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

Kidchameleon

I had a somewhat similar experience. Made me sick

silverharp

sure this was a parody account well fck me

https://twitter.com/PoliceServiceNI/status/937018759147147264

Buffman

silverharp wrote: »

sure this was a parody account well fck me

https://twitter.com/PoliceServiceNI/status/937018759147147264

They've deleted it and are using the 'taken out of context' excuse.

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/psni-face-twitter-backlash-over-seasons-greetings-mistletoe-rape-tweet-warning-36373326.html

PSNI face Twitter backlash over 'seasons greetings' mistletoe rape tweet warning

silverharp

and replaced it with this, socialising without consent is rape ;-)

https://twitter.com/PoliceServiceNI/status/937266196659032064

Calhoun

Doesn't look like it was aimed at men , the way they are trivialising rape both sexes could easily do it.

Buffman

Calhoun wrote: »

Doesn't look like it was aimed at men , the way they are trivialising rape both sexes could easily do it.

The legal definition of rape in NI means it was aimed at men only.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/nisi/2008/1769/article/5/made

The Sexual Offences (Northern Ireland) Order 2008

2008 No. 1769 (N.I. 2)PART 2RapeArticle 5

Rape

5.—(1) A person (A) commits an offence if—

(a)he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis,

(b)B does not consent to the penetration, and

(c)A does not reasonably believe that B consents.

(2) Whether a belief is reasonable is to be determined having regard to all the circumstances, including any steps A has taken to ascertain whether B consents.

(3) Articles 9 and 10 apply to an offence under this Article.

(4) A person guilty of an offence under this Article is liable, on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for life.

(5) Any reference to rape in a statutory provision shall be construed in accordance with paragraph (1).

(6) The common law offence of rape is abolished.

DamoKen

JPF82 wrote: »

So 6 months ago I became a proud Dad to a beautiful baby girl. Her first few days were not the easiest for her or my wife as the delivery was by emergency C Section and my daughter was then in ICU for the next 7 days. My wife had lost a good bit of blood and struggled to get to the ICU to see our daughter for a few days. She just wasn't able to. I was up in ICU most of the time, did the first nappy change, all feeds and everything any normal Dad would do in the situation. The only times I wasn't there was when I had to leave at night and during the day when I would be asked to leave for an hour. (I'm not looking for credit for that, just giving context).

Anyway, fast forward to the day we get to bring our beautiful girl home. The nurses are helping my wife and giving us some last minute advice etc. My wife was telling the nurse how great I had been and that I already had a great bond with my daughter.

ONE nurse responds "Well see how good he is when you get home".

As if I was some imbecile that would just not so anything at home. With the day that was in it, I let it slide, but it did f**king piss me off. My wife was none too impressed either. Overall, the staff in the Coombe were fantastic apart from that wally on the last day. The nurse was a bit younger than me so it wasn't some old fashioned nurse either.

Funny, had similar experiences all through my wife's pregnancy right through to the first district nurse visit when I was still off. Everything from being flat out ignored at appointments from reception to leaving (picture an empty handshake), a couple of comments on my suitability as a babysitter when I was noticed "you go out and treat yourself when you get home and he can babysit...maybe" as they cast a doubtful eye over me.

Tried to and did ignore it but due to the sheer frequency of incidents it did get to me at times.

Was weird, almost an undercurrent of blame like her discomfort and pain were my fault and resenting I wouldn't experience it? Thought I was being paranoid but it was my wife who brought it up, she had noticed it as well.

Calhoun

There is a thread in the pregnancy forum covered this topic recently, general consensus is the system is biased against men and does need to be brought into this century.

Prime example being simple things like no toilet facilities or the likes of UCC maternity hospital leaving partners out on visits ect.

