Unhelpful 'gendering' of social issues

The Corinthian

SeventySix wrote: »

Was there any way that she could have targeted the article towards men doing something to prevent sexual violence without being labeled a bigot, do you think?

Not labelling all men as either rapists or accessories to rape would have been a good start - you do realize the seriousness of such a statement? All gypsies are criminals is apparently unacceptable, yet all men being criminals (as perpetrators or accessories) is?

I am not being sarky, genuinely want to know.She is asking something of men, that the men here it seems dont want to be asked to do, that it seems they dont feel they should have to do. Is that a fair assertion?

No, she was asking something of only men. Apparently she didn't feel that women should have to do what she asked of men. Or that men don't have female friends. Not sure which is more stupid a presumption.

Is it fair to say that men with little respect for women, probably dont have many close women friends?

No, it would be pure speculation to say that. Indeed, strong relationships with members of the opposite sex are often instrumental in loss of respect for that sex.

I'm sorry, but there's really no way one could rationally defend that editorial or its author. It's more believable that the whole thing was a hoax, written to be so over the top than one could not take it seriously.

SeventySix

mariaalice wrote: »

I think you might be missing the point that some men are making I.e why ask men ALONE to do something about sexual violence.

Not men alone, but men in particular. Do you see the difference? I do see that it might be necessary as women probably dont have the same influence with men that already dont respect women. Can you see that?

Also women are already asked to do things by society to mitagate risk, in how the dress, where they go, how they act, what they drink etc.

mariaalice

SeventySix wrote: »

No, of course not. But could it be possible that a young man that hasnt raped but has been openly dismissive of women, is agressive towards them in nightclubs with out having actually steped fully over the line, could be influenced toward having abetter attitude by his peers. Is it possible that this prevents a rape in 10 years?

I know I seem to be defending her, which is not really my intention. But I do defend the principal that all the reasonable decent men out there are not entired powerless to try and intervene when one of their associates is getting out of line.

That was kinda my point about my husband not engaging with jokes that put women down both men and women tell those kind of jokes by the way.
I think you are a little naïve in thinking that the influence of friends is going to change behaviour to that extent, particularly sexually violent behaviour.

With a young teen friends might influence other criminal behaviour such as petty theft but sexual behaviour is different.

donfers

SeventySix wrote: »

Jesus, are you being deliberately obtuse?

One of your friends is striking out with women all over the place in a nightclub, getting drunk and frustrated and angry, calling them all bitches and sluts, grabbing girls arms as they walk by. In that case, could you see a possiblity that you might step in, tell him to chill out, be a bit more respectful, that how he is acting is not acceptable.

I am not being obtuse at all, she is, none of my family or friends behave like that and I resent the fact that both you and she seem to be implying that they do

Amirani

SeventySix wrote: »

Was there any way that she could have targeted the article towards men doing something to prevent sexual violence without being labeled a bigot, do you think?

I am not being sarky, genuinely want to know.She is asking something of men, that the men here it seems dont want to be asked to do, that it seems they dont feel they should have to do. Is that a fair assertion?

She could have been less inflammatory in her language and cut out some of the generalisations - "men who go to strip clubs are exhibiting rapist like qualities and all men know someone like this'.

However, directing it purely at men was always going to raise questions of bigotry.

I don't have any more responsibility to "prevent" rape than any woman does. I of course would do what I can to prevent it (as I would with any crime), but there's no special onus on me to do it purely because I have a set of genitalia that's common amongst most rapists.

Is it fair to say that men with little respect for women, probably dont have many close women friends? That the influence of women in that case probably wont mean much to someone that already has a bad attitude.

I'm not sure that's the case. I've encountered many men who are quite close to female friends despite having a fairly sexist and misogynistic view towards them. That's not even including familial or sexual relationships.

um7y1h83ge06nx

One thing none of us have considering is that she is professionally trolling. Maybe she just wanted to write a very abrasive, controversial article in order to boost her profile.

Still doesn't excuse the article, but might explain why the article and her tweets are so over the top.

SeventySix

donfers wrote: »

I am not being obtuse at all, she is, none of my family or friends behave like that and I resent the fact that both you and she seem to be implying that they do

You seem to be determined to take what she said personally.

If someone said
'People, tell your female friends not to engage in risky behaviour' would you assume that they are saying that all the female friends of all the people in the world are purposely placing themselves in danger?

