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

Seriously?

DoYouEvenLift wrote: »

Lol can't take thoughtcatalog seriously, they regularly publish articles by trolls, one of which is a male poster on another forum I browse and he makes a total mockery of the site.

Yeah they can be a bit far out on the right, but if we ignore the analysis given at the end the quoted text is quite revealing.

Perhaps it was all innocent childhood fun, but I seriously doubt that if a male author had written such a thing it would be handled so glibly or do you disagree ?

killanena

My friend who has a degree in childcare cannot get a job in play schools or creches.. I feel for him as he is really really good with kids, Loves singing songs, painting, etc.. but no one will hire him because of the fact that he is a male..

Seriously?

killanena wrote: »

My friend who has a degree in childcare cannot get a job in play schools or creches.. I feel for him as he is really really good with kids, Loves singing songs, painting, etc.. but no one will hire him because of the fact that he is a male..

Funny how people for example don't know that in cases of single parent abuse mothers make up the majority in both abuse and death cases.
Women it seems are not nearly the more caring sex.

DoYouEvenLift

Seriously? wrote: »

Yeah they can be a bit far out on the right, but if we ignore the analysis given at the end the quoted text is quite revealing.

Perhaps it was all innocent childhood fun, but I seriously doubt that if a male author had written such a thing it would be handled so glibly or do you disagree ?

Apologies, I hadn't read that far and just dismissed it because I hadn't been keeping up with this but now that I have I definitely agree with you. He would already be totally destroyed in the public eye.


No. 5 has really got the comment sections attention on there.

Piliger

I don't know if anyone has seen this De Freitas false-rape case currently being pursued by the media in the UK.

This woman was bipolar ... but if you listen to the media and her disingenuous father you would think she was mentally retarded in some way.

She accused a colleague of an appalling rape and tried to destroy his life ... then when it failed and the man started a civil action against her, she committed suicide.

Now it's ALL about her as a victim ! it's ALL about how badly she was treated ! it's ALL about this as a discouragement of 'real' rape victims to come forward.

tritium

Piliger wrote: »

I don't know if anyone has seen this De Freitas false-rape case currently being pursued by the media in the UK.

This woman was bipolar ... but if you listen to the media and her disingenuous father you would think she was mentally retarded in some way.

She accused a colleague of an appalling rape and tried to destroy his life ... then when it failed and the man started a civil action against her, she committed suicide.

Now it's ALL about her as a victim ! it's ALL about how badly she was treated ! it's ALL about this as a discouragement of 'real' rape victims to come forward.

Its amazing how the report infers that the man who was accused should still somehow be considered a rapist. There wasn't enough evidence to bring a prosecution but hey, he's the bad guy for bringing a private prosecution to clear his name, even though UK laws in anonymity mean it would be the only way he could remove the stigma of being "that guy who was accused of rape". Where is the concern for what he went through?

Just one of the many reasons I wouldn't wipe my ass with the Guardian.

aphex™

And now the (female) DPP in the UK is personally examining ALL accusations for false rape and 'Very few' are getting to court.

Jebus. :eek:

eviltwin

Piliger wrote: »

I don't know if anyone has seen this De Freitas false-rape case currently being pursued by the media in the UK.

This woman was bipolar ... but if you listen to the media and her disingenuous father you would think she was mentally retarded in some way.

She accused a colleague of an appalling rape and tried to destroy his life ... then when it failed and the man started a civil action against her, she committed suicide.

Now it's ALL about her as a victim ! it's ALL about how badly she was treated ! it's ALL about this as a discouragement of 'real' rape victims to come forward.

I was all set to agree with you until I read the article.

There is nothing to suggest she made a false claim of rape. The rape case didn't get to court because of lack of evidence but that doesn't mean she is automatically making it up. A lot of genuine rapes wouldn't have enough evidence to get to court. The accused of course is well within his rights to take her to court if he feels he was accused in the wrong but we don't know what the truth of this matter is. A girl is now dead and a man will forever have his reputation tainted...everyone is a victim here.

ETA: my reading of her mental illness wasn't to excuse her in any way but more to wonder why the CPS took her case to court without any evidence knowing she was in a vulnerable state of mind.

ancapailldorcha

maybe

eviltwin wrote: »

I was all set to agree with you until I read the article.

