Sexism you have personally experienced or have heard of? *READ POST 1*

FortySeven

PLEASE BRING THEM HOME!

Front page headline I saw on some newspaper today.

A father who took his kids to Pakistan to get away from the mother.

This happens to fathers every day. Doesn't even get traction in court, never mind a front page spread.

Calhoun

Not that i agree with what hes done but with the way things are for fathers in the courts is it any wonder stuff like this happens.

FortySeven

Calhoun wrote: »

Not that i agree with what hes done but with the way things are for fathers in the courts is it any wonder stuff like this happens.

I don't condone it in any way having been on the end of it. Wouldn't wish it on a leper that had stabbed me, licked the wound and then gone down on my wife with it.

It's more the coverage. The statistics for child abduction are heavily weighted in the female direction.

When a woman does it you need to go through a UN protocol to facilitate return with a piss poor success rate and yearly updates.

When a man does it they break out the Butch Cassidys. Roadblocks, Interpol, national crime squads and swat like rescues.

Or headlines. Always the poor woman headlines.

Sexism? Pah!

/rant off

DeadHand

Sweden went from being among the safest societies in history in which to be a woman to one with a rate of sexual violence comparable to South Africa's.

What happened?

A mass influx from the third world of products of a violently misogynistic religion and cultures.

Gang rape, previously unknown in Sweden is now a major problem. Native Swedish women in some areas have taken to dying their trademark blonde hair dark to avoid unwanted attention. A woman confined to a wheelchair was recently raped in Gotland by a gang of migrants. Her attackers were set free.

Feminist silence on these issues.

Yet, Swedish feminists WILL crusade against the evil of sexist snow clearing and mansplaining.

Sweden is a sick nation subjecting itself to a slow suicide.

Western Feminism is disinterested in the suffering of women unless it is at the hands of what they regard as the root of all evil: white men.

This despite the fact the civilisations in which it is safest and most fulfilling to be a woman (Western Europe, the Anglophone world) were built in the main by white men and women.

Pepe LeFrits

Source?

kunst nugget

maybe

Pepe LeFrits wrote: »

Source?

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/swedens-rape-crisis-isnt-what-it-seems/article30019623/

DeadHand

kunst nugget wrote: »

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/swedens-rape-crisis-isnt-what-it-seems/article30019623/

What we have here is a "liberal" commentator scrambling to blame rape on anyone and anything but the rapists.

This is rape apologism. We saw similar attempts on the boards over the Rotherham rape gangs (white girls were targeted because they are morally looser!) and over the Cologne mass, organised sex attack (they were drunk! This always happens anyway!).

The migrants studied in the report cited were part of an earlier wave of immigration- it is the later waves causing most concern in Sweden now. In any case, a 1,000%+ increase in rape since before mass immigration in Sweden cannot be explained by vagaries of the law alone.

A hazy law didn't knock a 13-year-old girl off her bicycle, knife her in the face and rape her in a park in Mariestad or gang rape a handicapped woman in Gotland or countless other daily horror stories from this year alone I could spend the entire day digging up for you to unthinkingly dismiss.

It's preposterous to argue the undeniable escalation in sexual violence just happened to occur coincidentally at the same time as an influx of products of violently misogynistic cultures.

The facts are muddied by the reality that the ancestry and ethnicity of criminals can't be specified in Sweden- a measure that is part of a broader media and government cover up of immigrant violence against native Europeans. We'd never have heard of the Cologne attack had the social media reporting not reached critical mass- there have been a great many more Cologne style incidents at public events all over Europe that most of us will never hear of.

Have a conversation with a Swede who has to live in the brave new Sweden or keep an eye on the Swedish local news reports and a truer picture emerges.

Cling to the downplay and spin if it comforts you. Sneer at the likes of me if it makes you feel superior. Keep cheering for more "refugees" and more Islamification in your own country as the Swedes and Germans did initially- (that's quietened down now, wonder why...).

kunst nugget

maybe

DeadHand wrote: »

What we have here is a "liberal" commentator scrambling to blame rape on anyone and anything but the rapists.

