Accusations of sexual assault on "reality" tv show, double standards?

retro:electro

PucaMama wrote: »

Feminists are for women. They are interested in women's rights. Men have their own groups. Direct your anger to those because they are just as silent as feminists on this.

What anger!?
Feminists are for women yes, they are interested in advocating for women's rights on the grounds of equality for the sexes. What don't you get?

AudreyHepburn

kunst nugget wrote: »

I'm not burying my head in the sand, thanks. I just don't feel the need to get worked up about it and be hysterical. She should be called in by Big Brother and told to cut it out for sure and if one of the Jedwards did it I'd want the same to happen to them.

By attempting to appear not bothered by the double standards on show and acting like a woman randomly rubbing her naked self up against is nothing yes you are.

It's worrying that anyone would be OK with Chloe's behavior.

PucaMama

anna080 wrote: »

What anger!?
Feminists are for women yes, they are interested in advocating for women's rights on the grounds of equality for the sexes. What don't you get?

I don't get why people like you want feminists to look after men's issues too. Feminists are about improving women's rights not men's.

RobertKK

If a man says he is a feminist, it doesn't mean he wants women to have more rights than men, he wants women to have the same rights.

However that also means doing things like what Chloe did to John has to be taken the same way as if a man came out of the shower naked and started rubbing himself against a woman.
It would lead to a man being thrown off the show, and far more than a verbal warning.

It has to be a level playing field and no one should be sexually intimidated.

retro:electro

PucaMama wrote: »

I don't get why people like you want feminists to look after men's issues too. Feminists are about improving women's rights not men's.

It's the fact that they don't even acknowledge incidents like this is what's telling. They claim to want equal rights for men and women, but a man doesn't get away with half of the sh1t that women do.
They are well able to be vocal and blame men for the "rape culture" that has immersed our society, but acts like this get brushed under the carpet and are never addressed or given attention. That is because feminism is bullsh1t and what they really want is not equal rights, but female advancement. Scenarios like this are evidence of that.

bucketybuck

PucaMama wrote: »

I don't get why people like you want feminists to look after men's issues too. Feminists are about improving women's rights not men's.

I think he just wants them to acknowledge the responsibilities that come with those equal rights.

How many people are tuned into a show like this or reading that section of the paper in fairness now

eviltwin

anna080 wrote: »

It's the fact that they don't even acknowledge incidents like this is what's telling. They claim to want equal rights for men and women, but a man doesn't get away with half of the sh1t that women do.
They are well able to be vocal and blame men for the "rape culture" that has immersed our society, but acts like this get brushed under the carpet and are never addressed or given attention. That is because feminism is bullsh1t and what they really want is not equal rights, but female advancement. Scenarios like this are evidence of that.

Sorry but what has this got to do with feminists? Woman does something to a man and the tv company don't deal with it. The only person to blame here is the woman involved and whoever behind the scenes didn't act accordingly. As a woman who identifies as feminist I think any kind of unwanted sexual contact is unacceptable no matter which gender is involved.

Special Circumstances

Sleeper12 wrote: »

I don't see any men in the photo????

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

It was John or Edward. Jedward isnt a person.

Whichever one it was i'm sure being that close to a naked woman was quite upsetting to him.

I'm shocked* that ye aren't at least as offended/outraged by this as recent "blackface" or "Mike Pence coming to sligo" outrages.



*I'm not really though. I'd safely say this is not "on message" for the outrage brigade. Sickening double standards.

ohnonotgmail

Special Circumstances wrote: »

I'm shocked* that ye aren't at least as offended/outraged by this as recent "blackface" or "Mike Pence coming to sligo" outrages.



*I'm not really though. I'd safely say this is not "on message" for the outrage brigade. Sickening double standards.

WTF??? since when am i part of the outrage brigade?????

kunst nugget

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

By attempting to appear not bothered by the double standards on show and acting like a woman randomly rubbing her naked self up against is nothing yes you are.

Say what? I've read that several times and I'm not closer to understanding what you're getting at.