There is nothing to suggest she made a false claim of rape. The rape case didn't get to court because of lack of evidence but that doesn't mean she is automatically making it up. A lot of genuine rapes wouldn't have enough evidence to get to court. The accused of course is well within his rights to take her to court if he feels he was accused in the wrong but we don't know what the truth of this matter is. A girl is now dead and a man will forever have his reputation tainted...everyone is a victim here.

ETA: my reading of her mental illness wasn't to excuse her in any way but more to wonder why the CPS took her case to court without any evidence knowing she was in a vulnerable state of mind.

The CPS probably did have evidence and it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if the Guardian failed to mention that. I'm not passing judgement but you don't get prosecuted without a substantial amount of evidence.

eviltwin

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

The CPS probably did have evidence and it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if the Guardian failed to mention that. I'm not passing judgement but you don't get prosecuted without a substantial amount of evidence.

The police who investigated her original claim say they don't believe she was lying. You could be right in which case its hard to feel sorry for her - although I have upmost sympathy for her dad who has lost his child - but going on the facts as presented its not as black and white as "she was raped" or "she made it up".

aphex™

eviltwin wrote: »

I was all set to agree with you until I read the article.

There is nothing to suggest she made a false claim of rape.

As the post above mine alluded, if the CPS took the case over and continued the private prosecution, there must have been some evidence of a false rape claim.

eviltwin

aphex™ wrote: »

As the post above mine alluded, if the CPS took the case over and continued the private prosecution, there must have been some evidence of a false rape claim.

What evidence would the CPS have that the police wouldn't? Surely the first port of call for the accused would be the police.

aphex™

eviltwin wrote: »

What evidence would the CPS have that the police wouldn't? Surely the first port of call for the accused would be the police.

Nobody is familiar with the case to know why the police weren't involved at that point, but I think it's a red herring as the CPS wouldn't 'take over' a case if they think they can't get a prosecution.

eviltwin

aphex™ wrote: »

Nobody is familiar with the case to know why the police weren't involved at that point, but I think it's a red herring as the CPS wouldn't 'take over' a case if they think they can't get a prosecution.

This is the crux of it. We DON'T know what happened. Hopefully the inquiry will explain all but taking the stance that she was guilty of lying so feck her is just as bad as assuming he was a rapist.

aphex™

eviltwin wrote: »

This is the crux of it. We DON'T know what happened. Hopefully the inquiry will explain all but taking the stance that she was guilty of lying so feck her is just as bad as assuming he was a rapist.

But we don't really care about individual cases anyway just the future going forward.

I'm concerned that in the video the DPP suggested she would have to review cases of false rape personally, and given the context, the video seemed to suggest if the woman was having emotional or psychological problems it may not proceed (based on the case used). It could be the way the video was edited, tho.

That would be a very dangerous precedent.

Video here http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29946823

ancapailldorcha

maybe

eviltwin wrote: »

The police who investigated her original claim say they don't believe she was lying. You could be right in which case its hard to feel sorry for her - although I have upmost sympathy for her dad who has lost his child - but going on the facts as presented its not as black and white as "she was raped" or "she made it up".

The thing is that we're debating with facts obtained from newspapers which are far from unbiased. I'd have a lot more faith in the CPS to do their job, especially in a case such as this than the Guardian to provide a balanced account.

Lemming

According to the BBC article, the police did not pursue the allegation due to "inconsistencies in her evidence". Doesn't say they believe she was lying, but it does imply they thought her accusation did not have grounds for a conviction. Beyond that, can't really comment on the case as not enough is known, but judging by the tone towards the end of the BBC article it does set the stage for a dangerous argument that all rape accusations should be above prosecution if shown to be false by claiming that a private prosecution is an attempt at intimidation.

ancapailldorcha

maybe

Lemming wrote: »

According to the BBC article, the police did not pursue the allegation due to "inconsistencies in her evidence". Doesn't say they believe she was lying, but it does imply they thought her accusation did not have grounds for a conviction.

False allegations aren't usually prosecuted which would imply that there's more to this than what's being reported.

Piliger

eviltwin wrote: »

I was all set to agree with you until I read the article.