This is rape apologism. We saw similar attempts on the boards over the Rotherham rape gangs (white girls were targeted because they are morally looser!) and over the Cologne mass, organised sex attack (they were drunk! This always happens anyway!).

I'm not being a rape apologist. I'm trying to go behind the hysteria and try and figure out why Sweden appears to have such staggeringly high levels of rape. How it's reported and recorded have much more of an impact on it than immigrants do. Are there immigrants that rape? I'm most definitely sure there is but I'm not going to blame every rape in Sweden on immigrants.

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-19592372

You mention South Africa as having comparable rates of rape in your other post but in the above article it says South Africa doesn't submit any statistics in relation to rape.

Pepe LeFrits

Seems what we have here is a considered look at rape statistics (an extremely complex subject with a lot grey), versus a guy bringing anecdotal evidence and conspiracy theories to a statistics fight.

Sweden has had an extremely high level of rapes reported going back years; the highest in the world according to some studies.

ancapailldorcha

maybe

Pepe LeFrits wrote: »

Seems what we have here is a considered look at rape statistics (an extremely complex subject with a lot grey), versus a guy bringing anecdotal evidence and conspiracy theories to a statistics fight.

Sweden has had an extremely high level of rapes reported going back years; the highest in the world according to some studies.

I don't want to google it at work but Sweden's authorities are much more diligent and have a much more studious system when it comes to recording assaults against women and they classify such things differently.

Pepe LeFrits

Yeah, I know. I just thought it relevant considering the claim that Sweden went from being one of 'the safest societies in history' to having a huge rate of reported rape. It's very difficult to accurately assess either claim.

daithi7

daithi7 wrote: »

Picture this.....tell me, where do all the daddies and kids park!?

Given that that is a stock image (note the glaring iStock watermark), did you specifically search for that? Meaning you went out of your way to try and find something to be offended by ...

Regarding Sweden -

Could it not be just that Sweden and Swedish people are a lot more open to actually reporting rape or sexual assaults, which is why you see higher figures, as opposed to there just being more of it?

runawaybishop

No

Deleted User wrote: »

Could it not be just that Sweden and Swedish people are a lot more open to actually reporting rape or sexual assaults, which is why you see higher figures, as opposed to there just being more of it?

The linked article mentions that Sweden classifies rape a bit differently. What here may be a single count of sexual assault can be multiple counts of rape in Sweden.

ligerdub

Deleted User wrote: »

Given that that is a stock image (note the glaring iStock watermark), did you specifically search for that? Meaning you went out of your way to try and find something to be offended by ...

Regarding Sweden -

Could it not be just that Sweden and Swedish people are a lot more open to actually reporting rape or sexual assaults, which is why you see higher figures, as opposed to there just being more of it?

Very fair point.

However, I'd be interested in seeing how that pattern has changed in Sweden in the last few years. I say that with no knowledge or opinion as to what that is likely to reveal.

kunst nugget

maybe

ligerdub wrote: »

Very fair point.

However, I'd be interested in seeing how that pattern has changed in Sweden in the last few years. I say that with no knowledge or opinion as to what that is likely to reveal.

As far as I can figure the definition of rape in Sweden since 2005 has been broadened significantly and now covers way more than it would in almost any other country. What would be considered sexual harassment in other jurisdictions would be rape in Sweden. Throw in big awareness campaigns and you're going to get a major increase in the statistics. People seem to be pointing to the correlation of immigrants entering the country at the same time and pointing to them as the cause of the increase which doesn't appear to be the case.

Robsweezie

Justin Bieber gets his pants pulled down by a female fan and it's hilarious.

Don't need to elaborate on the reaction to a lad making a grab for Beyonces knickers.

