Tonight With Vincent Browne Thread v3.0 (07/04/13 - 08/07/14)

Lisha

Lapin wrote: »

Adverts targeting a female audience

The Guinness ad?

Lisha

Oh poor little Thor! Some people are so bloody cruel.

Lapin

Apart form the Guinness ad and one a travel agency

Magic weight loss pill aimed exclusively at women
Pampers featuring mother and child (No males in ad)
Hitchen appliance
H&M (Blokes don't shop there)
Tampons
Eircom (Women forever on the phone )
Rice Krispies again featuring mother and child (No males in ad)
Vacuum cleaners
Aldi (with a child referring to her mum's shopping habits
Pregnancy and Baby Fair
Token hair loss ad for the lads.


Just sayin !

Lisha

Lapin wrote: »

Apart form the Guinness ad

Weight loss pill
Pampers featuring mother and child (No males in ad)
Hitchen appliance
H&M
Tampons
Rice Krispies again featuring mother and child (No males in ad)
Vacuum cleaners
Aldi
Pregnancy and Baby Fair
Token hair loss ad for the lads.

Fair point, I don't really watch ads, as I'm too busy playing with phone .

hotmail.com

Lapin wrote: »

Apart form the Guinness ad

Weight loss pill
Pampers featuring mother and child (No males in ad)
Hitchen appliance
H&M
Tampons
Rice Krispies again featuring mother and child (No males in ad)
Vacuum cleaners
Aldi
Pregnancy and Baby Fair
Token hair loss ad for the lads.

Ali and Vacuum cleaners? Men don't hoover or go to supermarkets?

TV3 staff have been offered voluntarily redundancy!! News just in. Is that it for TV3?

Lapin

hotmail.com wrote: »

Ali and Vacuum cleaners? Men don't hoover or go to supermarkets?

See my ninja edited explainations.

Busted Flat.

hotmail.com wrote: »

Ali and Vacuum cleaners? Men don't hoover or go to supermarkets?

TV3 staff have been offered voluntarily redundancy!! News just in. Is that it for TV3?

I live on my own and do both, and I actually do my own washing and cooking, hopefully this will not come as a shock to you.

Calhoun

hotmail.com wrote: »

Feminism is about giving equality to women. I don't know why some people, even women, find the word feminism, so offensive (My own hunch is because men have successfully made it a dirty word).

The odd extremist in the feminist movement doesn't own the word, nor can they undo the key aim of feminism - the advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of equality of the sexes.

You are right feminism is only about equality for women but ignores the inequalities/privileges that women have which is why it doesnt have universal support. I feel feminists do a pretty good job of making the word dirty themselves case in point here

hotmail.com

Calhoun wrote: »

You are right feminism is only about equality for women but ignores the inequalities/privileges that women have which is why it doesnt have universal support. I feel feminists do a pretty good job of making the word dirty themselves case in point here

Women have privileges..like what? When you consider the issues that affect women negatively, which I'm sure you're aware of, any perceived privileges women may have must seem irrelevant.

Calhoun

hotmail.com wrote: »

Women have privileges..like what? When you consider the issues that affect women negatively, which I'm sure you're aware of, any perceived privileges women may have must seem irrelevant.

Off the top of my head i would suggest, when it comes to criminal justice women seem to get a light touch approach compared to the opposite sex. Your right though the rights of others dont matter because of issues that affect one group :rolleyes:.

hotmail.com

Calhoun wrote: »

Off the top of my head i would suggest, when it comes to criminal justice women seem to get a light touch approach compared to the opposite sex. Your right though the rights of others dont matter because of issues that affect one group :rolleyes:.

The vast majority of offenders are men. The vast majority of murderers, rapists, burglars are men.

Some men are just in denial about women and men.

And I know some of the posters here will ask for statistics to back up my point! Save it, in denial!

Calhoun

hotmail.com wrote: »

The vast majority of offenders are men. The vast majority of murderers, rapists, burglars are men.

