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

Seriously?

Going by the source article this wasn't a gentle shove, but one with sufficent force to propel the guy to the ground, the guy appears to simply have reacted instinctively to defend himself.

"This girl pushed the bloke and he immediately hit the deck."

Personally I don't believe in this case he did anything wrong, if females insist on resorting to violence they can't cry foul if they are also answered with violence.

Piliger

Seriously? wrote: »

Going by the source article this wasn't a gentle shove, but one with sufficent force to propel the guy to the ground, the guy appears to simply have reacted instinctively to defend himself.

Are you joking ? The source article is posted to demonstrate the utter sexism and prejudice of that appalling article ! It is completely and utterly misrepresenting the facts an twisting them in a misandrous and prejudiced way.

Piliger

PucaMama wrote: »

She shoved him he punched her

She punched him in the face according to the other men. The press just want to attack any and every man who defends themselves.

eviltwin

This to and fro is ridiculous. We don't know with certainty who is at fault here. We don't know what happened in the build up to this so I will reserve judgement. I shoved a guy once for trying to put his hand up my skirt, he pushed me across the floor and broke my nose. I will defend my right to have shoved him just as I would if there had been any other kind of intimidating or threatening behaviour. But if she just went up and randomly shoved him - and I've seen that happen many times - then I don't blame him. Sometimes our reactions are instinctive, we don't put thought into it. If he was shoved unexpectedly and without reason then he isn't the one to blame.

Piliger

eviltwin wrote: »

This to and fro is ridiculous. We don't know with certainty who is at fault here. We don't know what happened in the build up to this so I will reserve judgement. I shoved a guy once for trying to put his hand up my skirt, he pushed me across the floor and broke my nose. I will defend my right to have shoved him just as I would if there had been any other kind of intimidating or threatening behaviour. But if she just went up and randomly shoved him - and I've seen that happen many times - then I don't blame him. Sometimes our reactions are instinctive, we don't put thought into it. If he was shoved unexpectedly and without reason then he isn't the one to blame.

Which intelligently reflects the issue at hand here in the forum, and the reason why the article is being posted and ridiculed. It is the knee jerk damning of the man as the nasty perpetrator of a violent crime, and the sanctification of the women as the victim in a chaotic drunken that is at the heart of the issue.

Lemming

PucaMama wrote: »

he had the right to be angry but not to hit her. its not her fault he cant react appropriatly

Tell me, what is an appropriate reaction to being struck in the face?

I've not seen the footage or read the story but on principle of action and reaction alone I shall ask you the above question.

Crooked Jack

eviltwin wrote: »

This to and fro is ridiculous. We don't know with certainty who is at fault here. We don't know what happened in the build up to this so I will reserve judgement. I shoved a guy once for trying to put his hand up my skirt, he pushed me across the floor and broke my nose. I will defend my right to have shoved him just as I would if there had been any other kind of intimidating or threatening behaviour. But if she just went up and randomly shoved him - and I've seen that happen many times - then I don't blame him. Sometimes our reactions are instinctive, we don't put thought into it. If he was shoved unexpectedly and without reason then he isn't the one to blame.

This is the crux of this particular incident, we simply dont know the details. You would have been justified in flat out levelling that bastard. Conversely, male or female, if anyone attacked me without provocation I'd have no issue knockinga few teeth down their throat

iptba

(January 10 article)

A JOURNALIST says she had a gun pointed to her head at the Charlie Hebdo offices but was told she would be spared because she was a woman.

Sigolene Vinson, told Radio France Internationale, said she survived the attack at the satirical weekly magazine which killed 12 people because of her gender.

http://www.news.com.au/world/europe/journalist-sigolene-vinson-says-she-was-spared-by-gunmen-because-of-her-gender/story-fnh81p7g-1227180266893

An alternative way to say this might be to say women can be privileged/it's an example of female privilege (cf. all the the talk of male privilege).

Lemming

iptba wrote: »

(January 10 article)



http://www.news.com.au/world/europe/journalist-sigolene-vinson-says-she-was-spared-by-gunmen-because-of-her-gender/story-fnh81p7g-1227180266893

An alternative way to say this might be to say women can be privileged/it's an example of female privilege (cf. all the the talk of male privilege).