There is nothing to suggest she made a false claim of rape. The rape case didn't get to court because of lack of evidence but that doesn't mean she is automatically making it up.

Then why was the civil case brought against her by the man taken over by the prosecutor ? And her accusation was investigated by the police and determined to be inconsistent.

This is nasty liar who made the whole thing up. It is clear as day.

A lot of genuine rapes wouldn't have enough evidence to get to court.

And a lot of rape liars never ever get prosecuted

The accused of course is well within his rights to take her to court if he feels he was accused in the wrong but we don't know what the truth of this matter is.

He did. Read the whole story.

A girl is now dead and a man will forever have his reputation tainted...everyone is a victim here.

No. He is a victim. She just committed suicide.

ETA: my reading of her mental illness wasn't to excuse her in any way but more to wonder why the CPS took her case to court without any evidence knowing she was in a vulnerable state of mind.

This is typical of how women are perceived. Is the alleged rapist ever treated specially if he was a vulnerable bipolar individual ?

Piliger

eviltwin wrote: »

This is the crux of it. We DON'T know what happened. Hopefully the inquiry will explain all but taking the stance that she was guilty of lying so feck her is just as bad as assuming he was a rapist.

The enquiry is being lead by the head of the PPS or whatever it is called. This is the woman who has changed the prosecution of rapists so that no evidence is now required, only a 'credible narrative'.

I wouldn't hold my breath. We'll just see a white wash and a statement making an angel of this woman and insinuation, as they ALWAYS do, that this man is really a rapist that they just couldn't find enough evidence against.

Lemming

Piliger wrote: »

This is nasty liar who made the whole thing up. It is clear as day.

I disagree with the assessment that this is as clear as day. Unless you've read some further details not published by the mainstream media?

No it doesn't look good, and as ancapailldorcha has pointed out reading between the lines would suggest there is more to this particular case than has been reported. But we simply don't know and rushing to judgements on the deceased, especially in light of her mental disorder is rash and a bit foolish.

ancapailldorcha

maybe

Lemming wrote: »

I disagree with the assessment that this is as clear as day. Unless you've read some further details not published by the mainstream media?

No it doesn't look good, and as ancapailldorcha has pointed out reading between the lines would suggest there is more to this particular case than has been reported. But we simply don't know and rushing to judgements on the deceased, especially in light of her mental disorder is rash and a bit foolish.

It's definitely not clear as day but I do find it appalling that a man's reputation can be incinerated by a simple false allegation with no consequences for the perpetrator. There really should be some form of protection for men accused at least until evidence is collated.

reprazant

Piliger wrote: »

This is nasty liar who made the whole thing up. It is clear as day.

Which facts are you basing that on? The article doesn't seem to say anything. It does say that police did not this she was lying

Lawyers for the CPS were told by the detective who investigated the rape allegation that there was no evidence that she had lied, they would not be investigating her for perverting the course of justice and the crime had been recorded as rape.

Also, the fact that the CPS opened a case against her means nothing as the CPS are also able to a) make mistakes as the Frances Andrade case reference in the article points out and b) a case against a person does not make them guilty. They have to be found guilty in a court of law, after hearing all, or at least a lot, the relevant facts for that happen, not to make rash, ill-informed judgements without knowing anything about the case based on a newspaper article.

eviltwin

Piliger wrote: »

The enquiry is being lead by the head of the PPS or whatever it is called. This is the woman who has changed the prosecution of rapists so that no evidence is now required, only a 'credible narrative'.

I wouldn't hold my breath. We'll just see a white wash and a statement making an angel of this woman and insinuation, as they ALWAYS do, that this man is really a rapist that they just couldn't find enough evidence against.

Unless you personally know the case then you can't assume who is guilty or not here. I will keep an open mind until one party or other can be proven to be guilty.

Lemming

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

It's definitely not clear as day but I do find it appalling that a man's reputation can be incinerated by a simple false allegation with no consequences for the perpetrator. There really should be some form of protection for men accused at least until evidence is collated.

I agree completely on the lack of anonymity or redress for false claims other than to instigate private prosecution. I'm just saying that calling the woman a nasty liar may be a bit hasty. We have no idea how extreme her condition was, or exactly what she said/did. The thing with mental disorders is that they are not always controllable or at all predictable. If her condition was extreme enough, she may at times have literally been a passenger to a darker side of her psyche.

