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

El_Duderino 09

DickSwiveller wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Heaven forbid you discuss anything of substance about what LON is actually doing.

Back to the ‘LON is such an eejit’ circle jerk.

I’ll get you started, ahem.

Gawd lads LON is such an eejit. She’s out there discussing culturally relevant issues and creating art on the topics, adding to the discussion and shaping the culture. What an eejit.

You are 100 per cent on a wind up.

givyjoe wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

.. your peers will be be crying, pissing, whinging and moaning full time.

Classic el duderino. It's no wonder so many are eager to debate with you. Honestly, I would really really love to know what your gripe with men really is. Some would say that's all LON does, piss moan and whinge full time and get paid for it.

But it’s a fair point. After being terrified of actually discussing consent (the topic of LON’s play) posters will be up in arms at the fact that cultural attitude to consent is changing.

Then you’ll hear the real complaining.

If LON is pissing moaning and whinging as you say, she’s doing it to a huge audience. Not bad for the subject of such derision in this thread, eh?

Omackeral

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

But it’s a fair point. After being terrified of actually discussing consent (the topic of LON’s play) posters will be up in arms at the fact that cultural attitude to consent is changing.

Nobody is terrified.

SnazzyPig

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

But it’s a fair point. After being terrified of actually discussing consent (the topic of LON’s play) posters will be up in arms at the fact that cultural attitude to consent is changing.

Then you’ll hear the real complaining.

If LON is pissing moaning and whinging as you say,she’s doing it to a huge audience. Not bad for the subject of such derision in this thread, eh?

Jedward performed their 'Art' to a huge audience at the Eurovision Song Contest. It doesn't mean it should be given an iota of attention, never mind consideration.

Omackeral

SnazzyPig wrote: »

Jedward performed their 'Art' to a huge audience at the Eurovision Song Contest. It doesn't mean it should be given an iota of attention, never mind consideration.

Garth Brooks sold out Croker 5 times over.

El_Duderino 09

The Crowman wrote: »

Are you calling her phoning it in chick lit art?

Well, yeah. I don’t have to admire it for it to be art. But you know that.

Silentcorner

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

But it’s a fair point. After being terrified of actually discussing consent (the topic of LON’s play) posters will be up in arms at the fact that cultural attitude to consent is changing.

Then you’ll hear the real complaining.

If LON is pissing moaning and whinging as you say, she’s doing it to a huge audience. Not bad for the subject of such derision in this thread, eh?

Let me just say firstly, I have no issue with the idea of discussing consent, in fact, I am quiet sympathetic to what some women have been exposed to, for whatever that is worth.

But LON and her like, are making money from weak willed individuals who crave inspiration of some sort, for instance, and it is just one tiny instance, a woman on my social media feed, a self declared feminist who was very vocal about her pro life stance blamed The Patriarchy for the Yes vote...I mean that is just unhinged...where is she getting her language from, very emotive and very divisive.

markodaly

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Your peers will let you know when it’s over. When LON and other interested parties have shaped the culture, your peers will be be crying, pissing, whinging and moaning full time.

Well so much for having a discussion about consent, when all you really wanted was to show us how 'I'm woke bro!'

SnazzyPig

Omackeral wrote: »

Garth Brooks sold out Croker 5 times over.

'50 Shades of Gray' has sold over 60 million copies.

I suppose just because Art is sh*t doesn't mean it's not Art.

El_Duderino 09

Yeah_Right wrote: »

Thanks. Hope LON thinks so too. Now please tell us more about her "art".

Eh, what do you want to know? It usually comes in fiction books and theatre form. Outlaw Pete reckons the play might be good but I don’t have an opinion on it one way or the other.

El_Duderino 09

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

Yet LON and co believe you can withdraw consent after the whole encounter-so if a man and woman engage in coitus, and both enjoy it, the woman can withdraw consent a week later, and claim rape.

Or withdraw consent 20 years later, and cry rape.

The also do the 'believe the rapist'-but if one were to accuse LON or her cohorts of rape, knowingly and falsely, we would have to believe the accuser? That's what LON believes.

Is that what LON believes? I disagree with anyone who advocates for that. I get my LON updated from these threads about her. Any links to her advocating for removing consent 20 years later?