Might seem silly, but I was in to see a doctor today and on the wall of the reception they had multiple posters - one or two of them were about domestic violence. One had a cartoon of a man shouting at his wife and child. With a caption of, "are you scared at home?"

It made me think - I've never really seen many campaigns or anything about women being the abusers. Rarely, if ever, actually.

Has anyone seen any?

ligerdub

There are famous examples of celebrities who are violent towards their husbands and go by without any real sense of downside.

Liza Minelli is still the darling of the world of camp, and that Mel "Boddingtons ad from the 90s" tv presenter went into the jungle a few months after her abuse was exposed, she went in without a fuss.

jcon1913

Woman kills 2 in crash in Cork admits guilt and gets a suspended sentence. She was an unaccompanied learner driver. I wonder what sentence a man would get in the same situation?

silverharp

jcon1913 wrote: »

Woman kills 2 in crash in Cork admits guilt and gets a suspended sentence. She was an unaccompanied learner driver. I wonder what sentence a man would get in the same situation?

easy enough to find a counter example for sure



http://www.thejournal.ie/gareth-jones-sentencing-3039195-Oct2016/

Unaccompanied learner driver sentenced to nine months for hitting and killing teenager while speeding

Gareth Jones hit 16-year-old Paul McCormack while driving a Toyota Avensis unaccompanied in Finglas, Dublin, in June 2015.

deaddonkey15

http://www.msn.com/en-ie/news/national/woman-found-guilty-after-false-nightclub-rape-claim/ar-AAkM4Xt?li=BBr5KbJ&ocid=mailsignout

A good argument against the "guilty until proven innocent" mindset of Louise O'Neill and her ilk. Also, a good example of asking how much a woman had to drink isn't exactly victim blaming. In this case, I would think that alcohol played a role when this girl decided it would be a good idea to walk into a Garda station at 4am after a night out to make a false rape claim and try and ruin someone else's life.

PucaMama

deaddonkey15 wrote: »

http://www.msn.com/en-ie/news/national/woman-found-guilty-after-false-nightclub-rape-claim/ar-AAkM4Xt?li=BBr5KbJ&ocid=mailsignout

A good argument against the "guilty until proven innocent" mindset of Louise O'Neill and her ilk. Also, a good example of asking how much a woman had to drink isn't exactly victim blaming. In this case, I would think that alcohol played a role when this girl decided it would be a good idea to walk into a Garda station at 4am after a night out to make a false rape claim and try and ruin someone else's life.

Asking how much a woman had to drink is suggesting that if a woman gets drunk (just like many men do on a night out) then being raped is partly her fault for being drunk. Not ok and no a woman is never to blame for being raped, despite some things I've seen said on here before.

In the case of a false accusation it shouldn't be a "I didn't realise what I was saying" get out of jail card either.

deaddonkey15

PucaMama wrote: »

Asking how much a woman had to drink is suggesting that if a woman gets drunk (just like many men do on a night out) then being raped is partly her fault for being drunk. Not ok and no a woman is never to blame for being raped, despite some things I've seen said on here before.

In the case of a false accusation it shouldn't be a "I didn't realise what I was saying" get out of jail card either.

Drinking impairs judgement. Obviously, no matter how much a woman has to drink it's not her fault if she get's raped. It is her fault though if she decides to falsely claim she was raped, which is something she probably wouldn't be as quick to do if she was sober and could think straight. If someone made a false rape claim against me I'd want it on record that they had drink taken at the time and didn't just walk into a Garda station stone cold sober.

PucaMama

deaddonkey15 wrote: »

Drinking impairs judgement. Obviously, no matter how much a woman has to drink it's not her fault if she get's raped. It is her fault though if she decides to falsely claim she was raped, which is something she probably wouldn't be as quick to do if she was sober and could think straight. If someone made a false rape claim against me I'd want it on record that they had drink taken at the time and didn't just walk into a Garda station stone cold sober.