Overall though with all that's wrong with the health system, it's probably not going to be solved anytime soon.

citytillidie

So a mans testies are worth £500 and no jail time

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/she-drew-head-back-testicle-11655153

silverharp

Overheard on Twitter, for context it was a story on UK News, you can picture the tone of , men sick, lol, weak

 More


I find the #manflu thread interesting. Despite scientific evidence that it could be actually be real, it's full of women degrading illness in men, suggesting they're weak. Now wonder why men don't like talking about their health, even with GPs

Kidchameleon

RTE news at 9 just did a report on the Alan Hawe case. After which they flashed up the number for The Samaritans and Womens Aid. As if the only perpetrators of familicide are men.

Calhoun

Kidchameleon wrote: »

RTE news at 9 just did a report on the Alan Hawe case. After which they flashed up the number for The Samaritans and Womens Aid. As if the only perpetrators of familicide are men.

I am going to have to be an ass and call you on this one, 1. Samaritans are a gender less organization as far as i was concerned and 2. considering the subject matter of the report women's aid is an appropriate thing to put up there.

For me it comes down to time and a place, in this case it was the father who was the perpetrator.

Kidchameleon

Calhoun wrote: »

I am going to have to be an ass and call you on this one, 1. Samaritans are a gender less organization as far as i was concerned and 2. considering the subject matter of the report women's aid is an appropriate thing to put up there.

For me it comes down to time and a place, in this case it was the father who was the perpetrator.

If it were the wife who killed the family, who would be the go to organisation in place of Womens Aid? Do you think RTE would provide that organisations details in the broadcast? I do get your point though.

Calhoun

Kidchameleon wrote: »

If it were the wife who killed the family, who would be the go to organisation in place of Womens Aid? Do you think RTE would provide that organisations details in the broadcast? I do get your point though.

I would expect them to put AMEN into it, everything after that is a bonus. All i am saying with something like this is not a time for point scoring.

Zulu

No

Calhoun wrote: »

I am going to have to be an ass ...

You're not an ass; it's a fair call

Kidchameleon

Zulu wrote: »

You're not an ass; it's a fair call

I get your point lads and I didnt mean to offend anyones feelings. I personally have not been "brought to tears" over this case. Maybe that makes me cold or inhuman but honestly it didnt effect me. Thats not to say that I dont think it was a horrific and tragic incident, I do fwiw.

However I dont think it is unfair to state that familicide can be perpetrated by both sexes and there have been a number of cases in the state where women have been guilty. Domestic violence is also often carried out by women. I think the state broadcaster should be looking out for all potential victims.

I agree though that this is not the time to discuss it.

iptba

Kidchameleon wrote: »

However I dont think it is unfair to state that familicide can be perpetrated by both sexes and there have been a number of cases in the state where women have been guilty. Domestic violence is also often carried out by women. I think the state broadcaster should be looking out for all potential victims.

I agree though that this is not the time to discuss it.

Personally I think it's generally reasonable to point things out as they occur. A lot of points would be forgotten and/or people would lose the link for the evidence they occurred if there is a delay. People may also remember other possibly relevant facts relating to the incident at that time so it's probably the best time for assessments to be made

yerwanthere123

The hashtag :rolleyes:

https://twitter.com/amcteirnan/status/942885069798166533

Calhoun

yerwanthere123 wrote: »

The hashtag :rolleyes:

https://twitter.com/amcteirnan/status/942885069798166533

Feminist working for the Irish times , shocker she would say that.

silverharp

Calhoun wrote: »

Feminist working for the Irish times , shocker she would say that.

how have I not heard of that hatchet faced harpey before?

Calhoun

As someone pointed out using the hawe tradegy as an opportunity to have a swipe at all men is a bit sick.

tritium

yerwanthere123 wrote: »

The hashtag :rolleyes:

https://twitter.com/amcteirnan/status/942885069798166533

When she talks about the collapse of the trial of a man who sexually assaulted a woman i assume she means this one....

https://amp.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/trial-of-man-charged-with-sexually-assaulting-woman-on-dance-floor-collapses-36418205.html

.. Tbh i think shes on very thin ice with that tweet given irelands libel and defamation laws. Wouldnt have much sympathy if she was taken to the cleaners tbh

silverharp

Guardian logic

El_Duderino 09

silverharp wrote: »

Guardian logic

What’s your point here? Is your point that Isis and abuse against women are so similar that they should be treated exactly the same by the Guardian or else there’s a fault in the logic?