SeventySix

NiallSparky wrote: »

She could have been less inflammatory in her language and cut out some of the generalisations - "men who go to strip clubs are exhibiting rapist like qualities and all men know someone like this'.

However, directing it purely at men was always going to raise questions of bigotry.

I don't have any more responsibility to "prevent" rape than any woman does. I of course would do what I can to prevent it (as I would with any crime), but there's no special onus on me to do it purely because I have a set of genitalia that's common amongst most rapists.

You dont have any more responsiblity, but would you say you have any? And while it seems to be accepted in society that women in particular have the responsibitily to dress conservatively, not get too drunk etc to try and prevent rape, that men would have a responsibitly, in particular to try exert a positive influence of any male aquaintences that are acting out of line.

NiallSparky wrote: »

I'm not sure that's the case. I've encountered many men who are quite close to female friends despite having a fairly sexist and misogynistic view towards them. That's not even including familial or sexual relationships.

And do you think that these sexist and misogynistic men would listen if one of these women told them they were out of line. And would they maybe take more notice of a male friend that they do respect.

Amirani

Nathanael Jolly Barmaid wrote: »

One thing none of us have considering is that she is professionally trolling. Maybe she just wanted to write a very abrasive, controversial article in order to boost her profile.

Still doesn't excuse the article, but might explain why the article and her tweets are so over the top.

I don't think that's the case. I completely understand where she's coming from and I reckon her intentions are fairly genuine. However, a lot of her piece is pretty offensive to men and is pretty unacceptable in that sense, regardless of whether it was accidental or otherwise.

The Corinthian

SeventySix wrote: »

You seem to be determined to take what she said personally.

Why wouldn't he take what she said personally? It was incredibly sexist and demeaning twoards men, bordering on hate propaganda. There was no misunderstanding either; this wasn't some illiterate blog, this was a national newspaper where articles are vetted prior to publication.

You've played apologist and suggested different reasons and interpretations for what she wrote. Fair enough.

Problem is, they've all been rebutted and reasons have been given for those rebuttals. So what now? Still maintain she did nothing wrong?

Wendolene

Nathanael Jolly Barmaid wrote: »

One thing none of us have considering is that she is professionally trolling. Maybe she just wanted to write a very abrasive, controversial article in order to boost her profile.

Still doesn't excuse the article, but might explain why the article and her tweets are so over the top.

It did occur to me that she may be trawling for an op-ed role with the Daily Mail, or some other journalistic denizen of whack-jobbery. It's just the type of OTT, troll-laden and unbalanced drivel that the DM specialises in.

So, maybe she's just job hunting ... but, dear God, that was dreadful muck altogether.

And I'm very uncomfortable giving her the oxygen of publicity as a result.

The Corinthian

SeventySix wrote: »

And do you think that these sexist and misogynistic men would listen if one of these women told them they were out of line. And would they maybe take more notice of a male friend that they do respect.

Yes, those women are powerless victims too...

And only sexist and misogynistic men rape... had it occurred to you that something like sociopathy is likely a far greater determinant than misogyny where it comes to such violent crime, or does everything have to have a political dimension?

Amirani

SeventySix wrote: »

You dont have any more responsiblity, but would you say you have any? And while it seems to be accepted in society that women in particular have the responsibitily to dress conservatively, not get too drunk etc to try and prevent rape, that men would have a responsibitly, in particular to try exert a positive influence of any male aquaintences that are acting out of line.

I don't accept whatsoever that women have a responsibility to dress conservatively and not get too drunk. They should be absolutely be allowed to do these things if they wish.

I don't have any real responsibility to exert a positive influence on male acquaintances of mine. As I said before, I have done and will continue to do so if necessary. This is just based on my own ethical principles though.

And do you think that these sexist and misogynistic men would listen if one of these women told them they were out of line. And would they maybe take more notice of a male friend that they do respect.

Honestly, I don't think so. There's very little talking to these tools. To paraphrase Frank, it's akin to trying to convince a religious extremist.

mariaalice

Men with sexist or misogynistic view of women don't always turn in to a rapist, men can have close women friend and still have terrible views of woman I have seen this.

SeventySix

The Corinthian wrote: »

Why wouldn't he take what she said personally? It was incredibly sexist and demeaning twoards men, bordering on hate propaganda. There was no misunderstanding either; this wasn't some illiterate blog, this was a national newspaper where articles are vetted prior to publication.

You've played apologist and suggested different reasons and interpretations for what she wrote. Fair enough.