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

It's worrying that anyone would be OK with Chloe's behavior.

I hope the worry that someone having a differing opinion to you doesn't cause you too much distress.

Dr Crayfish

It's not a double standard really. Men can be sexually threatening to women, not really the other way around as generally men are the much stronger sex. Men are capable of raping women etc.
So I may not like it if some aul one rubbed her arse all over me, I may be disgusted, but I'd quickly move on and it'd hardly traumatise me.
The other way around is just much, much worse, in my opinion.

jimgoose

"Naked Essex Tart Rubs Her Arse Against Half Of Jedward!! 1nt3rn3tz Outraged!!" :pac::pac::pac:

That horrible woman definitely overstepped the line between messing and assault, the recipients weren't at all happy and she should at least have been removed for inappropriate behaviour. Ugh.

On another note, it's really creepy for two grown men to be called an amalgamated name. I know it's their 'thing' etc, but they're two individuals, not two knobs on the same cane.

jimgoose

Candie wrote: »

...they're two individuals, not two knobs on the same cane.

The two ends of a mule's tool sprang to my mind. :pac:

kfallon

Candie wrote: »

not two knobs on the same cane.

Oh they're 2 knobs alright..... :pac:

daheff

RobertKK wrote: »

If a man says he is a feminist, it doesn't mean he wants women to have more rights than men, he wants women to have the same rights.

It has to be a level playing field and no one should be sexually intimidated.

Feminists want women to have at least the same rights as men. They are not interested in men having the same rights as women. They are advocates for women only.

fully agree with the last point you make Robert -nobody should have to put up with sexual initimidation/harassment/call it what you want.

Dr Crayfish wrote: »

It's not a double standard really. Men can be sexually threatening to women, not really the other way around as generally men are the much stronger sex. Men are capable of raping women etc.
.

Women are capable of raping men too..http://www.independent.ie/world-news/north-america/girl-17-charged-with-raping-19yearold-man-at-knifepoint-35380700.html

bucketybuck

jimgoose wrote: »

"Naked Essex Tart Rubs Her Arse Against Half Of Jedward!! 1nt3rn3tz Outraged!!" :pac::pac::pac:

"Naked man grabs womans breast! One man arrested."

professore

kunst nugget wrote: »

I wouldn't have an issue if the roles were reversed. If a penis or vagina was brought into the mix I would…

At the angle she is rubbing her ass at, that in practical terms IS her vagina.

Please people, we're talking pudenda/vulva, not vagina.

Unless she turned herself inside out, which would be a completely different discussion.

kunst nugget

professore wrote: »

At the angle she is rubbing her ass at, that in practical terms IS her vagina.

If she was a sheep…

kunst nugget

Candie wrote: »

Please people, we're talking pudenda/vulva, not vagina.

Unless she turned herself inside out, which would be a completely different discussion.

Can I use fanny instead? Covers all bases… especially if we use it for its American meaning as well.

professore

PucaMama wrote: »

Feminists are for women. They are interested in women's rights. Men have their own groups. Direct your anger to those because they are just as silent as feminists on this.

I think men's rights groups are more interested in serious disadvantages that men have compared to women, such as the heavily family rights courts, longer sentences for men for the same crimes, the automatic assumption of guilt if accused of domestic abuse or rape, the amount of suicides and the under - representation of men at third level etc than to be even bothered by something like this.

Not saying that women don't have disadvantages with respect to men, but most of these have been addressed, and modern feminism is largely hysteria.

professore

Candie wrote: »

Please people, we're talking pudenda/vulva, not vagina.

Unless she turned herself inside out, which would be a completely different discussion.

Yeah you're right ... the original guy said vagina.

professore

kunst nugget wrote: »

Can I use fanny instead? Covers all bases… especially if we use it for its American meaning as well.

Fanny is too open to misinterpretation

jimgoose

kunst nugget wrote: »

Can I use fanny instead? Covers all bases… especially if we use it for its American meaning as well.