If it doesn't matter how much she had to drink before being raped then why would it be relevant.

ligerdub

PucaMama wrote: »

If it doesn't matter how much she had to drink before being raped then why would it be relevant.

Are you just ignoring what he is saying?

FortySeven

PucaMama wrote: »

If it doesn't matter how much she had to drink before being raped then why would it be relevant.

This question of consent between two drunken people is where the real crux of responsibility is unfairly weighted on the male party.

We are both drunk, she can be determined to be too drunk to consent to sex while the male who is also drunk is criminalised for not being able to judge whether consent is implied.

Expecting men to take on the responsibility of making a judgement whilst also impaired and incapable under threat of criminal proceedings that can ruin his life while at the same time absolving the female of ANY responsibility due to her impairment is grossly unfair and open to abuse when the female wakes up and realises he is not what he seemed the night before.

I have woken to some right horror stories in my time. Regrets have been enormous. It would be all too easy for me to save face and cry rape had I been a woman.

It is a very dangerous grey area for men. How much drink was consumed is of course important in making any judgement.

Pawwed Rig

PucaMama wrote: »

Not ok and no a woman is never to blame for being raped, despite some things I've seen said on here before.

I have never read anything on this forum that said a rape victim was to blame for being raped. Can you point to any instances of this?

PucaMama

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

I have never read anything on this forum that said a rape victim was to blame for being raped. Can you point to any instances of this?

You have never once heard it suggested that women should drink less in case a man happens to rape them? You havnt heard it compared to locking the windows and doors of your house so you won't be robbed?

Pawwed Rig

Advocating that someone take personal responsibility for themselves seems like common sense to me. There is a huge gulf between that and saying a rape victim is responsible to what happens to them. To use your analogy, if I leave my front door open in my house then it is no way my fault when I am robbed.
Shouting victim blaming is usually a good way to stifle debate and propogate myths. Again show me one instance where anyone on this forum ever said that a rape victim was responsible for being raped.

PucaMama

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Advocating that someone take personal responsibility for themselves seems like common sense to me. There is a huge gulf between that and saying a rape victim is responsible to what happens to them. To use your analogy, if I leave my front door open in my house then it is no way my fault when I am robbed.
Shouting victim blaming is usually a good way to stifle debate and propogate myths. Again show me one instance where anyone on this forum ever said that a rape victim was responsible for being raped.

I'm not going to be rude and say I won't but I honestly havnt the time I'm working and on boards on the phone.

Yes that was my point when it was mentioned about the locked door an unlocked door isn't an invitation to thieve so a drunk woman isn't an invitation to rape and it shouldn't be relevant.

But I can't concentrate right now on the discussion so I could be talking in circles here, sorry

deaddonkey15

PucaMama wrote: »

I'm not going to be rude and say I won't but I honestly havnt the time I'm working and on boards on the phone.

Yes that was my point when it was mentioned about the locked door an unlocked door isn't an invitation to thieve so a drunk woman isn't an invitation to rape and it shouldn't be relevant.

But I can't concentrate right now on the discussion so I could be talking in circles here, sorry

You're completely missing the point.

midnight city

PucaMama wrote: »

If it doesn't matter how much she had to drink before being raped then why would it be relevant.

It makes a difference if her memory is impaired due to drinking too much. All factors need to be considered.

Pucamama you seem to be of the view that no questions or context is needed. If she says she was raped then she was raped seems to be your view.

PucaMama

midnight city wrote: »

It makes a difference if her memory is impaired due to drinking too much. All factors need to be considered.

Pucamama you seem to be of the view that no questions or context is needed. If she says she was raped then she was raped seems to be your view.

What makes you think women can make an accusation of rape without providing proof of some kind? I don't object to proof. Like I couldn't just walk in and say someone hit me and have no bruises. However the amount a woman has drank, or what she was wearing etc has no relevance to her being raped. She was drunk is just an reason to doubt her.

If you were to believe boards women must be queuing outside guards stations to accuse all the men of rape.