TBH iptba, I think it's very wrong trying to make capital out of the CH attack like that. Had the woman been hit in one of the bursts of gunfire they'd have shrugged their shoulders and carried on without a second thought. The two sick individuals in question believed whatever the magical sky faeiries told them, so I'd not be quick to put much stock in whatever they said, more what they did. And what they did was shocking in the extreme.

Edit: on second thoughts, I doubt they'd have even shrugged their shoulders had she been hit.

DoYouEvenLift

iptba wrote: »

(January 10 article)



http://www.news.com.au/world/europe/journalist-sigolene-vinson-says-she-was-spared-by-gunmen-because-of-her-gender/story-fnh81p7g-1227180266893

An alternative way to say this might be to say women can be privileged/it's an example of female privilege (cf. all the the talk of male privilege).

"You may live, M'Lady!"

iptba

Lemming wrote: »

The two sick individuals in question believed whatever the magical sky faeiries told them, so I'd not be quick to put much stock in whatever they said, more what they did.

This is an example of what they did. And I believe billions of people believe in religions (I'm not saying billions are like them but your dismissal appears to be based on dismissing as not important the actions of people of religious faith).

ETA: I think there are plenty of others with chivalrous attitudes in the world. Indeed, we see them ingrained in the rules and regulations of countries with military service for only one gender, along with conscription only for one gender. The different emphasis on male and female victims of domestic violence may be influenced by chivalry.

Lemming

iptba wrote: »

This is an example of what they did. And I believe billions of people believe in religions (I'm not saying billions are like them but your dismissal appears to be based on dismissing as not important the actions of people of religious faith).

Just so we're clear here; two lunatics walk into an office in Paris, gun down a load of people including police officers having convinced themselves that they got the nod to do so from magical sky faeiries. The they then flee and are killed a few days later after a siege involving at least another hostage. But you're fixating on the fact that they told a woman in the office that they were sparing her because she was a woman and was to run along home right away and conver to Islam.

Right. Ok.

People point out the idiocy that feminists routinly spout out, often on some matter with the most tenous and cynically linked threads of guff and then wonder why feminists don't speak out. Here we see the reverse so I AM speaking out. Sorry iptba but you're barking up the wrong tree on this one.

iptba

I believe chivalry is at the basis of many of the reasons men are treating differently (less well). As I've mentioned, whole countries have different rules for men and women with military service and conscription which I believe is likely largely due to chivalry. I imagine there's a good chance it is why female offenders are treated differently (e.g. (i) in prison conditions and (ii) in sentencing (which many argue is unequal). Also as I mentioned I think it probably influences how male and female victims of domestic violence are supported. I could probably give other examples also.

This is an actual example of chivalry in its most extreme, with a person's life saved due to their gender. I thought it was worth noting - this thread, after all, is (largely) about posting individual examples; others are free to think otherwise.

Seriously?

It’s perhaps worth noting that while they spared that female they did kill another policewoman. Also they did spare another guy later telling him don't kill civilians.

That said while I disagree with you with regards the Paris situation I do believe that you're correct as regards chivalry and nonsense like ‘Women and children’ or ‘Don’t hit women’.

iptba

psinno wrote: »

It is there to trivialise the consequences of false rape allegations.

Here's an example of an actual bad outcome with a false rape allegation:

False Rape Accusation Leads To Alaska Man’s Beating Death
http://dailycaller.com/2015/01/08/false-rape-accusation-leads-to-alaska-mans-beating-death/

(January 8 article)

Piliger

Seriously? wrote: »

It’s perhaps worth noting that while they spared that female they did kill another policewoman. Also they did spare another guy later telling him don't kill civilians.

That said while I disagree with you with regards the Paris situation I do believe that you're correct as regards chivalry and nonsense like ‘Women and children’ or ‘Don’t hit women’.

And of course this incident was nothing to do with chivalry - it was more to do with a woman not being worth killing, being basically a chattel of men in their religion. They let her go like they would let a cow go, basically.

eviltwin

Seriously? wrote: »

It’s perhaps worth noting that while they spared that female they did kill another policewoman. Also they did spare another guy later telling him don't kill civilians.