I remember being deeply shocked as a youngfella in the 1980s when some fella on an American TV show let a roar out of him to the daughter, "Martha! Get your skinny little fanny in here, pronto!!" :pac::pac::pac:

Dr Crayfish

Jedward are creepy alright at this stage. Serious question - are they mentally retarded?

kunst nugget

Dr Crayfish wrote: »

Jedward are creepy alright at this stage. Serious question - are they mentally retarded?

No but let's pretend they are so it makes the incident 100 times worse.

'SHOCK AS GEORDIE WOMAN RUBS ASS ON DISABLED TWIN!!!'

jimgoose

kunst nugget wrote: »

No but let's pretend they are so it makes the incident 100 times worse.

'SHOCK AS GEORDIE WOMAN RUBS ASS ON DISABLED TWIN!!!'

Oh, she's from Newcastle is she? That's just their way of being friendly, why-aye mon! :pac:

LionelNashe

A man generally wouldn't mind, or wouldn't mind as much, when a woman rubs her naked arse against him, as when the situation is reversed. That's why there's (quite rightly) a double standard.

IvySlayer

Dr Crayfish wrote: »

Jedward are creepy alright at this stage. Serious question - are they mentally retarded?

Have they ever rubbed their naked body against someone who was clearly uncomfortable with it?

It is double standards. The Ellen show is shocking for it. For some reason the men end up being stripped. Bieber was on it and they showed his naked picture and he was uncomfortable about it.

If a male host started showing leaked pictures of woman while she was on there would be uproar

kunst nugget

LionelNashe wrote: »

A man generally wouldn't mind, or wouldn't mind as much, when a woman rubs her naked arse against him, as when the situation is reversed. That's why there's (quite rightly) a double standard.

I'd mind but I'd tell her to fúck off. I won't be worrying too much about whether I'd considered myself a victim of sexual harassment.

professore

LionelNashe wrote: »

A man generally wouldn't mind, or wouldn't mind as much, when a woman rubs her naked arse against him, as when the situation is reversed. That's why there's (quite rightly) a double standard.

It would depend a lot on the woman doing the rubbing. Wouldn't be crazy about it myself.

Reverse the genders and you could say the same.

DrPhilG

Sexual? No.

Assault? No

Appropriate? No

Would the reaction and response have been the same if the genders were reversed? No.

py2006

Most lads don't (can't) care about this kinda stuff. It is the double standard that sets the alarm bells ringing and sends the feminists the quiet house!

retro:electro

eviltwin wrote: »

Sorry but what has this got to do with feminists? Woman does something to a man and the tv company don't deal with it. The only person to blame here is the woman involved and whoever behind the scenes didn't act accordingly. As a woman who identifies as feminist I think any kind of unwanted sexual contact is unacceptable no matter which gender is involved.

Because how can you want equality when men are punished for this and women aren't. If you actually wanted equality you'd be more vocal about issues like this. Or is it just selective equality you want? Equality only when it advances woman and only when it demotes men?

professore

DrPhilG wrote: »

Sexual? No.

Assault? No

Appropriate? No

Would the reaction and response have been the same if the genders were reversed? No.

How do you define assault though? A previous poster said if the person on the receiving end felt assaulted, then it's assault. This is not a good yardstick IMO. If I'm offended by seeing women's uncovered hair, should every woman have to wear a hijab?

It's definitely sexual.

It's certainly sexual harassment ... no question about it. Far less is considered sexual harassment.

mzungu

LionelNashe wrote: »

A man generally wouldn't mind, or wouldn't mind as much, when a woman rubs her naked arse against him, as when the situation is reversed. That's why there's (quite rightly) a double standard.

Ehh, speak for yourself there, but most of us have respect for personal space and would not welcome that kind of behaviour.

blue note

If the genders were reversed we'd be hearing about how it's typical of society and rape culture that you can do something like this and out go pretty much unpunished and unnoticed. Everyone would be condemning it and condemning the fact that it's considered acceptable behaviour.