Outlaw Pete

Deleted User wrote: »

It made me think - I've never really seen many campaigns or anything about women being the abusers. Rarely, if ever, actually.

Has anyone seen any?

Yes, there's a new one recently and while it's commendable that they are tackling it, I have to say the acting in it is brutal, to the point that I actually think it will draw laughs from a cinema audience when it is shown there and it will be shown there as the other one that goes along with it (where a woman is abused) began to be shown in the cinema earlier this week.

I genuinely hate to be critiquing it, as God knows I have suggested they need to tackle the subject of DV and how it affects both genders often enough, and here they are doing just that and I'm picking holes in it, but the acting is just so bad that it's hard not to. The acting in the women's is Oscar worthy in comparison and as a result you take it more seriously because of that, obviously. Hard to have empathy for someone hamming it up.

Ah maybe I'm wrong, certainly hope so, as it's important for people to see that guys being subjected to violence at the hands of their partners is as serious an issue as when women are.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Min3O_D_wM4

The J Stands for Jay

PucaMama wrote: »

What makes you think women can make an accusation of rape without providing proof of some kind? I don't object to proof. Like I couldn't just walk in and say someone hit me and have no bruises. However the amount a woman has drank, or what she was wearing etc has no relevance to her being raped. She was drunk is just an reason to doubt her.

If you were to believe boards women must be queuing outside guards stations to accuse all the men of rape.

Someone posted a link to a case where a man was falsely accused if rape. If a man is accused of something he didn't do, is he not allowed to defend himself? Proving the unreliability of testimony is likely to be part of proving the allegations are false. Should we be choosing certain crimes to reverse the assumption of innocence?

As for advice not to be drinking, it's good advice for not becoming a victim of many crimes and accidents. Think of all the people who wouldn't have been mugged if they had a little less to drink.

Connacht2KXX

http://www.irishexaminer.com/viewpoints/columnists/suzanne-harrington/fathers-ad-campaign-is-completely-ill-conceived-432575.html

So getting this back on track, I completely disagree with this article due to its overt sexism.

I'm personally undecided about the ethical aspects of abortion (of course incidences like fatal foetal abnormality, rape, suicide etc should permit the termination of a pregnancy) but there needs to be change and clarification to the abortion laws in this country.

There are so many fallacies, inaccuracies and sheer stupidity in this piece of thrash.

I'll keep this somewhat brief:

1. She tows the party line of the repeal the 8th campaign by saying that when a woman is pregnant, she isn't the mother, the man isn't the father and the foetus isn't a child as they are all potentially the mother, father and child, respectively. This is completely wrong as when a man and a woman get pregnant and decide they want to keep the child, the terms change. This isn't how reality works. One's subjective opinion of the name of a substance shouldn't alter its rights.

2. She bítches about Amnesty International saying that the abortion laws in Ireland constitute an abuse of human rights yet fails to mention that Amnesty is one of the most politicised humanitarian organisations in the world. Therefore, their opinion doesn't mean much.

3. She then plays the victim card about single mothers. I agree that there are some awful scumbag fathers out there who abandon their kids, beat their wives etc but she makes it out like every single mother is in that position due to no fault of their own. She doesn't seem to take into account how fúcked up the divorce laws are and women get free rule of the court. They can easily make up lies about the fathers so as to get custody of the children and bar the father from getting any access. They can do this plus claim child support and alimony. Without a doubt, this makes up more than the "tiny handful of vindictives" that she claims.

4. My main gripe with this article is the following extract - "if a woman doesn’t want to start a family with you, it might not be just that she isn’t ready. It might be that she doesn’t want to start a family with YOU."
I cannot get my head around the fact that she can't value a man wanting to have a child. Why does the mother get sole decision over killing the child? In my perfect world, if the mother gets to decide to terminate the child without the consent of the father if she isn't ready to have the child, then the father doesn't have to pay child support if he isn't ready to have the child.