Anyone got a link to Blindboy interviewing her?..

Masochistic streak is playing up..

(Flicked through a few of his podcasts there..couldn't take it anymore..)

El_Duderino 09

upandcumming wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Your peers will let you know when it’s over. When LON and other interested parties have shaped the culture, your peers will be be crying, pissing, whinging and moaning full time.

This is hilarious. Bravo!

Check out the gentlemen’s club forum. It’s littered with threads about men who are struggling to keep up with changes in culture. There’s one called ‘does anyone else feel the same’ classic example.

Cultures changing whether you get involved in shaping it or not. The men’s forum shows what happens when men refuse to get involved in the change and then get confused that it has changed.

This issue is being discussed whether you like it or not. It’s in a theatre play at the moment. There was a parliamentary committee hearing during the week on revising the sex and relationship education course in schools.

LON is involved in shaping the discussion.

RabbleRouser2k

Silentcorner wrote: »

To be fair this thread has gone on longer than anyone would have predicted.

LON and those like her are like those self help charlatans that emerged back in the 80s in the States, they prey on weak willed individuals desperate for something to grasp to...anything will do....and good luck to them.

Modern feminism is a pile of nonsense, it is class driven, using gender as a shield! How many women working on zero hour contracts in sh#t conditions in this very country would identify with Irish modern day feminism, indeed how many Irish feminists reach out to those mostly foreign national women who serve up those afternoon teas, clean those hotel rooms, vacuum the homes of the wealthy, etc...absolutely none...feminists don't even see those women, they cannot relate to them. They are only concerned with equality for SOME women, you know, their own kind!

It's a tool of the oligarchy, not a revolt against the 'patriarchy'...

If feminism actually cared, as you said, then why isn't it tackling genuine rape cultures in places like India? Or Johannesburg? Lara Logan was tortured and violated in Egypt...when did anyone condemn the country and their rape culture?

Or another example-we hear about the 'massive third wave feminist movement' in the USA, and it's 'changing society'...
Yet there exists no mandatory maternity leave laws in the USA. In fact, the US and Australia are one of the few, if not only two countries in the world that don't have laws demanding paid maternity leave.
Even poorer countries have those laws. Actual paid 4 months maternity leave (which can be extended based on any health issue that arises), where a woman cannot return to work during those months. She'd be breaking the law, for one. As would her employers.
In the USA, those protections don't exist-a woman can return to work 2 or 3 weeks after having a kid, all because she can't afford to lose out on a paycheck.

But yet they complain about oppression-while ignoring legitimate grievances all because someone was misgendered by a blind person.

El_Duderino 09

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

LON is involved in shaping the discussion.

But she's only parroting 2nd hand ideology..

RabbleRouser2k

Deleted User wrote: »

But she's only parroting 2nd hand ideology..

She doesn't even debate. The one time she did, it was with Tommy Tiernan, who'd no clue who she was.

And yet he was able to dissect her views and showcase the massive flaws inherent.

El_Duderino 09

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

I doubt it-when less and less girls and women identify with O'Neill and company, our 'peers' will be moving on with their lives.

Not whining Trump won.

Is that true? The wider discussion of consent is growing momentum. As I said above, the parliamentary committee hearing on rewriting the sex and relationships course.

Whether LON’s personal readership is going up or down is a small issue. She’s one voice in the discussion.

El_Duderino 09

Omackeral wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

But it’s a fair point. After being terrified of actually discussing consent (the topic of LON’s play) posters will be up in arms at the fact that cultural attitude to consent is changing.

Nobody is terrified.

Terrified, unable, unwilling. The result is the same. The last few pages are testimony to that.

Omackeral

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

LON is involved in shaping the discussion.

She's 33 and lives with her ma, she's shaping fcuk all.

El_Duderino 09

markodaly wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Your peers will let you know when it’s over. When LON and other interested parties have shaped the culture, your peers will be be crying, pissing, whinging and moaning full time.

Well so much for having a discussion about consent, when all you really wanted was to show us how 'I'm woke bro!'

I’ve no idea why you consider that to demonstrate ‘woke’. It’s fact that these discussions are happening. As above where they’re happening at parliamentary level, so things they are a changin’. I saw the list of people giving evidence. Lots of active parties were represented but no group representing men’s perspective.