But, the way it is the girl didn't seem to think she did anything wrong, no punishment beyond a little please don't do that again has been issued and this is barely mentioned that I've seen in the media. Which pretty much says that this type of assault is culturally pretty acceptable when a woman does it to a man. Similarly when earlier in the series when someone grabbed a guy by the dick.

andekwarhola

I think the gap in judgement comes from the intiidmidation aspect. I doubt myself or any other man would be intimidated (annoyed and embarrassed sure) by a woman doing that whereas in a lot of cases, a woman is more likely to be intimidated, given statistics and the (usual if not always) difference in size/strength etc.

Obviously not condoning her behaviour though as it's a horrible and humiliating thing to do to somebody and in a context such as a workplace, it should be punished across the board, regardless of gender.

Dr Crayfish

blue note wrote: »

Which pretty much says that this type of assault is culturally pretty acceptable when a woman does it to a man.

Well yeah but women have never been a threat to men the way men are to women.

Louis explains it perfectly...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRzs7v0do_Q

GingerLily

anna080 wrote: »

eviltwin wrote: »

Sorry but what has this got to do with feminists? Woman does something to a man and the tv company don't deal with it. The only person to blame here is the woman involved and whoever behind the scenes didn't act accordingly. As a woman who identifies as feminist I think any kind of unwanted sexual contact is unacceptable no matter which gender is involved.

Because how can you want equality when men are punished for this and women aren't. If you actually wanted equality you'd be more vocal about issues like this. Or is it just selective equality you want? Equality only when it advances woman and only when it demotes men?

Because she does want equal punishment for this!
You're just making stuff up at this stage

steddyeddy

westcoast66 wrote: »

In fairness, what percentage of blokes would be offended by a women flashing her arse/tits at them? If you do, you really need to harden the f**k up!

Victims of sexual assault shouldn't have to toughen up.

Arghus

It's a disgrace Joe.

kunst nugget

steddyeddy wrote: »

Victims of sexual assault shouldn't have to toughen up.

Would you genuinely consider yourself a victim of sexual assault if a woman flashed her tits at you?

jimgoose

Actually, it just occurred to me - it looks like she's wiping her arse with him more than anything else! :pac::pac::pac:

professore

andekwarhola wrote: »

I think the gap in judgement comes from the intiidmidation aspect. I doubt myself or any other man would be intimidated (annoyed and embarrassed sure) by a woman doing that whereas in a lot of cases, a woman is more likely to be intimidated, given statistics and the (usual if not always) difference in size/strength etc.

Obviously not condoning her behaviour though as it's a horrible and humiliating thing to do to somebody and in a context such as a workplace, it should be punished across the board, regardless of gender.

What if she slapped you across the face? Hit you on the head with a golf club? Stabbed you with a knife? Would you then be intimidated?

retro:electro

GingerLily wrote: »

Because she does want equal punishment for this!
You're just making stuff up at this stage

My post wasn't directed to evil twin, more the feminist movement as a whole. Tis a peculiar type of feminism that decries the objectification of women and calls men rapists but which ignores a man being assaulted by a woman on national tv. I mean the first and one of the most thanked post on this thread is a comment that says "who cares". Indeed.

OldGoat

andekwarhola wrote: »

I think the gap in judgement comes from the intiidmidation aspect. I doubt myself or any other man would be intimidated (annoyed and embarrassed sure) by a woman doing that whereas in a lot of cases, a woman is more likely to be intimidated, given statistics and the (usual if not always) difference in size/strength etc.

This idea has been brought up a number of times in the thread about how a man due to being a bigger size should not see the harassment or that if a man harnessed a woman than it's more threatening because of his size compared to her.
It's a bull**** argument. Harassment or assault is not based on physical size.
If for example 3 men intimidated a woman would you then dole out criminal charges based on various their physical sizes? The heavy set lad gets a bigger sentence while the slight little fella gets off scott free? No, they would each be equally at fault.

If genders are to be treated equally than people need to remove this idea that size matters when dealing with harassment, intimidation or assault.

fleet_admiral

Where is the feminist outrage?