Calhoun

Connacht2KXX wrote: »

[
4. My main gripe with this article is the following extract - "if a woman doesn’t want to start a family with you, it might not be just that she isn’t ready. It might be that she doesn’t want to start a family with YOU."
I cannot get my head around the fact that she can't value a man wanting to have a child. Why does the mother get sole decision over killing the child? In my perfect world, if the mother gets to decide to terminate the child without the consent of the father if she isn't ready to have the child, then the father doesn't have to pay child support if he isn't ready to have the child.

This is the crux of the argument for me, If a woman wants full say over carrying her child that's fine with me but it should go both ways and the father have the option to be exempt from the childs life.

deaddonkey15

Connacht2KXX wrote: »

http://www.irishexaminer.com/viewpoints/columnists/suzanne-harrington/fathers-ad-campaign-is-completely-ill-conceived-432575.html

So getting this back on track, I completely disagree with this article due to its overt sexism.

I'm personally undecided about the ethical aspects of abortion (of course incidences like fatal foetal abnormality, rape, suicide etc should permit the termination of a pregnancy) but there needs to be change and clarification to the abortion laws in this country.

There are so many fallacies, inaccuracies and sheer stupidity in this piece of thrash.

I'll keep this somewhat brief:

1. She tows the party line of the repeal the 8th campaign by saying that when a woman is pregnant, she isn't the mother, the man isn't the father and the foetus isn't a child as they are all potentially the mother, father and child, respectively. This is completely wrong as when a man and a woman get pregnant and decide they want to keep the child, the terms change. This isn't how reality works. One's subjective opinion of the name of a substance shouldn't alter its rights.

2. She bítches about Amnesty International saying that the abortion laws in Ireland constitute an abuse of human rights yet fails to mention that Amnesty is one of the most politicised humanitarian organisations in the world. Therefore, their opinion doesn't mean much.

3. She then plays the victim card about single mothers. I agree that there are some awful scumbag fathers out there who abandon their kids, beat their wives etc but she makes it out like every single mother is in that position due to no fault of their own. She doesn't seem to take into account how fúcked up the divorce laws are and women get free rule of the court. They can easily make up lies about the fathers so as to get custody of the children and bar the father from getting any access. They can do this plus claim child support and alimony. Without a doubt, this makes up more than the "tiny handful of vindictives" that she claims.

4. My main gripe with this article is the following extract - "if a woman doesn’t want to start a family with you, it might not be just that she isn’t ready. It might be that she doesn’t want to start a family with YOU."
I cannot get my head around the fact that she can't value a man wanting to have a child. Why does the mother get sole decision over killing the child? In my perfect world, if the mother gets to decide to terminate the child without the consent of the father if she isn't ready to have the child, then the father doesn't have to pay child support if he isn't ready to have the child.

"the vast majority of one parent families headed by women — who make up 90% of one parent families, by the way"

Gas how she makes this point as if women are hard done by here.

That whole article read like a Facebook rant to me. It seemed to almost change topic half way through. I'm so sick of these kinds of opinion pieces getting a national platform.

iptba

Connacht2KXX wrote: »

http://www.irishexaminer.com/viewpoints/columnists/suzanne-harrington/fathers-ad-campaign-is-completely-ill-conceived-432575.html

So getting this back on track, I completely disagree with this article due to its overt sexism.

I'm personally undecided about the ethical aspects of abortion (of course incidences like fatal foetal abnormality, rape, suicide etc should permit the termination of a pregnancy) but there needs to be change and clarification to the abortion laws in this country.

There are so many fallacies, inaccuracies and sheer stupidity in this piece of thrash.

I'll keep this somewhat brief:

1. She tows the party line of the repeal the 8th campaign by saying that when a woman is pregnant, she isn't the mother, the man isn't the father and the foetus isn't a child as they are all potentially the mother, father and child, respectively. This is completely wrong as when a man and a woman get pregnant and decide they want to keep the child, the terms change. This isn't how reality works. One's subjective opinion of the name of a substance shouldn't alter its rights.

