Wow

[lewisnotmiller]

Those women were not feminists, if by feminist you mean someone who stands for equality.

What were they ?

Would anyone like to venture a suitable adjective ?

Fundamentalists?

 

[apophenia]

Fundamentalists?

Fugg defino.

Certainly hypocrites. And lauded as progressive social activists. Heroines ! You get that. They made good material for 3CR, I know that much. Unimpeachable.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Fugg defino.

Certainly hypocrites. And lauded as progressive social activists. Heroines ! You get that. They made good material for 3CR, I know that much. Unimpeachable.

It all plays into my life theory, entitled '********* are *********'.
On the positive side, good people are good people.

Don't ever let all the other labels fool ya.

 

[Falvlun]

At that point I realised that for some women, feminism was a war, and regardless of my attitudes or behavior, I was the enemy.

Unfortunately, 'feminists' and the 'alternative socialist left' media gave those women unconditional support. Not one woman present objected to what had happened. The community radio journalists swept the arson under the carpet.

I did not (and do not) consider any of those women ( dozens were aware of what had happened) who saw this event and raised no objection to be decent or moral, nor their passivity anything less than tacit support for a violent attack on a male for 'political reasons'.

That is how it was in 1979.

How will that be viewed here on RF in 2013 ?

Those women were not feminists, if by feminist you mean someone who stands for equality.

What were they ?

Would anyone like to venture a suitable adjective ?

I think this likely has less to do with feminism and more to do with the feeding frenzy that comes over people when they are in a big crowd supporting some position.

It's no different than fans of Team B beating up fans from team Z because Team Z fans were in Team B's stadium. It's just a mob mentality, an us-vs-them instinct that takes over when you are over-whelmed by emotion and fed a heavy dollop of pride for your group above all else. You suddenly do feel like everybody not in your group is the enemy, even if on a normal sunny day you could have a picnic in a park with that person.

 

[crossfire]

Reminds me of a book I encountered on a library. Basically a woman was raped by a man. Then she decided to take vengence and rape him. Never actually read the book, but I think it was about how society views rape differently when it comes to what gender the victim and perpretator has. If its a man who rapes a woman he is a *******. When a man gets raped by a woman he wasnt actually raped because he is a man. Thats my guess anyway.

Hmm...
I actually think the gender of the victim has less to do with it.
(I don't mean in reality, I mean in how it is viewed)

The gender of the perp seems to drive general attitudes. I think it's understandable though.

Not necessarily. Local story.
Rape victim suing Lynnwood police | HeraldNet.com - Local news

 

[Alceste]

I was a manager of a sex shop in 1979. It was a part-time job I got off a university jobs board. I had a partner who was pregnant, so I wanted to get some extra income while I studied.

I was working there on the night of the first 'reclaim the night' feminist march through the streets of Melbourne. Lots of women carrying candles.

The shop only had one entrance/exit. The back door into a lane was bolted and chained shut. The entrance had a wooden structure to conceal the interior of the shop, a kind of vestibule. In the vestibule were very flammable items of lingerie.

One of the women from the march decided to set the shop alight with her candle.

I managed to put the fire out with a fire extinguisher. It could have got very ugly very quickly. It was worthy of a charge of attempted murder.

I went outside after extinguishing the fire. There was a community radio ( 3CR ) news crew, set up in the street. They seemed to be waiting for me.

They began to interview me about my attitudes to pornography, and whether I thought it was exploitation of women. I pointed out that a lot of it was gay magazines, and the hetero stuff was also bought by a lot of women, and couples. Which was true.

They were obviously hoping I was a knuckle dragging chauvinist. I answered their questions in an enlightened kind of way, despite their attempts to brand me as an oppressor of women.

Then I pointed out that a woman had just set fire to the shop, and I could have been burned alive.

At that point they ( males ) actually said to one another, "let's finish up" and terminated the interview. All of the women listening glared at me like I was the enemy. No-one protested at the act of irresponsible and possibly lethal arson.

That was illuminating (pardon the pun).

