Louise O'Neill on manned mission to Mars: "Why not go to Venus?" (MOD Warning post 1)

darkdubh

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

What did she say about her Grandfather?

"I think of when I was three, cuddling into my Granddad Murphy’s lap as he stroked my hair and told me I was the best girl and I wonder did he really think that, or did he secretly hate women too?"

yerwanthere123

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

What did she say about her Grandfather?

From the above article:

I think of when I was three, cuddling into my Granddad Murphy’s lap as he stroked my hair and told me I was the best girl and I wonder did he really think that, or did he secretly hate women too?

An odd comment, to say the least.

Sue Pa Key Pa

darkdubh wrote: »

"I think of when I was three, cuddling into my Granddad Murphy’s lap as he stroked my hair and told me I was the best girl and I wonder did he really think that, or did he secretly hate women too?"

Her family must be very proud of her for that gem.

Barncom

darkdubh wrote: »

"I think of when I was three, cuddling into my Granddad Murphy’s lap as he stroked my hair and told me I was the best girl and I wonder did he really think that, or did he secretly hate women too?"

She's writing the wrong genre, that's comedy gold. :pac:

TerrorFirmer

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

Her whole 'bit' is to project her own massive, glaring insecurities and unresolved issues onto the entire female populace, treating them as if they're a hive mind connected by gender.

I cannot believe she gets paid for these wild, swinging rants.

Let alone that her idiotic sub editor was defending the Facebook comments against her latest trash heap

Widdershins

Shes still struggling to work out how to be herself, she is emotionally unbalanced and can't distinguish between a normal, usually easygoing person with no irrational outbursts or overreactions, bar the rare 'off day', and a doormat trying to be ''the cool girl''.

She sort of has a point in there somewhere as it is proven that women get taken less seriously in some situations such as clinical settings due to the stereotype of hysteria and emotional reactions, but she's not exactly helping to dispel that notion.

The_Kew_Tour

darkdubh wrote: »

"I think of when I was three, cuddling into my Granddad Murphy’s lap as he stroked my hair and told me I was the best girl and I wonder did he really think that, or did he secretly hate women too?"

yerwanthere123 wrote: »

From the above article:



An odd comment, to say the least.

You know I'm starting feel more sorry to her the more she says.

Odd alright.

darkdubh

Deleted User wrote: »

Let alone that her idiotic sub editor was defending the Facebook comments against her latest trash heap

From the Examiner? Where was that?

r93kaey5p2izun

This thread remains my only exposure to this woman beyond a name on the front cover of a book in easons. But I read the quoted article and can see that she's a poor writer, failing to make a convincing argument on a topic that will certainly irritate and annoy many. I don't know enough about her to comment on her mental health but the conflation of mental health issues with what amounts to clickbait sensationalist trolling is a bit much. (And some of those pointing that finger here are the very ones I have seen rail against comments about Donald Trump's mental status based on his controversial attention seeking soundbites, which is strange). Plenty of mentally ill people make excellent, reasoned, logical arguments and plenty of mentally sound individuals spout nonsense.

darkdubh

darkdubh wrote: »

From the Examiner? Where was that?

Examiner Irish page, Sam Boland apparently defending her, an editor - known to do that on the comments section on the Irish Examiner page

Turnipman

darkdubh wrote: »

"I think of when I was three, cuddling into my Granddad Murphy’s lap as he stroked my hair and told me I was the best girl and I wonder did he really think that, or did he secretly hate women too?"

If he secretly hated her at age 3, then it's beyond rational argument that he was an extremely prescient old man!

darkdubh

Dakota Brave Carrot wrote: »

Examiner Irish page, Sam Boland apparently defending her, an editor - known to do that on the comments section on the Irish Examiner page

Googling him and his twitter page came up. Hes quite angry individual, at least I assume its the same fella. Main obsessions soccer and feminism.

Max Prophet

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Funnily, the vast majority of the time it's men that share her opinion.

Men who usually agree with these feminazi types are usually virginal chaps desperate to virtue signal some lass to let them have a pity ride

Jim Bob Scratcher

darkdubh wrote: »

Googling him and his twitter page came up. Hes quite angry individual, at least I assume its the same fella. Main obsessions soccer and feminism.

Proper loon

_Dara_

Wibbs wrote: »

Not really, as people are clearly interested in her enough to get clicks. Media outlets love her kind of controversy writer. All the red tops have them, but so do the sniffy broadsheets.

Absolutely. Every last one. Sure, that why the Sunday Times have had Jeremy Clarkson as a columnist for years. And Kevin Myers at the Independent until recently. And the Guardian has some blatant parody columnists. Having controversial contributors even predates social media. This is nothing new.

Widdershins

Max Prophet wrote: »

Men who usually agree with these feminazi types are usually virginal chaps desperate to virtue signal some lass to let them have a pity ride

AND Vegan

Max Prophet

Max Prophet wrote: »

Men who usually agree with these feminazi types are usually virginal chaps desperate to virtue signal some lass to let them have a pity ride

male feminists are the creepiest ones you'd have to watch out for

darkdubh

darkdubh wrote: »

From the Examiner? Where was that?

The comments underneath the article link on the examiner facebook page.

True journalism is well and truly f**king dead. Its all about the clicks and the advertising. Gone are the days of thought provoking arguments being made barring a few exceptions and glimmers of hope. Its all agenda driven hypershít now.

Great journalists and articles are being stifled by overbearing media tycoons while lazy useless journalists like O'neill are getting away with churning out unfounded rubbish without backing it up in the slightest and yet this shít is taken as the fact of the matter. The sad thing is that there is idiots out there who look up to this fruitcake as some sort of intellectual top quality journalist.

Welcome to the age of the idiot folks.