Given that they’re about very different topics from over a year apart, what exactly about the articles is it that you disagree with?

I looked at the username and remembered that the poster doesn’t tend to read the articles, they just post the headlines and presume that’s enough to demonstrate their point. Using ignorance of the article content shouldn’t be considered as useful a shield as it is to some people.

Given the article about abuse of women was written before Weinstein, it should take on addition significances rather than being subject to derision with a 2 word post.

Anyway if you have a point to make about the articles, that might be interesting. And Ig the point has something to do with sexism, that might’ be better again.

The J Stands for Jay

Members of Isis are a subset of the Muslim population. Abusers are a subset of all men (ignoring female abusers). The Grauniad are saying it's ok to ask one population to address the actions of their subset, but not the other.

El_Duderino 09

McGaggs wrote: »

Members of Isis are a subset of the Muslim population. Abusers are a subset of all men (ignoring female abusers). The Grauniad are saying it's ok to ask one population to address the actions of their subset, but not the other.

I wonder if the point would bare any scrutiny beyond a simple one line summar - a small improvement on the 2 words in the original post. Reading the articles and seeing what they actually say might spoil the conceit, so i wouldn’t necessarily recommend it.

Am I breaking the social convention by suggesting the point should have a bit more to it than simple playing word games with headlines about different topics from over a year apart?

When there are so many real men’s rights issues, why this type of whinging gets so much attention from supposed MRAs, never ceases to amaze me.

The determination to be a victim doesn’t seem to drive these same characters to take an interest in substantive issues. If this kind of guff is the kind of thing that MRAs like, then it’s fairly predictable that the MRAs will be seen as a bit of a joke compared to other lobby groups with more substantive issues. Pity

The J Stands for Jay

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I wonder if the point would bare any scrutiny beyond a simple one line summar - a small improvement on the 2 words in the original post. Reading the articles and seeing what they actually say might spoil the conceit, so i wouldn’t necessarily recommend it.

Am I breaking the social convention by suggesting the point should have a bit more to it than simple playing word games with headlines about different topics from over a year apart?

When there are so many real men’s rights issues, why this type of whinging gets so much attention from supposed MRAs, never ceases to amaze me.

The determination to be a victim doesn’t seem to drive these same characters to take an interest in substantive issues. If this kind of guff is the kind of thing that MRAs like, then it’s fairly predictable that the MRAs will be seen as a bit of a joke compared to other lobby groups with more substantive issues. Pity

TBH, I'm amazed that anyone gets worked up about what it says in the opinion section of any newspaper or their website. It would probably make an entertaining game to try and determine whether or not the writer actually holds that opinion (or to guess if the headline will actually match the message of the linked article).

El_Duderino 09

McGaggs wrote: »

TBH, I'm amazed that anyone gets worked up about what it says in the opinion section of any newspaper or their website. It would probably make an entertaining game to try and determine whether or not the writer actually holds that opinion (or to guess if the headline will actually match the message of the linked article).

First step would be to read beyond the headlines. The poster who posted the headlines is well practiced in posting headlines without bothering to read the articles. They must spend time googling ‘ I’m a man and I’m a victim’, looking for click bait guff like that to repost. It’s pretty important not to read the articles or else it would ruin it.

All the real issues affecting men and the MRAs are busy liking this nonsense.

iptba

A willingness for men to be held accountable for problems in the world when other groups may not be held responsible in a similar way or put another way double standards seems to me to be worth highlighting (if it occurs - this one example wouldn't prove much by itself but it seems plausible it isn't an isolated case).

Striving for equality can take many forms and it seems legitimate to me to complain about any double standards or harsher treatment men might face.

El_Duderino 09

iptba wrote: »

A willingness for men to be held accountable for problems in the world when other groups may not be held responsible in a similar way or put another way double standards seems to me to be worth highlighting (if it occurs - this one example wouldn't prove much by itself but it seems plausible it isn't an isolated case).