He said that
"on her twitter feed she says she is encouraging men to tell their male friends and male family members not to be abusive to women"

From this he took that she is saying that all his family members and friends are rapists. Is that reasonable? In this case I wasnt replying about the article but about this tweet specifically.

To use an example. If i said to you - tell your female friends and female family members not to be abusive to men - am i insulting your mother? As i would feel I was making a general point.

The Corinthian wrote: »

Problem is, they've all been rebutted and reasons have been given for those rebuttals. So what now? Still maintain she did nothing wrong?

Please show me where I maintained she did nothing wrong.

Carlos Orange

SeventySix wrote: »

Is it possible that this prevents a rape in 10 years?

About as possible as the article meaning more rapes happen.

SeventySix

The Corinthian wrote: »

Yes, those women are powerless victims too...

And only sexist and misogynistic men rape... had it occurred to you that something like sociopathy is likely a far greater determinant than misogyny where it comes to such violent crime, or does everything have to have a political dimension?

Where did I say or even imply they are victims? I didnt. You are either misunderstanding or willfully misinterpreting.

The Corinthian

SeventySix wrote: »

Please show me where I maintained she did nothing wrong.

Apologies, so where it comes to accusations of sexism and misandry being made now, through what she wrote in her article, you're in agreement that she did do wrong - because that's what we're talking about.

The Corinthian

SeventySix wrote: »

Where did I say or even imply they are victims? I didnt. You are either misunderstanding or willfully misinterpreting.

Well they're apparently powerless in the face of these penis-wielding oppressors, who have no respect for them. Clearly they're victims.

The Corinthian

mariaalice wrote: »

Men with sexist or misogynistic view of women don't always turn in to a rapist

And a rapist need not be a misogynist to commit rape; simply have little regard for any person and a sexual attraction to women.

Breaking News: In a follow up on the Ferns Report, it's been concluded that the widespread sexual abuse of boys in Catholic run schools was due to deep rooted and institutionalised misandry...

:rolleyes:

simonmln

She sure has got some exposure from this...

mariaalice

Have a look at the wiki on the causes of sexual violence, Its very good and really demonstrates the silliness of the ideas that you can influence some not to rape.

SeventySix

The Corinthian wrote: »

Well they're apparently powerless in the face of these penis-wielding oppressors, who have no respect for them. Clearly they're victims.

I suggested that men that someone else called misoganist and sexist might not listen to there female friends.

How is that my saying they are victims? Please explain that to me. Victims of what?

SeventySix

mariaalice wrote: »

Have a look at the wiki on the causes of sexual violence, Its very good and really demonstrates the silliness of the ideas that you can influence some not to rape.

I am not saying its not to rape, I am staying that maybe with early intervention by a man that they respect might help them not get to a point where that is even a possiblity. Surely you can see what I mean? Or are rapists born that way?

iptba

mariaalice wrote: »

Men with sexist or misogynistic view of women don't always turn in to a rapist, men can have close women friend and still have terrible views of woman I have seen this.

Similarly, a woman can have a close male friend and still have terrible views of men.

donfers

SeventySix wrote: »

He said that
"on her twitter feed she says she is encouraging men to tell their male friends and male family members not to be abusive to women"

From this he took that she is saying that all his family members and friends are rapists. Is that reasonable? In this case I wasnt replying about the article but about this tweet specifically.

To use an example. If i said to you - tell your female friends and female family members not to be abusive to men - am i insulting your mother? As i would feel I was making a general point.

Thanks for telling me what I took from it, but would it be reasonable to suggest that I know best what I took from it or does your dogma stretch to deeming yourself able to peer inside the minds of others.

I didn't think take from what she said that all my family and friends or rapists, what I took from it was the implied suggestion that it was a possibility and that I should take action to ensure otherwise which is preposterous.

Any man or woman is capable of anything, it is not my duty, obligation or responsibility to second-guess what goes in the darkest recesses of the minds of those around me.

I can only act on evidence, if I see, hear or witness anything dodgy then I will intervene but to suggest some kind of pre-emptive intervention just on the basis that somebody is male is blatantly sexist and as crackpot an idea as thinking you know the mind of another better than they do

um7y1h83ge06nx

If she is genuine this whole thing has back-fired on her.

If a person wants other people to help them fight a cause they should encourage those people, not insult them. By insulting a large section of society she has destroyed any intelligent message she have to express.