I'm not defending her, I'm just saying rushing in with words like "nasty" and "liar" may be a bit hasty.

eviltwin

Lemming wrote: »

I agree completely on the lack of anonymity or redress for false claims other than to instigate private prosecution. I'm just saying that calling the woman a nasty liar may be a bit hasty. We have no idea how extreme her condition was, or exactly what she said/did. The thing with mental disorders is that they are not always controllable or at all predictable. If her condition was extreme enough, she may literally have been a passenger to a darker side of her psyche.

I'm not defending her, I'm just saying rushing in with words like "nasty" and "liar" may be a bit hasty.

Posters here who rightly criticise the guilty until proven innocent culture around accused men should remember that also goes for accused women. It's never a good idea to make a judgment from a vague and possibly biased media article.

Lemming

eviltwin wrote: »

Posters here who rightly criticise the guilty until proven innocent culture around accused men should remember that also goes for accused women. It's never a good idea to make a judgment from a vague and possibly biased media article.

I criticise those women (and men) who rush blindly to defend some feminist issue just because it's a woman involved regardless of whether or not it's justified, and I lament the lemming-like rush to pile in off the cliff edge. Which is why I wont rush in carte-blanche the other way around either. No this case does not look good for the woman involved, but as myself & others have already said we don't know enough to comment either way with any degree of certainty.

There's too much bullsh*t in this world to go around. I'll take any given incident on its de/merits kthxbye.

tritium

I'd be more worried about the very blatant and sexist agenda being pushed by a rag like the guardian than this one case tbh. Some the links (and links of links) from that page are pretty bonkers

This is a good one: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/10/20/drunk-woman-says-cop-sexually-assaulted-her-cop-shuts-her-down-with-video-evidence/

Update at the end: "UPDATE: Albuquerque Police Department spokesman Tanner Tixier told TheBlaze on Monday evening that police were not pursuing additional charges against Griego because, despite the apparent falsehood of her sexual assault claim, police did not want to set a precedent that could discourage other potential victims of sexual assault from coming forward."

DoYouEvenLift

Piliger wrote: »

I don't know if anyone has seen this De Freitas false-rape case currently being pursued by the media in the UK.

This woman was bipolar ... but if you listen to the media and her disingenuous father you would think she was mentally retarded in some way.

She accused a colleague of an appalling rape and tried to destroy his life ... then when it failed and the man started a civil action against her, she committed suicide.

Now it's ALL about her as a victim ! it's ALL about how badly she was treated ! it's ALL about this as a discouragement of 'real' rape victims to come forward.

SNIP

ancapailldorcha

maybe

DoYouEvenLift wrote: »

SNIP

A bit tasteless, no?

Wibbs

maybe

Just a little. No more of that please Doyouevenlift.

DoYouEvenLift

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

A bit tasteless, no?

Alright, my bad.

ptee1

Deleted User wrote: »

Update at the end: "UPDATE: Albuquerque Police Department spokesman Tanner Tixier told TheBlaze on Monday evening that police were not pursuing additional charges against Griego because, despite the apparent falsehood of her sexual assault claim, police did not want to set a precedent that could discourage other potential victims of sexual assault from coming forward."

Disgraceful.

Seriously?

Deleted User wrote: »

Update at the end: "UPDATE: Albuquerque Police Department spokesman Tanner Tixier told TheBlaze on Monday evening that police were not pursuing additional charges against Griego because, despite the apparent falsehood of her sexual assault claim, police did not want to set a precedent that could discourage other potential victims of sexual assault from coming forward."

Yes it really sends the wrong message out that somehow protecting women is more important than seeing justice for the men wronged.

I think the real solution here is to provide strong legislation to protect the identity of people who are accused of rape.

If someone accuses an individual publicly (or reports) someone as an unproven rapist they should be seriously penalised. Accusations should be handled privately by the authorities only.

True anonymity would go a long way to protecting both parties until the courts reach a verdict, with both proven instances of rape and false accusations equally punished.

Pawwed Rig

Seriously? wrote: »

I think the real solution here is to provide strong legislation to protect the identity of people who are accused of rape.