That said while I disagree with you with regards the Paris situation I do believe that you're correct as regards chivalry and nonsense like ‘Women and children’ or ‘Don’t hit women’.

There was also a female victim in the CH office. I don't think the fact a woman wasn't killed was relevant as we know 2 women were killed. The fact was that the targets just happened to be male cartoonists, I've no doubt had a female cartoonist been responsible for those drawings she would have been killed too.

iptba

eviltwin wrote: »

There was also a female victim in the CH office. I don't think the fact a woman wasn't killed was relevant as we know 2 women were killed. The fact was that the targets just happened to be male cartoonists, I've no doubt had a female cartoonist been responsible for those drawings she would have been killed too.

Regarding the female victim killed in the CH office, Wikipedia says:

Elsa Cayat was the only female slain and was targeted because she was Jewish.[64] A second female journalist named Sigolène Vinson survived and stated that one of the shooters aimed at her but spared her life. She reported he told her, "I'm not killing you because you are a woman and we don't kill women but you have to convert to Islam, read the Qu'ran and wear a veil." She said he then left, shouting, "Allahu akbar, allahu akbar."[65][66][67]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Hebdo_shooting

Anyway, doesn't seem like I've much/any support on this. Personally, I see a value in documenting different treatment. I think plenty of people/countries/cultures in the world have odd views on other issues and sexist things they do or say can still be reported.

Lemming

iptba wrote: »

Anyway, doesn't seem like I've much/any support on this. Personally, I see a value in documenting different treatment

I don't think there's really much to document here that can be taken seriously as being credible evidence of sexism. We have two guys who were deluded enough to commit an act of mass murder based on religion. On top of that, they were completely inconsistent in their application of apparent sexism. One woman was spared, whilst others were gunned down because - despite being female, had something else going on that apparently gave override to any notions of "chivalry" these two mongs had. They can't have it both ways on that count.

There's nothing in their words or actions to take seriously other than the fact they were deluded mongs who carried out a horrifying act of barbarism.

eviltwin

iptba wrote: »

Regarding the female victim killed in the CH office, Wikipedia says:


Anyway, doesn't seem like I've much/any support on this. Personally, I see a value in documenting different treatment. I think plenty of people/countries/cultures in the world have odd views on other issues and sexist things they do or say can still be reported.

She was targeted because she was Jewish, the men were killed because they were the ones responsible for the cartoons. There is no sexism here. The gender of the victims is irrelevant.

py2006

I really don't think you can accuse terrorists of being sexist. Sexism is an irrelevant charge by comparison.

iptba

Lemming wrote: »

One woman was spared, whilst others were gunned down because - despite being female, had something else going on that apparently gave override to any notions of "chivalry" these two mongs had. They can't have it both ways on that count.

One doesn't have to be consistently sexist/chivalrous/whatever to be sexist/chivalrous/whatever. If somebody didn't discriminate by gender in something (e.g. employing somebody) 4 times, but did the 5th time, that would still be sexist.

Piliger

py2006 wrote: »

I really don't think you can accuse terrorists of being sexist. Sexism is an irrelevant charge by comparison.

I have no idea what that means. Terrorists cannot be sexist ? or you cannot charge them with being sexist ?

Lemming

Look; itpba - what do you want to come from documenting the fact that two dead guys - who killed a whole load of people - apparently spared one woman on notions of sexism, whislt killing other women?

What message can we take, what lesson learned, etc.?

Lemming

Piliger wrote: »

I have no idea what that means. Terrorists cannot be sexist ? or you cannot charge them with being sexist ?

I think what he's trying to point out that in the grand scheme of things, there are far more serious issues to take note of when it comes to such people. Not whether they're misunderstood souls with an angle on gender studies just waiting to be explored with them if someone would just give them the chance.

ancapailldorcha

maybe

What stops a man from beating up and raping his female partner? According to research published today, it is not sanctions imposed by the criminal justice system, such as prison or probation, but attending a course with other abusers

No mention of female perpetrators of course.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/12/beating-your-partner-crime-not-illness-domestic-violence

NormalBob Ubiquitypants

Story on my newsfeed from the Irish Mirror of a Chinese woman who cut of her husband's penis twice after he cheated on her. The comments are mostly women laughing and saying good for her. Really shocking.

iptba

NormalBob Ubiquitypants wrote: »

Story on my newsfeed from the Irish Mirror of a Chinese woman who cut of her husband's penis twice after he cheated on her. The comments are mostly women laughing and saying good for her. Really shocking.