I'm sure most men that read that article thought, like us here, how insulting, sexist and silly the article is. The whole topic of rape has gotten lost through all that noise.

Still, if she or the editor had thought about the article they would have possibly noticed that before it got published.

SeventySix

The Corinthian wrote: »

Apologies, so where it comes to accusations of sexism and misandry being made now, through what she wrote in her article, you're in agreement that she did do wrong - because that's what we're talking about.

She definitely was extreme and inflamatory and gives the impression that she holds all men responsible for what some men do. I never ever said that wasnt true so dont put that on me.

My point is that I dont think there is anything inherently sexist or unreasonable in asking that men be aware that their friends might be getting a little out of line and exert some influence if they can.

That is my whole point. Some people on her seem to be taking offence that I am even suggesting such a thing. Am I? And if so, why?

iptba

It has been suggested that feminism should not be brought in to it.

However, I think feminism, or some forms of it, can (i) bring about a negative view of men and (ii) make it more acceptable for negative attitudes about men to be said publicly.

I think there's a good chance such an article wouldn't have been published without the influence of feminism on her personally and on the editor or editors involved who agreed to publish it.

Over the years, society has gradually been inured to negative things being said about men and bad things being blamed on men: indeed, feminism has at its basis a blame on patriarchy for problems. Patriarchy is very much associated with men, men's power and influence, etc. In other words, it could be said feminism blames men for society's problems.

Potatoeman

SeventySix wrote: »

I am not saying its not to rape, I am staying that maybe with early intervention by a man that they respect might help them not get to a point where that is even a possiblity. Surely you can see what I mean? Or are rapists born that way?

Some people are just assh*les and thats not going to change. Its not safe for a guy to wander around some areas at night either. Self defense and awareness of surroundings is important.

Carlos Orange

SeventySix wrote: »

My point is that I dont think there is anything inherently sexist or unreasonable in asking that men be aware that their friends might be getting a little out of line and exert some influence if they can.

Why does that say men?

SeventySix

donfers wrote: »

Thanks for telling me what I took from it, but would it be reasonable to suggest that I know best what I took from it or does your dogma stretch to deeming yourself able to peer inside the minds of others.

I didn't think take from what she said that all my family and friends or rapists, what I took from it was the implied suggestion that it was a possibility and that I should take action to ensure otherwise which is preposterous.

Any man or woman is capable of anything, it is not my duty, obligation or responsibility to second-guess what goes in the darkest recesses of the minds of those around me.

I can only act on evidence, if I see, hear or witness anything dodgy then I will intervene but to suggest some kind of pre-emptive intervention just on the basis that somebody is male is blatantly sexist and as crackpot an idea as thinking you know the mind of another better than they do

donfers wrote: »

I am not being obtuse at all, she is, none of my family or friends behave like that and I resent the fact that both you and she seem to be implying that they do

It was from this, that I felt that you thought I (and the author) were accusing your family and friends of abusive behaviour. If you read what you wrote was what I took from it unreasonable? To me, you are saying I accused your family and friends of being abusive to women. You dont mention ' implied suggestion that it was a possibility ' here.

SeventySix

psinno wrote: »

Why does that say men?

Is it sexist now to just say 'men'? To address something to one gender in particular, when I am honestly not being pejoritive. Its a suggestion of something men could possibly do.

I am not even close to suggesting that men are guilty of anything, not placing blame for anything.

donfers

SeventySix wrote: »

It was from this, that I felt that you thought I (and the author) were accusing your family and friends of abusive behaviour. If you read what you wrote was what I took from it unreasonable? To me, you are saying I accused your family and friends of being abusive to women. You dont mention ' implied suggestion that it was a possibility ' here.

wrong - what you said was

"From this he took that she is saying that all his family members and friends are rapists."

move the goalposts all you like

also when I said

"I am not being obtuse at all, she is, none of my family or friends behave like that and I resent the fact that both you and she seem to be implying that they do"

I was referring to your claims about dodgy behaviour in night clubs

also please tell me the difference between "seem to be implying" and "implied suggestion that it was a possibility"

Thanks

Carlos Orange

SeventySix wrote: »

Is it sexist now to just say 'men'? To address something to one gender in particular, when I am honestly not being pejoritive. Its a suggestion of something men could possibly do.

I am not even close to suggesting that men are guilty of anything, not placing blame for anything.