2. She bítches about Amnesty International saying that the abortion laws in Ireland constitute an abuse of human rights yet fails to mention that Amnesty is one of the most politicised humanitarian organisations in the world. Therefore, their opinion doesn't mean much.

3. She then plays the victim card about single mothers. I agree that there are some awful scumbag fathers out there who abandon their kids, beat their wives etc but she makes it out like every single mother is in that position due to no fault of their own. She doesn't seem to take into account how fúcked up the divorce laws are and women get free rule of the court. They can easily make up lies about the fathers so as to get custody of the children and bar the father from getting any access. They can do this plus claim child support and alimony. Without a doubt, this makes up more than the "tiny handful of vindictives" that she claims.

4. My main gripe with this article is the following extract - "if a woman doesn’t want to start a family with you, it might not be just that she isn’t ready. It might be that she doesn’t want to start a family with YOU."
I cannot get my head around the fact that she can't value a man wanting to have a child. Why does the mother get sole decision over killing the child? In my perfect world, if the mother gets to decide to terminate the child without the consent of the father if she isn't ready to have the child, then the father doesn't have to pay child support if he isn't ready to have the child.

FYI

Womenscouncilireland ‏@NWCI 12h12 hours ago
Fathers’ ad campaign is completely ill-conceived - good piece from @soozysuze http://www.irishexaminer.com/viewpoints/columnists/suzanne-harrington/fathers-ad-campaign-is-completely-ill-conceived-432575.html …

FortySeven

That's the same Suzanne Harrington who was a hedonistic alcoholic druggie whilst pregnant. Twice. Who drove her husband to suicide with her behavior and then sat in the house he paid for and wrote a book blaming him for all her ills?

I wouldn't miturate upon her should she combust after this latest piece. Just pulling figures from her arse to make a point that is as incorrect as possible to forward her cause.

Damn I hate that woman.

py2006

FortySeven wrote: »

Damn I hate that woman.

A quick glance at some of her articles and I came across this:

"Gosh, thanks, all you mansplaining manterrupters — where would us gals be without you?"

FortySeven

py2006 wrote: »

A quick glance at some of her articles and I came across this:

"Gosh, thanks, all you mansplaining manterrupters — where would us gals be without you?"

Still sitting in caves trying to work out fire I would imagine.

Carlos Orange

No

Calhoun wrote: »

This is the crux of the argument for me, If a woman wants full say over carrying her child that's fine with me but it should go both ways and the father have the option to be exempt from the childs life.

Don't see that ever happening. Even as men are told pregnancy is nothing to do with them and totally disposable it will remain somehow a magical source of responsibility (but strangely not so many rights).

midnight city

Could a man get away with talking about a woman like this. I very much doubt it. We live in a time where sexism policing applies one way only.

'In my experience, women are seasoned hands themselves at over-explaining to men. Yes sisters, admit it - how often do we have to repeat ourselves to get something through to a man's thick skull? Especially when it is a topic that may not be of interest to him (if it's sport, usually the message gets home straight away).

Maybe I am just the bossy type anyway. But mansplaining has never bothered me. If a man is droning on about an issue I don't regard it as mansplaining or I don't take offence. I put him down to being a know-all and a bore, and I try to walk away and ignore.

In a work situation in the past when I was a manager I often found myself over briefing male colleagues just to be sure they got it right. Funny, I found women got the message quicker.

And at home I think many women find themselves in womansplaining mode. Sending a man to the supermarket can be a trial. Very explicit instructions often have to be doled out. And to be sure to be sure a list written down. Whereby a woman would get it immediately.

And try sending a man off clothes shopping on his own? The womansplaining has to be laid on thick and heavy here. "Your shoe size is 10. And waist 34. Oh, and green doesn't suit you. Go for the blue."'