At that point I realised that for some women, feminism was a war, and regardless of my attitudes or behavior, I was the enemy.

Unfortunately, 'feminists' and the 'alternative socialist left' media gave those women unconditional support. Not one woman present objected to what had happened. The community radio journalists swept the arson under the carpet.

I did not (and do not) consider any of those women ( dozens were aware of what had happened) who saw this event and raised no objection to be decent or moral, nor their passivity anything less than tacit support for a violent attack on a male for 'political reasons'.

That is how it was in 1979.

How will that be viewed here on RF in 2013 ?

Those women were not feminists, if by feminist you mean someone who stands for equality.

What were they ?

Would anyone like to venture a suitable adjective ?

That's awful behavior. Stuff like that is one of the reasons I usually avoid protests and marches. Doesn't matter how worthy the cause, some jerk is always going to get over-exited and smash or burn something. The last march I went to was the global protest against the Iraq war. It was a lovely day and a really positive atmosphere. Someone had put a sign on their dog saying "throw balls, not bombs". People had their kids there. Sure enough, an hour or so into it, some retards decided to burn an American flag. The next day, the only images the papers and TV carried were of the guys who burned the flag, and the anti-war protests were instantly rebranded as anti-America protests.

Years later, in Montreal, street kids were protesting police brutality. I support their cause, but what did they decide to do but smash the front window of the coffee shop next to my friends's theatre and burn a car? Any sympathy or support they might have had from local businesses was instantly lost.

I didn't see anybody in either group taking a strong stand against the destructive and dangerous behavior of a minority.

The group mind is an ugly beast.

I'm so glad you were able to put out the fire and stay safe. That kind of behavior - the destruction of property and putting others in danger - is inexcusable.

 

[Alceste]

I think this likely has less to do with feminism and more to do with the feeding frenzy that comes over people when they are in a big crowd supporting some position.

It's no different than fans of Team B beating up fans from team Z because Team Z fans were in Team B's stadium. It's just a mob mentality, an us-vs-them instinct that takes over when you are over-whelmed by emotion and fed a heavy dollop of pride for your group above all else. You suddenly do feel like everybody not in your group is the enemy, even if on a normal sunny day you could have a picnic in a park with that person.

Totally. Hockey fans in Vancouver wrecked the whole damn city over a game. That totally sucks, but it's their behavior that stinks, not hockey.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Apophenia, let me again reiterate what happened to you was awful. None of that is excusable, and the woman who attempted to burn your building down should have been prosecuted.

I hate the stories of mob violence. The 1992 L.A. riots after the Rodney King trial helped fuel prejudice against blacks by perpetuating the image that they're naturally violent and anti-white, even against those whites who marched with them and defended them against institutional racism.

After the O.J. Simpson trial, people were appalled at the reaction of many from the black community who cheered the verdict. Some mused that it was an anti-white sentiment given that the murder victims were both white. It was very sad and unfortunate that the mob response was fueled by something else entirely.

Bringing these instances as examples are not to suggest that we should "pick sides" of being for us or against us (I heard Bush say that before, which is fundamentally untrue). And bringing them up is not to justify or excuse the violence or the atrocity committed. I bring them up to dispel the myth that the actions prove that the group is instigating a war against those who have helped them or at least have not hurt them in the past.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Not necessarily. Local story.
Rape victim suing Lynnwood police | HeraldNet.com - Local news

Heya...

Just to be clear on my views, I'm in no way suggesting rapes of females are always appropriately treated. Conviction rates, etc, are pretty clear pointers that this is not the case, as well as a mountain of anecdotal evidence.

It's more a case of...let's say you could KNOW for a fact that a rape occurred. Would society view the rape of a male by a female in the same manner as the rape of a female by a male. Does it engender the same horror in people? Is it thought of differently?

Speaking for myself, I was not trivialising female rape in any sense, nor suggesting it's appropriately handled in all (many?) cases.