Strangely you didn't answer the question at all.

mariaalice

SeventySix wrote: »

I am not saying its not to rape, I am staying that maybe with early intervention by a man that they respect might help them not get to a point where that is even a possiblity. Surely you can see what I mean? Or are rapists born that way?

I do see what you mean but it is a bit simplistic, sexual attitudes are formed in a variety of ways and probably before adult hood, for example home life and parenting is going to be at least as important as friend in forming attenuated

Rev Hellfire

SeventySix wrote: »

I am not even close to suggesting that men are guilty of anything, not placing blame for anything.

Then if men are not guilty of anything, why are they deserving of special criticism?

The Corinthian

SeventySix wrote: »

My point is that I dont think there is anything inherently sexist or unreasonable in asking that men be aware that their friends might be getting a little out of line and exert some influence if they can.

Asking only men and suggesting that only men should exert such influence is sexist.

It presumes only (and all) men are aware of anything going on, that the prevalence is such that every group of male friends will have at least one "wayward" member and it presumes that women cannot or need not exert influence (which in turn is based upon the false presumption that rape and misogyny are interlinked).

All of these presumptions are sexist and offensive.

And that is before one considers the other, frankly misandrist, accusations she makes in the article.

SeventySix

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

Then if men are not guilty of anything, why are they deserving of special criticism?

What criticism? I am suggesting that there is something that men might possibly do, if they like.

The Corinthian

SeventySix wrote: »

What criticism? I am suggesting that there is something that men might possibly do, if they like.

We're all discussing the article, as were you, and it's not shy on criticizing men:

"You can’t tar every man with the same brush, but men must accept that most violent crimes perpetrated against women are by men, and that they have the power to stop this."

Compu Global Hyper Meganet

Whenever someone makes outlandish remarks, I think that it's always worthwhile to look at potential motives. One thing that strikes me is that this article could have been written by a C student under huge time constraints in the Leaving Cert. Putting aside the delicate subject matter, the writing style is incoherent. The journalist seems to have little appreciation for diction or sentence construct. In short, it's technically awful.

Were she to write a reasonable, balanced piece it would never get published. Therefore she must go over the top to earn her crust. Ultimately, this is a woman who wants to be a writer, but lacks the skill set to succeed. To compensate she writes a provocative yet illogical article and here we are ignoring her obvious faults.

I suppose it's similar to US politics. You could study, work hard and become intelligent enough to gain a position of power. Or you could spout invective to get noticed instead (see Rick Perry/Sarah Palin). Being provocative is the only recourse if you lack talent.

SeventySix

The Corinthian wrote: »

Asking only men and suggesting that only men should exert such influence is sexist.

It presumes only (and all) men are aware of anything going on, that the prevalence is such that every group of male friends will have at least one "wayward" member and it presumes that women cannot or need not exert influence (which in turn is based upon the false presumption that rape and misogyny are interlinked).

All of these presumptions are sexist and offensive.

And that is before one considers the other, frankly misandrist, accusations she makes in the article.

The author was the one that said it was every group of friends. I made no such claim.

I didnt say only men should do it, but that men could do it.

Also its not to say women cannot or do not exert influence and have their own responsibilites but that there is a case to highlight the potential influence of men on other men. Is that not allowed at all? Is it sexist to suggest that it would be good if men encouraged boys to be active and healthy as men might exert more influence? I honestly didnt think it was, but maybe it is.

SeventySix

mariaalice wrote: »

I do see what you mean but it is a bit simplistic, sexual attitudes are formed in a variety of ways and probably before adult hood, for example home life and parenting is going to be at least as important as friend in forming attenuated

Sure, but we are not going to find a one-size-fits-all solution to rape, are we? But lots of small, simple things might help a little. Yes simplistic, but pehaps still worth doing or at least attempting? Is it better to do nothing?

SeventySix

The Corinthian wrote: »

We're all discussing the article, as were you, and it's not shy on criticizing men:

"You can’t tar every man with the same brush, but men must accept that most violent crimes perpetrated against women are by men, and that they have the power to stop this."

Ok, I just want to make it clear that I am not criticising men, that I am not a man hater and dont blame all men for rape at all.

The article and author mgiht, but I do not. I have already been called an apologist for this author and I want to be clear that I am not.

The Corinthian

SeventySix wrote: »

The author was the one that said it was every group of friends. I made no such claim.

I don't know what you're talking about, but everyone else is discussing the article. As there's clearly confusion going on here, perhaps you should stop replying to what is, at this stage, and overwhelming number of posts and start from the beginning again.