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/miriam-donohoe/lets-focus-on-rape-racism-and-refugees-not-invented-crises-35249570.html

silverharp

Suspended jail term for woman who made false rape report | Irish Examiner

Zoe Fitchett, aged 26, of Drombohilly, Tousist, Kenmare, Co Kerry, had made a report to gardaí in Dunmanway on May 20, 2014, alleging an attack the previous day.

However, following a garda investigation, Ms Fitchett appeared before court on June 21 last on charges of having made a false report.

She entered a guilty plea at a hearing in September and sentencing had been deferred until yesterday, to await a probation report.


At Clonakilty District Court, Judge James McNulty said the defendant had told a lie to “cover the tracks for an afternoon that was entirely consensual”.

However, he said he did not want to be harsh with Ms Fitchett, who he said had had a “tough life”.

He said she made “a foolish mistake” and had been immature.

He sentenced her to six months in prison, suspended for two years.

I don't think there has been a sentence here on this one, suspended would be par for the course though


Woman guilty of false report of rape by

Jacinta O’Connor, of Steelroe, Killorglin had denied “knowingly” making a false report of a rape and wasting Garda time.
...gave a detailed account of being raped by “a Pakistani-looking” man in a green hoodie, at the rear of the town’s court house.
...next day made a formal lengthy statement describing in graphic and stark detail two vaginal rapes and one attempted anal rape.
...The man was interviewed under caution and denied having any sexual contact with her. He handed over the green hoodie and samples.
By October 4th, gardaí who harvested images from around 30 locations, felt they had spotted discrepancies in Ms O’Connor’s account.

The Black Oil

I bet Twitter is pleased with this piece from Laura Kennedy in the Irish Times...

I was having tea with a friend when we got talking about women and sexism, though not in the way you might think. She relayed an incident at work, where a female colleague had spoken very rudely to an employee in his 30s, and called him “boy”.

I remarked with some distaste that the woman should at least be disciplined for such sexist treatment. My friend looked surprised, “Well it was rude of course, but women can’t be sexist towards men. That’s ridiculous. It was probably a bigoted thing to do, but only men can be sexist”. I’d rarely heard any statement as sexist in my life.

This perspective is increasingly common, and finds its expression in post-structuralist thinking which suggests that individuals aren’t what’s important when looking at inequality.

Rather, structures are. According to this view, because women as a group are structurally disadvantaged (and they are on a global scale), under the thumb of male-dominated and unfair social and economic structures, their individual actions are secondary. It follows that the system keeps women down, and men benefit from that, so how could any behaviour exhibited by a woman ever be sexist when ultimately she doesn’t have the power?

I consider this view one of the most regressive of our era. Feminists have struggled for so long to achieve a level playing field precisely because individual women have suffered – and still suffer – in the billions. We are not a demographic, a faceless collective, but a group of individuals. The purpose of feminism is to allow every woman to pursue her free choice according to her own individual human potential.

It is important to recognise the structures that limit and restrain women, and others. But to casually remove our own agency, and suggest that our individual behaviour towards other people “can’t be sexist” because we are oppressed, is incredibly unprogressive.

I’ve had some women tell me that my disagreement with this outlook indicates that I “clearly haven’t read enough” or that I’m “not a feminist”. This, of course, is nonsense. I’ve done little other than read about theories like this one for over a decade. I simply disagree with it. It is about time we stopped presenting theories (poor, logically indefensible ones at that) as fact.

ligerdub

#didnthappen

Zulu

No

internalised misogyny.

py2006

The aul 'guys are always to blame' angle again:

'Guys cheat because they want to, girls cheat because there's something wrong in the relationship' - Niamh Horan


Not familiar with Niamh Horan, is she another Mullally/O'Neill?

um7y1h83ge06nx

God forbid women might just want a sneaky ride or something.

In fairness it's the same with divorce, an automatic assumption is "what did he do?". I wonder in today's same sex marriage world how will they manage to explain a female/female divorce?