Ralf and Florian

The same Sam Boland who wrote this.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/viewpoints/analysis/comment-extreme-behaviour-at-slane-not-the-end-of-our-youth-240728.html

I enjoy bitching about LON

manonboard

(male)
I used to be part of a feminist group.
There was much i learned from it, both good and bad. Some really good wisdom in it, some overreacting group mentality.

The oddest thing was, the person who was most destructive, bullying, and down right full of hate, was the only other guy in the group.
Even when he first came to a meeting, he wouldnt even look at me, no shake of the hand, even though he was seated next to me.
I couldnt say a thing without him going against my point.

It was very clear from experiencing him, that he had terrible relationship with other men and plenty of low self esteem for his own, and he expressed it by hating his own kind. A type of mentality designed to hide his own faults/needs from himself. He was the most hate filled feminist i had ever met. Very sad.
Very 'nice' guy mentality to women though, always seeking approval. Always talking about how 'those men' and 'they' as a means to separate himself egotistically. Yet he was the most violent of the lot, gleeful when someone he disliked suffered. Creeped me out, sad to say it was highly re-enforced by the group though. The approval he gained from them was the reward he sought. It grew and so did his behavior.

LON desires this type of behavior from followers. It's sad, but its required in order to elevate 'a person' into the limelight. Very few peace makers, make the headlines.

manonboard

Max Prophet wrote: »

Men who usually agree with these feminazi types are usually virginal chaps desperate to virtue signal some lass to let them have a pity ride

Not all men*


*couldn't resist

endacl

Deleted User wrote: »

No, we're all doing it now

[IMG][/img]via Imgflip Meme Generator

Max Prophet

manonboard wrote: »

(male)
I used to be part of a feminist group.
There was much i learned from it, both good and bad. Some really good wisdom in it, some overreacting group mentality.

The oddest thing was, the person who was most destructive, bullying, and down right full of hate, was the only other guy in the group.
Even when he first came to a meeting, he wouldnt even look at me, no shake of the hand, even though he was seated next to me.
I couldnt say a thing without him going against my point.

It was very clear from experiencing him, that he had terrible relationship with other men and plenty of low self esteem for his own, and he expressed it by hating his own kind. A type of mentality designed to hide his own faults/needs from himself. He was the most hate filled feminist i had ever met. Very sad.
Very 'nice' guy mentality to women though, always seeking approval. Always talking about how 'those men' and 'they' as a means to separate himself egotistically. Yet he was the most violent of the lot, gleeful when someone he disliked suffered. Creeped me out, sad to say it was highly re-enforced by the group though. The approval he gained from them was the reward he sought. It grew and so did his behavior.

LON desires this type of behavior from followers. It's sad, but its required in order to elevate 'a person' into the limelight. Very few peace makers, make the headlines.

What kind of meetings?

manonboard

Max Prophet wrote: »

What kind of meetings?

Just a basic meetup in a coffee house. Sitting around tables. Talking.
90% of people were very pleasant, though of course passionate about the topic.
Most were there to find a safe place to talk about their experiences and hardships in a sympathetic support group fashion. From traumatic experiences, to debating difficulties with various social dynamics.
Very little solution creating going on though. I think it's where its biggest weak point was. No advice on how to deal with the issues on an individual level.
Though perhaps that was not the intent or desire from the meetings for most. Maybe just a place of sharing....but alot of reinforcing too.

professore

alchemist33 wrote: »

I wonder how much the "tenants of the patriarchy" pay in rent each month, and if the patriarchy have any apartments near the city centre.

They get all the best accommodation.

markodaly

Deleted User wrote: »

Welcome to the age of the idiot folks.

Yeap, the idiot generation for sure.

The thing is, you will not get a journalist or anyone for that matter get a piece published challenging LON or her point of view, because that would be hateful I suppose.

This is what happens when you start to censor the other side and get people to think about the issue rather then spoon feed them ****e like they are babies.

There is no alternative thinking now in the media. Its one way of thinking about an issue and if your not 'woke' then your part of the problem. The with us or against us mentality. So, we get this nonsense thrown at us again and again.

professore

_Dara_ wrote: »

Wibbs wrote: »

Not really, as people are clearly interested in her enough to get clicks. Media outlets love her kind of controversy writer. All the red tops have them, but so do the sniffy broadsheets.

Absolutely. Every last one. Sure, that why the Sunday Times have had Jeremy Clarkson as a columnist for years. And Kevin Myers at the Independent until recently. And the Guardian has some blatant parody columnists. Having controversial contributors even predates social media. This is nothing new.

Jeremy Clarkson is funny though and most of his stuff is pure satire. LON is deadly serious.

professore

manonboard wrote: »

(male)
I used to be part of a feminist group.
There was much i learned from it, both good and bad. Some really good wisdom in it, some overreacting group mentality.

The oddest thing was, the person who was most destructive, bullying, and down right full of hate, was the only other guy in the group.
Even when he first came to a meeting, he wouldnt even look at me, no shake of the hand, even though he was seated next to me.
I couldnt say a thing without him going against my point.

It was very clear from experiencing him, that he had terrible relationship with other men and plenty of low self esteem for his own, and he expressed it by hating his own kind. A type of mentality designed to hide his own faults/needs from himself. He was the most hate filled feminist i had ever met. Very sad.
Very 'nice' guy mentality to women though, always seeking approval. Always talking about how 'those men' and 'they' as a means to separate himself egotistically. Yet he was the most violent of the lot, gleeful when someone he disliked suffered. Creeped me out, sad to say it was highly re-enforced by the group though. The approval he gained from them was the reward he sought. It grew and so did his behavior.

LON desires this type of behavior from followers. It's sad, but its required in order to elevate 'a person' into the limelight. Very few peace makers, make the headlines.

That's disturbing reading. Cult like behaviour.