Striving for equality can take many forms and it seems legitimate to me to complain about any double standards or harsher treatment men might face.

In order for the analogy to work you need to be willing to say the subjects are similar. Do you think ISIS victims and women are similar?

It’s clear you haven’t read the articles or you’d see the difference in the subjects and the approaches taken by the various groups - if you’re determined to be a victim in this case then don’t read the articles. Stick to the headlines or it would spoil the illusion

lalababa

Was in fca camp the first year 'the girls' were accepted. You couldn't make up the farce that ensued. The Sargent s and above of course were all male, and were not used to having girls (18yr olds in their prime) around their environment. The ladies wrapped them around their fingers. We were called for a 10km march with rifle. The Ladies showed up with their rifles following behind in a truck, too heavy to carry!
Half way through the camp half the ladies were excused from training because of various minor maladies.
No male excused that I remember.

But all that said these may have been wise decisions as probably none would have come back in following years and bad-mouthed the experience.

Kidchameleon

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

All the real issues affecting men and the MRAs are busy liking this nonsense.

Being held accountable for sexual abuse is not a "real issue" no? Let me tell you, as a father of a young girl, reading headlines like that is heart breaking. And we are inundated with messages like that, constantly, day in day out. Fair play to the poster for highlighting this particular instance.

*edit* I cant imagine what its like for a young lad growing up nowadays's. It must be horrible, having shame shoved in your face left, right and center. If I was a parent of a young man these kind of headlines would seriously worry me. I have no doubt that things like this are a contributing factor in the blatantly disproportionate male suicide rate.

padser

citytillidie wrote: »

So a mans testies are worth £500 and no jail time

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/she-drew-head-back-testicle-11655153

Wow, that's genuinely incredible. Turn the tables around on this one

- woman rejects boyfriends sexual request
- boyfriend assaults girlfriend and mutilates her genitalia

In a million years would that be a non custodial sentence?

Wibbs

maybe

silverharp wrote: »

Guardian logic

Standard "feminist" fare really. In other news: water is wet. It never ceases to fit that the mantra always comes down to; women are always agentless victims, men are always to blame. Even if they are men who aren't perpetrators of anything, they are still to blame. It's a church of victimhood, with the much needed devil of a scapegoat. That narrative is present in damned near every nasty and oft dangerous politic ever. Fascism, Marxism, you name it, it's there and it's present in current "feminism".

On that score the last thing men need to be doing is buying into that bull and aping these muppets*. Point out their hypocrisy and vocally everywhere you may meet it sure, but don't go down their rabbit hole of victimhood. Leave that to extremist idiots of all stripes.



*it's why I would have a bucket of sneers ready for the MGTOW types

backspin.

padser wrote: »

Wow, that's genuinely incredible. Turn the tables around on this one

- woman rejects boyfriends sexual request
- boyfriend assaults girlfriend and mutilates her genitalia

In a million years would that be a non custodial sentence?

Hard to see anything less than a 10 year sentence in the reverse.

El_Duderino 09

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Being held accountable for sexual abuse is not a "real issue" no? Let me tell you, as a father of a young girl, reading headlines like that is heart breaking. And we are inundated with messages like that, constantly, day in day out. Fair play to the poster for highlighting this particular instance.

*edit* I cant imagine what its like for a young lad growing up nowadays's. It must be horrible, having shame shoved in your face left, right and center. If I was a parent of a young man these kind of headlines would seriously worry me. I have no doubt that things like this are a contributing factor in the blatantly disproportionate male suicide rate.

Ah here. Sure it’s simple enough for most men - the ones without an axe to grind at least. I find it very easy to condemn abuse of anyone. For example the sexual abuse mostly of women that came to light post Weinstein.

Now if you’re more interested in some petty point scoring rather than any serious men’s issues, then it might be interesting to seek victim hood in the recent abuse revelations- and it turns out that men are the victims.

The suicide claims are spurious, speculative at best. Suicide is a serious issue and this trivialises it.