Here's one article on this:

Wife chopped her husband's penis off after she discovered he had cheated on her… then cut it off AGAIN after surgeons managed to reattach it in China

- Fan Lung, 32, used his wife Feng's mobile to send saucy email to lover

- When she found out, she snipped off his manhood while he was sleeping

- Surgeons reattached it but Feng went into hospital and cut it off again

- Two-timer's penis was thrown from window and couldn't be found

- It's believed missing body part was taken by a stray cat or dog

By JENNY STANTON FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 14:37 GMT, 13 January 2015 | UPDATED: 15:11 GMT, 13 January 2015



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2908057/Wife-chopped-husband-s-penis-discovered-cheated-cut-surgeons-managed-reattach-China.html

jackofalltrades

maybe

Why is Lucinda holding a women-only briefing?

Eyebrows were raised among political correspondents this week when it emerged that the leader of the nameless political party, Lucinda Creighton, had invited only female journalists to a briefing this Friday.

Creighton emailed several female journalists – including three from TheJournal.ie – on Monday, inviting them to attend an off the record breakfast briefing on her plans for a new party at a Dublin city centre venue this Friday.
Creighton maintains there is “nothing Machiavellian” about the invitation, but did note to the Irish Times that Leinster House is a pretty male-dominated environment, both in media and politics. While that is certainly the case just what exactly will a briefing for women journalists, at the expense of their male colleagues, achieve?

http://www.thejournal.ie/state-of-the-nation-lucinda-creighton-1880695-Jan2015/

More "fighting sexism with sexism" nonsense.
Looks like another reason not to vote for this party.

um7y1h83ge06nx

jackofalltrades wrote: »

More "fighting sexism with sexism" nonsense.
Looks like another reason not to vote for this party.

Just came on to comment on this. Not smart to alienate roughly half your potential voters when you're starting a new party.

Give her a year and her attitude might change when she's desperate for votes.

ancapailldorcha

maybe

jackofalltrades wrote: »

More "fighting sexism with sexism" nonsense.
Looks like another reason not to vote for this party.

Darren Incalculable AcrossL wrote: »

Just came on to comment on this. Not smart to alienate roughly half your potential voters when you're starting a new party.

Give her a year and her attitude might change when she's desperate for votes.

I've noticed that with the Greens over here. They almost seem intent on creating a girls club.

LostinBlanch

maybe

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I've noticed that with the Greens over here. They almost seem intent on creating a girls club.

While this guy is pushing back against the current tide. Justice For Men And Boys (And The Women Who Love Them).

He's running against Gloria De Piero the Labour Shadow Minister for Women & Equalities, who has a very thin majority of only 192 votes.

While they are running two other candidates, one of them a male victim of domestic violence.

I don't think for a minute they expect to get elected but running will definitely bring issues that many have discussed here to the fore. Especially if Gloria de Piero loses her seat.

ancapailldorcha

maybe

LostinBlanch wrote: »

While this guy is pushing back against the current tide. Justice For Men And Boys (And The Women Who Love Them).

He's running against Gloria De Piero the Labour Shadow Minister for Women & Equalities, who has a very thin majority of only 192 votes.

While they are running two other candidates, one of them a male victim of domestic violence.

I don't think for a minute they expect to get elected but running will definitely bring issues that many have discussed here to the fore. Especially if Gloria de Piero loses her seat.

The Greens have completely ignored men. One of them even asked me if men can even experience sexism which says it all, really. This is why UKIP are popular. They've targeted a demographic which has been ignored by the bigger parties in their attempts to cow tow to big business.

Could you give me the name of the male domestic violence victim please? I'd like to read up on this.

LostinBlanch

maybe

It's in their election manifesto linked in the article.

The guy you are looking for is Ian Young who is running in the Sherwood constituency against a Tory called Mark Hucknall.