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

And there is also this video:
[youtube]oLCyUpIbnQk[/youtube]
WWYD? - Unscripted Potential Danger Rape Scenario - YouTube

 

[Me Myself]

That looks like material for this thread: http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/general-debates/149631-drunken-consent.html

 

[Me Myself]

I mean, in that scenarioi at least they are not being deliberately drugged by the OTHER guy. They are as drunk as they themselves want to be.

My only moral problem is e dishonesty of the guys about knowing each other because if the other guy was a real dangerous person, they pretended he was trustable.

 

[roger1440]

I honestly have no idea.

I ve noticed its a trend in WWYD.

People go faster to rescue women in most scenarios.

I cant believe they are actually seeing the poor guy not only have something done to his drink but even display symptoms of sickness and they dont do a thing...

I mean, Wow. People can be cold ****

Here is something I wrote 11 years ago.
Fri Sep 13, 2002 8:13 pm

Patriarchy in the ladies room​

Men's and women's roles have been slowly changing over the last century, but it's still largely a patriarchal society. The male of our species is still obligated to protect, provide and guide the weaker of our species, the female. The female still seeks the comfort of the protection, provision and guidance from the male. Each and every day, I see examples of this. I am employed at a large retail chain. There is approximately 400 locations world wide. At the location I work at, the restrooms are being remodeled. The remodeling will take about one month. Work will start with the men's room. Outhouses has been set up for the men during this period of remodeling. After the remodeling of the men's room has been finished, work will begin on the ladies room. While the ladies room is being remodeled, the ladies will use the newly remodeled men's room. At no time during the remodeling process, will the ladies be required to use the outhouses. They will not be inconvenienced in the slightest bit. The example given illustrates how women are protected and provided for. If we substitute, men and women with blacks and whites or Jews and Christens it would probably be easier for most to see how this is unfair. I had mentioned to several people how this is unfair. More then once, I had been told, I do not like women. I fail to see how treating women as capable creatures can possible give the impression that I dislike women. Paradoxically, I had probably treated women better then they had treated themselves. I had treated them fairly.
Yahoo! Groups​

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

I agree the men should of helped the guy being drugged the men didn't, the woman did.

And oh wow look at this, other women help the drunk woman while the men are trying to get them drunk and team up together so they can get their leg over. Yeah I'm seeing who the problem lies with.

 

[Aquitaine]

I dunno, I guess some Men like to see other Men "fail" or something.

Although for the sake of getting a better mix of Male/Female spectators to compare the difference, they probably should have chosen a different location.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Here is something I wrote 11 years ago.
Fri Sep 13, 2002 8:13 pm

Patriarchy in the ladies room​

Men's and women's roles have been slowly changing over the last century, but it's still largely a patriarchal society. The male of our species is still obligated to protect, provide and guide the weaker of our species, the female. The female still seeks the comfort of the protection, provision and guidance from the male. Each and every day, I see examples of this. I am employed at a large retail chain. There is approximately 400 locations world wide. At the location I work at, the restrooms are being remodeled. The remodeling will take about one month. Work will start with the men's room. Outhouses has been set up for the men during this period of remodeling. After the remodeling of the men's room has been finished, work will begin on the ladies room. While the ladies room is being remodeled, the ladies will use the newly remodeled men's room. At no time during the remodeling process, will the ladies be required to use the outhouses. They will not be inconvenienced in the slightest bit. The example given illustrates how women are protected and provided for. If we substitute, men and women with blacks and whites or Jews and Christens it would probably be easier for most to see how this is unfair. I had mentioned to several people how this is unfair. More then once, I had been told, I do not like women. I fail to see how treating women as capable creatures can possible give the impression that I dislike women. Paradoxically, I had probably treated women better then they had treated themselves. I had treated them fairly.
Yahoo! Groups​

I combat partiarchy, too. However, when *I* bring up treating women and men fairly, I'm called a misandrist, man-hater, ball-crusher, etc. When you combat the patriarchal paradigm, you're called a woman-hater.

I commend you for standing up for equality. I can't say how many times that I fight patriarchy. Not males.

Now, the only thing I disagree with is that whole "protect, provide, and guide the weaker sex" thing in your treatise.