To be honest I think this should apply to all crimes

iptba

(October 31 article)

Douglas Todd: Victoria scholar hopes to reduce gulf between men and women

Professor’s latest book on misandry looks at damage technology has done to men and boys

http://www.vancouversun.com/life/Douglas+Todd+Victoria+scholar+hopes+reduce+gulf+between+women/10342810/story.html

Latest book in series: "Replacing Misandry: A Revolutionary History"

Earlier books:
"Spreading Misandry: The Teaching of Contempt for Men in Popular Culture"

"Legalizing Misandry: From Public Shame to Systematic Discrimination Against Men"

"Sanctifying Misandry: Goddess Ideology and the Fall of Man"

The final volume in their series will be titled Transcending Misandry: From Feminist Ideology to Intersexual Dialogue

iptba

Vojera wrote: »

A website I read (for women-who-like-women, but seems to be leaning increasingly towards Feminism-with-a-capital-F) has released a new t-shirt:


It makes me vastly uncomfortable, and from reading the comments I'm certainly not the only one. I can't imagine a "Misogynist" t-shirt would be viewed as "ironic" or "funny" or "provocative" in the way that this t-shirt is being defended.

Popular items for misandry on Etsy:
https://www.etsy.com/market/misandry

DoYouEvenLift

Brave woman shows this patriarchy who's boss! Woo, so brave.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pDOwnV-nzg

iptba wrote: »

Popular items for misandry on Etsy:
https://www.etsy.com/market/misandry

Hopefully more hardcore feminists wear stuff like that so we have clear indication of who to disregard and avoid in our own day-to-day lives

Seriously?

What’s interesting is how she assumes as a female that assaulting that guy is ok, all the while people are chanting “sexual assault is not ok”.

Fair credit to the restraint shown by the guy who in my mind would have been perfectly entitled to return the favour, however that would have just allowed her to play the victim.

Playboy

No

A single man and want to visit a park, no you cant because you might be a pedophile! But in a bizarre turnaround, single women might also be pedophiles! Go gender quality!! Where all single people are now potential pedophiles! A triumph for equality!

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/man-banned-from-entering-park-on-his-own-because-of-paedophile-fears-9849602.html

The Independent wrote:

A man has been barred from entering a park because of a policy banning single men or women without children from visiting the attraction in case they are paedophiles.

newport2

Playboy wrote: »

A single man and want to visit a park, no you cant because you might be a pedophile! But in a bizarre turnaround, single women might also be pedophiles! Go gender quality!! Where all single people are now potential pedophiles! A triumph for equality!

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/man-banned-from-entering-park-on-his-own-because-of-paedophile-fears-9849602.html

"However Alistair Mead, the managing director of the park, was quoted in the local paper saying that he thought the policy was sensible and if he conducted a straw poll customers would back the decision.

"We have done our research and in line with all other parks we don't let single men or women in.""

In fairness, it applies to women too (as you said), so not really sexist. More discriminatory against single people. Also makes the assumption that if you have children, you are not a paedophile.

Astonishing though, I hadn't heard about it before. Where will they draw the line?

reprazant

Considering that those RSD lads say that you should grab women by the throats or shove their faces into your crotch, all without either consent or actually knowing the woman, I am not really that shocked that some women think that they deserve a slap.

Depressingly, there are probably some supporter of Julien Blanc on here.

Wibbs

maybe

DoYouEvenLift wrote: »

Brave woman shows this patriarchy who's boss! Woo, so brave.

This another perfect example of this daft gender war shíte kicking off at the moment. "PUA" gobshíte selling his wares for the largest PUA company out there(RSD) posts a youtube video of him going well over the top harassing Japanese women. Forget "isms" the guy was being a dick and a disturbing one too. A real social mental defective. To the degree that many other PUA types are asking "WTF?" about this eejit. But the show/business must go on pimping "bootcamps" and making money out of guys looking for guidance. A woman shows up to one of these "free" seminars as part of a protest against this eejits video and she kicks off on one. Two gobshítes fighting over a "war" nobody wants and is getting tired of.