El_Duderino 09

Wibbs wrote: »

Standard "feminist" fare really. In other news: water is wet. It never ceases to fit that the mantra always comes down to; women are always agentless victims, men are always to blame. Even if they are men who aren't perpetrators of anything, they are still to blame. It's a church of victimhood, with the much needed devil of a scapegoat. That narrative is present in damned near every nasty and oft dangerous politic ever. Fascism, Marxism, you name it, it's there and it's present in current "feminism". [/quote]

But men are the real victims?
The problem is that women are stealing men’s victimhood. This is meta-ridiculous.

Feminists focusing on an issue that matters to women and MRAs focusing on feminism. The usual.

Wibbs

maybe

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

But men are the real victims?
The problem is that women are stealing men’s victimhood. This is meta-ridiculous.

And here we have a perfect example of your usual gross dishonesty. Of course you purposely left out - and in your haste to do so screwed up the formatting - my very next statement that clearly states the complete opposite of what you want it to state:

Wibbs wrote: »

On that score the last thing men need to be doing is buying into that bull and aping these muppets*. Point out their hypocrisy and vocally everywhere you may meet it sure, but don't go down their rabbit hole of victimhood. Leave that to extremist idiots of all stripes.



*it's why I would have a bucket of sneers ready for the MGTOW types

I used think you and it trolling, but having had debates with true believers of many hues I've found it's just one of the go to tactics when their basic "arguments" turn out to be mist. Your "arguments" are thin gruel indeed and throwing in dishonesty, avoidance and deflection adds no meat to them. But it can be amusing at times.

Feminists focusing on an issue that matters to women

At least you got this bit right.

El_Duderino 09

Wibbs wrote: »

And here we have a perfect example of your usual gross dishonesty. Of course you purposely left out - and in your haste to do so screwed up the formatting - my very next statement that clearly states the complete opposite of what you want it to state:

Wibbs wrote: »

On that score the last thing men need to be doing is buying into that bull and aping these muppets*. Point out their hypocrisy and vocally everywhere you may meet it sure, but don't go down their rabbit hole of victimhood. Leave that to extremist idiots of all stripes.

*it's why I would have a bucket of sneers ready for the MGTOW types

I used think you and it trolling, but having had debates with true believers of many hues I've found it's just one of the go to tactics when their basic "arguments" turn out to be mist. Your "arguments" are thin gruel indeed and throwing in dishonesty, avoidance and deflection adds no meat to them. But it can be amusing at times.

Feminists focusing on an issue that matters to women

At least you got this bit right.

You both like arguments for men being the real victims then try to rise above it by pretending you don’t approve of claiming victim hood -once it’s been argued that men are the victims.

Having your cake and eating it.

I was going to post that the way to complete the circle would be for MRAs to focus on feminists and then complain that feminists don’t do MRA’s job for them! You did it without prompting! Classic stuff!

Wibbs

maybe

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

You both like arguments for men being the real victims then try to rise above it by pretending you don’t approve of claiming victim hood -once it’s been argued that men are the victims.

Nope try again. I've regularly berated the MGTOW victim types as weak saps. The "red pill" types though I find their social theorising and navel gazing to be nearly entirely nonsense, I'd have a little more respect for some of them who see a central tenet of their thing being self improvement. I'd also agree with them when they suggest not ever engaging with true believer "feminists". It's largely pointless as they can't debate worth a damn and the screeching usually kicks off when they don't get their own way(as do the Red Pill types and the MGTOW and many of the MRA types for that matter. And none have the self awareness to see it in themselves). Personally I have found dyed in the wool male "feminists" to be generally beyond tiresome, so that is good advice.

I was going to post that the way to complete the circle would be for MRAs to focus on feminists and then complain that feminists don’t do MRA’s job for them! You did it without prompting! Classic stuff!

You do know claiming some victory requires at least some evidence of same? Then again it is expected. Ah well... back to the sweet bliss of ignoring you.

Kidchameleon

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Ah here. Sure it’s simple enough for most men - the ones without an axe to grind at least. I find it very easy to condemn abuse of anyone. For example the sexual abuse mostly of women that came to light post Weinstein.