Their other candidate is Ray Barry who is running against another Tory called Anna Soubry in the Broxtowe consituency.

ancapailldorcha

maybe

LostinBlanch wrote: »

It's in their election manifesto linked in the article.

The guy you are looking for is Ian Young who is running in the Sherwood constituency against a Tory called Mark Hucknall.

Their other candidate is Ray Barry who is running against another Tory called Anna Soubry in the Broxtowe consituency.

They don't even have their own website. Some of the stuff they're coming out with is absurd. The worst thing is that anyone who even mentions men's issues will likely be linked to the drivel they're spouting.

LordNorbury

Have to say, was watching the RTE documentary the other day, 'We Need to Talk About Porn", and I found it outrageously sexist. The gender bias I thought was completely in your face and seriously annoying.

The 2 part documentary revolved around a bunch of sexually inexperienced teenagers who could only have been found at a prayer meeting down at the Iona Institute.

The angle of every "expert" participant, was that young men watch porn and then want to try certain sexual acts that are inherently degrading to women. Oral sex (deepthroat), was passed off as an inherently violent act that men will try to push on women and that women must hate and basically refuse to accommodate a guy who wants it, because, "they see this when watching porn you see". Lost on RTE is that some women really enjoy doing this.

Women shaving their public hair was explicitly blamed on men watching porn, (it doesn't explain why women choose to shave their legs/armpits, I suppose you can put that down to men watching porn as well), so basically personal grooming is now being pushed on women by men and this happens because "men see shaved female genitalia when watching porn you see", according to RTE.

I found the angle of this documentary actually disturbing in its invective and childish cynicism towards men. Also, according to RTE "research", women don't watch porn, another big lie as we all know.

iptba

Just to say that on reflection the killers at the CH massacre saying didn't kill women, and not killing one woman in particular because of this, was probably not something I should have bothered posting on this thread as their behaviour was so outside cultural norms that it may only represent their strange individual views.

ALiasEX

Saw this on facepuke http://elitedaily.com/women/big-sister-made-for-you/698206/

20 Reasons Why Your Big Sister Is The Greatest Gift Your Parents Gave You

Starts off "If the Solange-Beyoncé-Elevatorgate scandal taught us anything, it’s this: You don’t mess with sisters."

Seriously?

ALiasEX wrote: »

Saw this on facepuke http://elitedaily.com/women/big-sister-made-for-you/698206/

20 Reasons Why Your Big Sister Is The Greatest Gift Your Parents Gave You

Starts off "If the Solange-Beyoncé-Elevatorgate scandal taught us anything, it’s this: You don’t mess with sisters."

Hardly sexism, more general faecebook you-go-girl rubbish.
ps. you don't have to click it

ALiasEX

Seriously? wrote: »

Hardly sexism, more general faecebook you-go-girl rubbish.
ps. you don't have to click it

What about the first line? It sounds like blaming the victim to me

Also assuming Jay-Z did something wrong (or do we now know what happened in the elevator)

ancapailldorcha

maybe

Locking up low-level offenders isn't a great solution. Only applies to female offenders of course:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/18/scottish-women-jail-offenders-crime-children

ancapailldorcha

maybe

I think I might be stretching the definition of sexism here:

py2006

...because only men voted for men. :rolleyes:

Piliger

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I think I might be stretching the definition of sexism here:

Holy Fcuk ... is that a real poster ???

ancapailldorcha

maybe

Piliger wrote: »

Holy Fcuk ... is that a real poster ???

Yes. Yes it is.

Pawwed Rig

Do they have any seats out of interest?

Piliger

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Yes. Yes it is.

Getting my biro out for a complaint .... :mad: Bloody patronising AND sexist.

ancapailldorcha

maybe

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Do they have any seats out of interest?

At the moment, Caroline Lucas is their only MP. She is the former leader of the party. They've doubled their membership in the past year.

Pawwed Rig

Plenty of Lib Dem seats up for grabs in the next election

ancapailldorcha

maybe

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Plenty of Lib Dem seats up for grabs in the next election

True. The Green's can't afford to field too many candidates. Nowhere near as many as the big boys.