I didnt say only men should do it, but that men could do it.

Actually you did when you argued that women would not be listened to on the erroneous basis that rapists are misogynists and would not respect them enough to listen to them.

Compu Global Hyper Meganet wrote: »

Were she to write a reasonable, balanced piece it would never get published. Therefore she must go over the top to earn her crust. Ultimately, this is a woman who wants to be a writer, but lacks the skill set to succeed. To compensate she writes a provocative yet illogical article and here we are ignoring her obvious faults.

It's crossed a few minds here, if only because we'd otherwise be incredulous that anyone with such extreme and abhorrent views would ever be given such a public platform for them, or that a national newspaper would supply it.

This is, you could well be right - she's not a terribly good writer, after all - but in reality such people do exist and even if in this instance it was nothing more than a troll, if accepted more such views will follow.

clairefontaine

Does someone who commits rape ONCE a rapist? Doesn't the definition of rapist imply serial behaviour?

There can be many circumstances to rape, like warfare for example, sometimes peer pressure too. I don't k ow of it means anyone who commits rape is a misogynist, these labels are distracting. It's like saying someone who committed murder or a frustration crime is a misanthropist. Does it really matter?

The article is so reductive and superficial, no insight.

ConFurioso

What are people's opinions on that actually...

Do we think it's just link bait, with both editor and writer involved?

Or is it link bait with just the editor utilizing an opportunity that presented itself?

Or perhaps both editor and writer are oblivious to the terrible level of writing and both thought they were adding a quality argument to the debate?


I'd be inclined to go for B, as C is just too depressing to think about.

mariaalice

SeventySix wrote: »

Sure, but we are not going to find a one-size-fits-all solution to rape, are we? But lots of small, simple things might help a little. Yes simplistic, but pehaps still worth doing or at least attempting? Is it better to do nothing?

Did you read the Wikipedia on the causes of sexual violence?, rape has been around since the dawn of time and with all advances in psychology, sociology, understanding of crime and punishment, understanding of society etc. it is still happening, plus should men be role models to other men maybe they don't see why they should be, maybe they are not interested in being a role model, and perhaps role models has no effect on changing sexual behaviour in sexually violent men.

SeventySix

The Corinthian wrote: »

Actually you did when you argued that women would not be listened to on the erroneous basis that rapists are misogynists and would not respect them enough to listen to them.

I will address just this point specifically so neither of us are overwhelmed. I, definitely did say that it was unlikely that a misogynist would listen to a woman if she was telling him his behaviour was out of line. I never said she shouldnt say it, just that he might not listen. I have never said that all rapists are misogynists but that misogynists treat women with disrespect and it would be worth the effort for a man that the misogynist does respect to tell him its not on.

I thought that given everyone seems to have the same opinion of the article, that the discussion had broadened in to whether its is always unreasonable to ask men in particular to maybe do something that it is in their power to do i.e. have a word with friends that are out of line. It might be simplistic and not do anything or it may contribute to a nicer society in general. However by asking men to do it, it does target one particular gender, so is that inherently sexist, when its not prejoritive?

Wendolene

Nathanael Jolly Barmaid wrote: »

If she is genuine this whole thing has back-fired on her.

That depends on her motivation. I'm struggling to see this as anything more than a self-promoting piece underscored by selfish motivation ... in which case she may see it as successful.

Nathanael Jolly Barmaid wrote: »

If a person wants other people to help them fight a cause they should encourage those people, not insult them. By insulting a large section of society she has destroyed any intelligent message she have to express.

I'm quite sure the Garda Commissioner will have been taken more than a little bit aback. Oh the cheek of him to advise women on their safety ... em ... get men off the hook. :eek:

Nathanael Jolly Barmaid wrote: »

I'm sure most men that read that article thought, like us here, how insulting, sexist and silly the article is. The whole topic of rape has gotten lost through all that noise.

In a nutshell, that's the most disappointing result for me - the generation of unhelpful, uninforming and misleading noise around, what is, a very serious topic.

Nathanael Jolly Barmaid wrote: »

Still, if she or the editor had thought about the article they would have possibly noticed that before it got published.

Well, again, it depends on what the motivation was - on the editor's part as well as the author's. Was this a considered effort to throw a muck piece out as a reasoned treatise on a particular matter? Again, I smell aroma of Daily Mail :rolleyes: