who's been trafficked and a prostitute.

One has no choice and the other does.

So every woman selling herself for sex who has not been trafficked is exercising a choice? That's nonsense.

P. Breathnach wrote: »

That is a most dishonest distortion.

Unless you consider that junkies desperate for their fix, or women pimped by abusive partners, or people who have got themselves into problems with potentially-violent moneylenders, or homeless teens trying to get enough money for a night in a hostel, or many others who live messy desperate lives are making free choices.

Did you or did you not say she was selling herself?

If she was then she was exercising a free choice to do so like most sex workers do.

So every woman selling herself for sex who has not been trafficked is exercising a choice? That's nonsense.

They were your words not mine.

S.L.F wrote: »

Of course they do but the issue is do people listen to women more than they listen to men.

From my experience people listen to women more.

Would you be willing to acknowledge at all that the reason for your experience is because you have some fairly off the wall views regarding what you consider to be gender equality?

I am not now or have ever been a misogynist, but I get that some people think............feminism = women.

Just to shock you to your core but it is not the same thing.

Feminism is a Marxist ideology

Your opinion is bogus of Elam

Have you ever spoken to him?

Why not go onto AVfM and ask him directly his opinions on rape and women?



Feminism is an evil Marxist ideology.

That clear enough?

You're going to have to do a lot better than that to shock me (like maybe trying to engage with the discussion rather than vomiting all over the thread), but you've consistently said that feminism is an 'evil' ideology. Feminism is nothing more than an abstract set of ideals that can be twisted and corrupted in the same way as masculism is an abstract set of ideals that has been twisted and corrupted by the likes of men like Elam.

Have you read the legislation and the preamble of it.

I have and it is anti-male.



Read the law itself and see why I have an issue with it.

Read from

I'm familiar with the legislation, I still can't see how it is anti-male? Perhaps instead of making vague, grandstanding statements and multiquoting, you could keep your posts more brief, and expand on the points you're trying to make"

I've been busy, sorry to keep you waiting.

The new prostitution legislation is based on the Nordic model which basically makes all men guilty.

It came from Sweden where they are currently suffering from having the highest number of rapes per capita in Europe.....just thought I'd throw that in there.

Ah that's OK, I understand you have a life outside Boards, and I appreciate your efforts here despite the fact I seem to wholeheartedly disagree with your opinions.

Now, how can anyone be guilty of anything if they have never committed a crime? If they break the law, of course they're guilty, regardless of their gender. Just because more men commit a crime does not mean the law discriminates against men. It simply means that more men commit that specific crime!

It came from Sweden, a country which is recognised as having one of the most gender equal societies in the world... just thought I'd throw that in there too!

I'm sure you spend a lot of time that way

I spend a lot of time confused when reading your posts because you continue to grandstand and be as vague as fcuk rather than actually explain anything, with the idea being that I might actually understand what you're trying to say!

This makes my point

I'd rather you make your own points tbh so I'm not left feeling completely confused by your ineffective communication skills, or indeed lack thereof.

It is the feminists who are leading the feminist movement

See what I mean? Vague as fcuk! What does that even mean, when I said that feminists can't agree among themselves, and when they can't agree among themselves, there is no bloody movement, of any sort, so there is no movement to lead!

As far as I am concerned whatever someone decides to do with their body is up to themselves.

So you're OK with men in the sex industry being paid less than their female counterparts? You're OK with male adult entertainers having to supplement their income with having to do escort work outside of their main source of employment?

I'd call that men being exploited myself, funny how you seem less concerned with that though. "Equal pay for an equal days work" only seems to apply to certain cases, and MHRA orgs aren't up in arms about this discrepancy? Why is that?

It is important that we clarify the difference between someone who's been trafficked and a prostitute.

One has no choice and the other does.

This new set of laws will make working as a sex worker far more dangerous for all sex workers.

They won't at all, they'll make it far more dangerous for people who seek the services of sex workers, because they'll be afraid of getting caught. I don't think you'll gain much sympathy in society for them tbh.


I had to remove your links in order to reply. As a new user to this website I couldn't post including the links.

S.L.F wrote: »

Feminists don't want to hear what female sex workers have to say.

It interfers with their 'women are oppressed' illusion.

Just like you don't want to listen to what anyone else has to say, as it interferes with your 'men are oppressed' illusion.

Until you have something substantive to say and are willing to engage in the discussion rather than just throwing out vague statements and links to information that I have to go sifting through, I think I'm done trying to engage with you tbh.

This has to be one of the most depressing threads I've ever seen on AH. Just reading through the posts makes me sad.

Tea Earl Grey Hot wrote: »

Do you disagree that there is widespread discrimination against men in the western world?

Again, that's a very vague statement when you offer no context. Everyone, regardless of their gender, is discriminated against in one way or another. I'll help someone who I know who is being discriminated against if they ask for my help and I can see they are clearly being discriminated against, but otherwise, I'm not going to be too bothered by people regardless of their gender whingeing about nothing.

Tea Earl Grey Hot wrote: »

Do you think the fact that men get much more severe punishments by the courts for the same crime is "nothing"?

Let's take that back a step further - do you think it's OK for anyone to be breaking the law in the first place, regardless of their gender?

If people didn't break the law, they wouldn't have to worry about harsher sentences!

BrokenHero wrote: »

Ah, you gotta love Sweden. If ever there was a feminist canary in the mine, then there it surely resides.

Sweden is regarded as having one of the most gender equal societies in the world? Is that not what MHRMs and egalitarians want? Surely that is exactly what they are campaigning for, no? What exactly do you want, if you dismiss a gender equal society as a feminist canary?

I'm very confused now.

Feminists there even tried to make it illegal for men to urinate standing up, starting with boys in primary school.

Ah look, they got nowhere though, did they? A small band of fringe lunatics with lunatic ideas and you're trying to hold that up as a representative example of god knows how many of the population of Sweden identify as feminist?

Come on now, isn't it about time you stop with the silly ideas that nobody actually takes seriously anyway? If you want people to take you seriously, then take yourself seriously and stop throwing shìt in the hope that something might stick.

BrokenHero wrote: »

I asked you why you bother labeling yourself as a feminist when -- in your own words -- there is not a single feminist mindset. I did not try and "decide" what movements you should or should not support. You're clearing just sidestepping the question. Be nice if you could address it....

I'm not going to be drawn on this one because we could get too close to a discussion of me rather than a discussion of feminism in general.