Some men are just in denial about women and men.

And I know some of the posters here will ask for statistics to back up my point! Save it, in denial!

Thanks, you have really helped give people an insight into why feminism might have a bad name all on its own without men helping it although in fairness that comment illustrated it in itself.

Rather than take an opportunity to show that feminism is more than a card carrying man hating group that only cares for the rights and privileges of its member we splash around generalizations that men are in denial.

RayM

Calhoun wrote: »

Rather than take an opportunity to show that feminism is more than a card carrying man hating group that only cares for the rights and privileges of its member we splash around generalizations that men are in denial.

Do you believe that feminism is more than "a card carrying man hating group"?

Busted Flat.

RayM wrote: »

Do you believe that feminism is more than "a card carrying man hating group"?

I have met a few, he is not far of the mark.

Calhoun

RayM wrote: »

Do you believe that feminism is more than "a card carrying man hating group"?

I do of course, like any interest group there are going to be multiple layers/groups in which people fall into, moderate to extreme, equal rights versus the rights of one sex versus another.

However the reason i jumped into the conversation was to respond to the generalization that men are responsible for turning the word feminism into a dirty word.

AnonoBoy

jescart wrote: »

"Fluoride" is a conspiracy theory??

It's a highly toxic substance and is most definitely added to our public water supply. Where is the conspiracy?

Salt is a highly toxic substance and is added to our food.

STAMP OUT SODIUM CHLORIDE!!!!

hotmail.com

Calhoun wrote: »

Thanks, you have really helped give people an insight into why feminism might have a bad name all on its own without men helping it although in fairness that comment illustrated it in itself.

Rather than take an opportunity to show that feminism is more than a card carrying man hating group that only cares for the rights and privileges of its member we splash around generalizations that men are in denial.

Well least women get off lightly in the courts (apparently).

Calhoun

hotmail.com wrote: »

Well least women get off lightly in the courts (apparently).

Indeed

RayM

Calhoun wrote: »

I do of course, like any interest group there are going to be multiple layers/groups in which people fall into, moderate to extreme, equal rights versus the rights of one sex versus another.

However the reason i jumped into the conversation was to respond to the generalization that men are responsible for turning the word feminism into a dirty word.

There are quite a lot of men out there who feel uncomfortable about the fact that extra rights for women = less privilege for men. Some of them, I think it's fair to say, don't seem to like or respect women very much. It is in their interest to lump all feminists in with the more extreme minority - and also to misrepresent mainstream feminist arguments as 'extreme'. Therefore, I think it's fair to say that those vigorously opposed to feminism have attempted, with considerable success, to turn it into a dirty word.

hotmail.com

RayM wrote: »

There are quite a lot of men out there who feel uncomfortable about the fact that extra rights for women = less privilege for men. Some of them, I think it's fair to say, don't seem to like or respect women very much. It is in their interest to lump all feminists in with the more extreme minority - and also to misrepresent mainstream feminist arguments as 'extreme'. Therefore, I think it's fair to say that those vigorously opposed to feminism have attempted, with considerable success, to turn it into a dirty word.

There is a great sense of denial among many men about feminism and the treatment of women. And they get very irate when people say "men" without prefacing it with "some".

Calhoun

RayM wrote: »

There are quite a lot of men out there who feel uncomfortable about the fact that extra rights for women = less privilege for men. Some of them, I think it's fair to say, don't seem to like or respect women very much. It is in their interest to lump all feminists in with the more extreme minority - and also to misrepresent mainstream feminist arguments as 'extreme'. Therefore, I think it's fair to say that those vigorously opposed to feminism have attempted, with considerable success, to turn it into a dirty word.

Well personally i would be in favor of equal rights for both sexes, as the saying goes what is good for the goose is good for the gander and we should never be selective of rights because of sex.

Like the feminist movement the men's side has its extremist but is it fair to generalize and lump all men into the one bucket? Is this not the same thing?