Now if you’re more interested in some petty point scoring rather than any serious men’s issues, then it might be interesting to seek victim hood in the recent abuse revelations- and it turns out that men are the victims.

The suicide claims are spurious, speculative at best. Suicide is a serious issue and this trivialises it.

Ha yeah your right there. Male suicide is a non issue. And sure who cares if their daughter is bombarded with messages that her dad is a preditor. Silly me for being petty.

El_Duderino 09

Wibbs wrote: »

Nope try again. I've regularly berated the MGTOW victim types as weak saps. The "red pill" types though I find their social theorising and navel gazing to be nearly entirely nonsense, I'd have a little more respect for some of them who see a central tenet of their thing being self improvement. I'd also agree with them when they suggest not ever engaging with true believer "feminists". It's largely pointless as they can't debate worth a damn and the screeching usually kicks off when they don't get their own way(as do the Red Pill types and the MGTOW and many of the MRA types for that matter. And none have the self awareness to see it in themselves). Personally I have found dyed in the wool male "feminists" to be generally beyond tiresome, so that is good advice.

I was going to post that the way to complete the circle would be for MRAs to focus on feminists and then complain that feminists don’t do MRA’s job for them! You did it without prompting! Classic stuff!

You do know claiming some victory requires at least some evidence of same? Then again it is expected. Ah well... back to the sweet bliss of ignoring you.

Weak saps? Well that’s a good one. Isn’t that straight out of the handbook for denigrating MRAs? I was accused of it not so long ago so it’s nice to know I’m in such esteemed company.

The desire to see men as the real victims is strong in this forum. Silverharp’s headlines skimming is an example. Men are the real victims of one form or another. Double standards in this example. Far from discouraging victim hood, you thanked that post. Having your cake and eating it.

Feminists focus on issues, MRAs focus on feminists and then complain that feminists haven’t done their homework for them. Complaining both that they’re terrible creatures and they’re not on your side. Classic. Off you go back to ignoring me. Better luck in the future if that’s what you enjoy.

And if you enjoy complaining about feminist’s success and the lack of MRA success, you’re in for a treat because that’s exactly what’s happening.

El_Duderino 09

Kidchameleon wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Suicide is a serious issue and this trivialises it.

Ha yeah your right there. Male suicide is a non issue. And sure who cares if their daughter is bombarded with messages that her dad is a preditor. Silly me for being petty.

As I said, suicide is a serious issue. You’re trivialising my it by linking a serious issue with this guff to score points

Do you have any issue condemning abuse? I don’t. It doesn’t cost me a second thought. I condemn it and anyone who does it. Case closed, next issue. I don’t identify with people who do it and I don’t assume any guilt by association with them because I’m not associated with them.

I can’t understand why you would be offended on behalf of an abuser. Do you feel you need to defend abusers or something? I feel I could drop them like a hot snot so it doesn’t knock a feather out of me to say I condemn that behaviour. Simple as that.

Kidchameleon

What the hell are you talking about? Are you drunk?

tritium

Wibbs wrote: »

Standard "feminist" fare really. In other news: water is wet. It never ceases to fit that the mantra always comes down to; women are always agentless victims, men are always to blame. Even if they are men who aren't perpetrators of anything, they are still to blame. It's a church of victimhood, with the much needed devil of a scapegoat. That narrative is present in damned near every nasty and oft dangerous politic ever. Fascism, Marxism, you name it, it's there and it's present in current "feminism".

On that score the last thing men need to be doing is buying into that bull and aping these muppets*. Point out their hypocrisy and vocally everywhere you may meet it sure, but don't go down their rabbit hole of victimhood. Leave that to extremist idiots of all stripes.