In this case who's worse? I'd say the PUA eejit by a goodly distance. The sociopathic shenanigans he pulled in his video, that's bad enough, but if some naive follower of his tries similar emulating his "guru" and gets his head kicked in by some locals and/or is up for sexual assault, IMH that's far more serious than some woman losing the run of herself in a situation of heightened feelings at a protest. Her kicking off is a one off, but this other idiot is selling this guff to thousands of men around the world and too many will believe him and see this incident as an example of the "feminists" holding them back.

mrkiscool2

reprazant wrote: »

Considering that those RSD lads say that you should grab women by the throats or shove their faces into your crotch, all without either consent or actually knowing the woman, I am not really that shocked that some women think that they deserve a slap.

Depressingly, there are probably some supporter of Julien Blanc on here.

Firstly, it's all well and good to make assumptions based on something, but you have no idea. There have been reports of a lot of the guys going to Blanc's seminars just being shy guys who don't have much luck with girls. They aren't all raging misogynists. Based on this video, some woman thinks it's perfectly ok to his someone of the opposite gender (it's never ok, and to even defend that is a silly thing to do. Especially if you believe in true gender equality)

Secondly, there may be some supporters of Blanc yes. And you know what? I'd argue with them about him. I think he is vile and disgusting and a person who takes advantage of people's insecurities. But to try and make the woman's actions in the video better by making a statement like that is just low and diversionary.

reprazant

I have zero respect for people who want to be a PUA as the whole idea of it is that women get treated like little better than bags of meat there to be scored and thrown away after. If your idea of getting women is to learn how to prey upon their insecurities, you'll probably barely have any sort of meaningful relationship with one. As for going to a seminars where the guy doing the talk encourages you to essentially assault women, good god.

mrkiscool2

reprazant wrote: »

I have zero respect for people who want to be a PUA as the whole idea of it is that women get treated like little better than bags of meat there to be scored and thrown away after. If your idea of getting women is to learn how to prey upon their insecurities, you'll probably barely have any sort of meaningful relationship with one. As for going to a seminars where the guy doing the talk encourages you to essentially assault women, good god.

Again, your moving the goalposts. It's definitely not healthy for males to attend PUA seminars, but in a world that requires men to be more and more out-going to even have a chance of getting into a meaningful relationship it's no surprise people like Blanc are trying to take advantage of that. Again, there are some assholes who want to just treat women like meat (which isn't on) but some guys just have no clue where else to turn. It's not all the people who attend that are PUA's, but all the people who lead those seminars are users and despicable people who view women as nothing more than something to be conquered which isn't right.

Again, I want you to answer my point. Do you think it is acceptable for a woman to hit a man? And if yes, do you think it's acceptable for a man to hit a woman? Unless both answers are the same you have some sexist views.

Wibbs

maybe

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

Secondly, there may be some supporters of Blanc yes. And you know what? I'd argue with them about him. I think he is vile and disgusting and a person who takes advantage of people's insecurities. But to try and make the woman's actions in the video better by making a statement like that is just low and diversionary.

For me there are two separate issues in this case.

1) She gets wound up and kicks off. That's out of order regardless whether it's a man or woman doing so. She also kicks off knowing subconsciously or not, that the chances of physical repercussions for a woman thumping a bloke are low. If one of the men had slapped this eejit in the same fashion chances are high he would have gotten a thrashing.

2) Blanc as you say is a vile apparently sociopathic gobshíte pimping his wares to many men out there. Insecure, inexperienced men, even men with genuine mental/social health problems that could think this guys actions and methods are to be followed and that's not good by any metric.

reprazant

I never said that it was acceptable for either a man or a woman to hit someone else. I said that when you have people going to a seminar where the degradation and assault of women is encouraged, I can understand if some women get annoyed by it.

My point wasn't even about the woman hitting the fella, it was more about how pathetic the RSD lads are and how it is quite depressing that lads feel the need to follow these lads.

Wibbs

maybe

reprazant wrote: »

I said that when you have people going to a seminar where the degradation and assault of women is encouraged, I can understand if some women get annoyed by it.

As can I, however I think a point is being made that if it had been one of the men attending who was equally annoyed and had ramped it up to a physical attack, the perception and outcome would have likely been very different. It kinda boils down to this; men and women shouldn't strike other people, but women are more likely to get away with doing so.