My point was that when we generalize more often than not it damages the argument we are trying to make.

RayM

hotmail.com wrote: »

There is a great sense of denial among many men about feminism and the treatment of women. And they get very irate when people say "men" without prefacing it with "some".

Their logic is similar to that of hardline Ulster Unionists (and supremacists everywhere, from South Africa to Israel). Deny that inequality exists, claim that you're actually the victimised party, and based on the actions of a minority, portray all opponents as extremists.

Calhoun wrote:

Well personally i would be in favor of equal rights for both sexes, as the saying goes what is good for the goose is good for the gander and we should never be selective of rights because of sex.

Like the feminist movement the men's side has its extremist but is it fair to generalize and lump all men into the one bucket? Is this not the same thing?

My point was that when we generalize more often than not it damages the argument we are trying to make.

The vast, vast majority of feminists don't lump all men into one bucket. I think people sometimes willfully take the word 'men' far too literally when it's uttered by a feminist and not accompanied by 'some'. When a woman appears on a televised debate and blames 'men' for sex trafficking, she isn't attempting to imply that all men are somehow responsible. That would be completely ludicrous. Although I do think that by failing to use the word 'some', she was giving an open goal to those who seek to discredit feminism as a whole.

Galwayguy35

Watched this last night, small bit of radfem notions in it but overall there were some good points raised as well.

Thought the one with the glasses who was from the Left Alliance was a bit full on though.

donfers

RayM wrote: »

Their logic is similar to that of hardline Ulster Unionists (and supremacists everywhere, from South Africa to Israel). Deny that inequality exists, claim that you're actually the victimised party, and based on the actions of a minority, portray all opponents as extremists.



The vast, vast majority of feminists don't lump all men into one bucket. I think people sometimes willfully take the word 'men' far too literally when it's uttered by a feminist and not accompanied by 'some'. When a woman appears on a televised debate and blames 'men' for sex trafficking, she isn't attempting to imply that all men are somehow responsible. That would be completely ludicrous. Although I do think that by failing to use the word 'some', she was giving an open goal to those who seek to discredit feminism as a whole.

She didn't just neglect to use the word "some"

She said men collectively have to answer for it

You can pretend all you like that men (did I neglect to stick the word "some" in there, sh sure it doesn't bother you anyway) who have a problem with feminism are trying to keep women oppressed or "in their place". It's utter fantasy though and is a strategy to justify the increasingly discriminatory and sexist policies that (some) feminists are calling for

Temaz

I never saw so many cackling hens in a room than I did last night

Elmer Blooker

It was refreshing to hear one of the women on that debate say "women objectify themselves" - good to hear some honesty for a change when this topic is being discussed.
It just isn't true that men are entirely the cause of the objectification of women.

vicwatson

Maybe VB will be an employee of UTV soon?

brooke 2

Thought the woman from Zimbabwe had some interesting anecdotes about the universality (not!) of the Catholic church.

The following is one:

An archbishop in the Philippines felt compelled to send a letter to one of his priests,
informing him that if he had any more than two children his pay would be reduced!

Calhoun

RayM wrote: »

The vast, vast majority of feminists don't lump all men into one bucket. I think people sometimes willfully take the word 'men' far too literally when it's uttered by a feminist and not accompanied by 'some'. When a woman appears on a televised debate and blames 'men' for sex trafficking, she isn't attempting to imply that all men are somehow responsible. That would be completely ludicrous. Although I do think that by failing to use the word 'some', she was giving an open goal to those who seek to discredit feminism as a whole.

Was too tired to keep posting lastnight, agree with most of what you are saying but non more so than your last point.

I don't see why its ok to generalize against one group on a whole and not another and then to label any protests to this double standard by using emotive words.

Neither group generalizing does any justice to either arguments but which is worse targeting a sub group or a whole sex? You can choose to be one but not the other.

take everything

Crazy stuff altogether.
Very damning.