*it's why I would have a bucket of sneers ready for the MGTOW types

Ah but wibbs, do that and youll still have a wing of the feminist movement swearing blind that the two are completely different and it's just butthurt mras whining

In other words classic arguement shutdown nonsense

Robsweezie

hate to be a grinch today but....anyone noticed how it always seems more acceptable to point out when a man is ''punching above his weight'' in relationships? seems very one sided.

http://www.digitalspy.com/soaps/feature/a831878/soap-characters-who-punched-well-above-their-weight/

El_Duderino 09

Kidchameleon wrote: »

What the hell are you talking about? Are you drunk?

Lol. I’m referring to the headlines silverharp posted to demonstrate men as victims of one kind or another. Lots or posters enjoyed the post but then Wibbs went along and said men should stay away from claiming victimhood.

All in all it’s a great example of the usually story. Feminists focus on issues important to them and MRAs focus on feminism. And then some MRAs go as far as to whinge that feminists don’t advocate for men’s rights.

All in all it’s a pity because there are real issues which affect men and this forum is mostly concerned with men as Victims and complaining about feminism.

Kidchameleon

I demonstrated with personal experience how the deluge of such headlines *literally* makes victims of men. I havnt complained about feminism?

tritium

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Lol. I’m referring to the headlines silverharp posted to demonstrate men as victims of one kind or another. Lots or posters enjoyed the post but then Wibbs went along and said men should stay away from claiming victimhood.

As usual you spin the past to give it a dishonest slant to suit your narrative. What Silverharp posted was a (very good) example of the hypocricy attaching to a well known feminist leaning publication.

You of course went on the offensive, completely ignoring the point that had been made in favour of your own interpretation (how can i be offended, let me count the ways......). What wibbs actually said then;

On that score the last thing men need to be doing is buying into that bull and aping these muppets*. Point out their hypocrisy and vocally everywhere you may meet it sure, but don't go down their rabbit hole of victimhood. Leave that to extremist idiots of all stripes.

Pointing out the hypocrisy is of course, as I already noted, exactly what Silverharp had done..

All in all it’s a great example of the usually story. Feminists focus on issues important to them and MRAs focus on feminism. And then some MRAs go as far as to whinge that feminists don’t advocate for men’s rights.

As above its not really an example of that at all. Of course you, as a self identified feminist who posts most of their time in forums that deal with womens issues you would have a different perspective.. I mean it would be different if you were the kind of poster who just came on to a mens forum and whinged they werent being nice to women......

By the way you might want to ask folks like tim hunt, erin pizzey, lots of women in the middle east and a few others whether feminists are focusing in issues that are important to feminism

All in all it’s a pity because there are real issues which affect men and this forum is mostly concerned with men as Victims and complaining about feminism.

Yep and if you bothered to read the forum instead of just looking for excuses to be offended as a feminist you'd find those issues get plenty of airtime. Of course it might also be uncomfortable since addressing many of those issues might mean many feminists would have to acknowledge some flaws in the dogma and perhaps even acknowledge how their 'whinging' in areas like male DV victims has actually hindered progress there.

Saruhashi

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Lol. I’m referring to the headlines silverharp posted to demonstrate men as victims of one kind or another. Lots or posters enjoyed the post but then Wibbs went along and said men should stay away from claiming victimhood.

All in all it’s a great example of the usually story. Feminists focus on issues important to them and MRAs focus on feminism. And then some MRAs go as far as to whinge that feminists don’t advocate for men’s rights.

All in all it’s a pity because there are real issues which affect men and this forum is mostly concerned with men as Victims and complaining about feminism.

I must be missing something here.

Silverharp shared 2 Guardian headlines with the comment "Guardian logic " and no other commentary.

My personal assumption is that this was just having a laugh at the contradictory nature of Guardian articles. I thought it was pretty funny myself.

It is a bit crap, and a bit sexist, that all men are expected to go out of their way to condemn men who do bad things.

It's a bit hypocritical of the Guardian to publish articles saying that it's wrong to demand that all Muslims condemn ISIS whilst also demanding that all men condemn abusive men.

I thought it was a good point.

Here's your take though: "the headlines silverharp posted to demonstrate men as victims of one kind or another"

Do you fancy yourself as a bit of a mind-reader? If you do then I have to tell you that I think you might not be very good at it.