And we’ll see them go bananas when the sex and relationships course is changed and it represents those who took an active part shaping it.

RabbleRouser2k

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I’ve no idea why you consider that to demonstrate ‘woke’. It’s fact that these discussions are happening. As above where they’re happening at parliamentary level, so things they are a changin’. I saw the list of people giving evidence. Lots of active parties were represented but no group representing men’s perspective.

And we’ll see them go bananas when the sex and relationships course is changed and it represents those who took an active part shaping it.

There are qualified psychologists, Rape Crisis Counsellors, and other qualified professionals who'll be involved in such a course, if it happens and doesn't get abandoned like other places.

It won't be LON declaring all men are evil, except her daddy, and to 'protect the wahmens'.

El_Duderino 09

Omackeral wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

LON is involved in shaping the discussion.

She's 33 and lives with her ma, she's shaping fcuk all.

I’ll take your word for it. You seem to keep up with her life. She’s also written books, a play and has regular national newspaper, radio and tv appearances.

But you seem to think her living arrangements mean she cant be part of shaping the discussion. That might be more wishful thinking on your part than anything else.

El_Duderino 09

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

There are qualified psychologists, Rape Crisis Counsellors, and other qualified professionals who'll be involved in such a course, if it happens and doesn't get abandoned like other places.

It won't be LON declaring all men are evil, except her daddy, and to 'protect the wahmens'.

Well the parliamentary committee is part of the wider societal change in attitudes towards relationships and consent. She’s definitely part of the wider discussion.

But you’re right that the rape crisis centre was one of the witnesses at the hearing the other day. There were some academics and a few charities.

We’ll see how the course is updated. It’s good he’s that it’s being updated.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Anyone got a link to Blindboy interviewing her?..

Masochistic streak is playing up..

(Flicked through a few of his podcasts there..couldn't take it anymore..)

Has this been released yet? I thought it was done as one of his live podcasts but has yet to release it

Omackeral

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

It won't be LON declaring all men are evil, except her daddy, and to 'protect the wahmens'.

Don't forget her dear old Grandad too, sitting her on his lap with those questionable motives.

upandcumming

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I’ll take your word for it. You seem to keep up with her life. She’s also written books, a play and has regular national newspaper, radio and tv appearances.

But you seem to think her living arrangements mean she cant be part of shaping the discussion. That might be more wishful thinking on your part than anything else.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I’ve no idea why you consider that to demonstrate ‘woke’. It’s fact that these discussions are happening. As above where they’re happening at parliamentary level, so things they are a changin’. I saw the list of people giving evidence. Lots of active parties were represented but no group representing men’s perspective.

And we’ll see them go bananas when the sex and relationships course is changed and it represents those who took an active part shaping it.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Is that true? The wider discussion of consent is growing momentum. As I said above, the parliamentary committee hearing on rewriting the sex and relationships course.

Whether LON’s personal readership is going up or down is a small issue. She’s one voice in the discussion.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Check out the gentlemen’s club forum. It’s littered with threads about men who are struggling to keep up with changes in culture. There’s one called ‘does anyone else feel the same’ classic example.

Cultures changing whether you get involved in shaping it or not. The men’s forum shows what happens when men refuse to get involved in the change and then get confused that it has changed.

This issue is being discussed whether you like it or not. It’s in a theatre play at the moment. There was a parliamentary committee hearing during the week on revising the sex and relationship education course in schools.

LON is involved in shaping the discussion.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

But it’s a fair point. After being terrified of actually discussing consent (the topic of LON’s play) posters will be up in arms at the fact that cultural attitude to consent is changing.

Then you’ll hear the real complaining.

If LON is pissing moaning and whinging as you say, she’s doing it to a huge audience. Not bad for the subject of such derision in this thread, eh?

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Your peers will let you know when it’s over. When LON and other interested parties have shaped the culture, your peers will be be crying, pissing, whinging and moaning full time.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Heaven forbid you discuss anything of substance about what LON is actually doing.

Back to the ‘LON is such an eejit’ circle jerk.

I’ll get you started, ahem.

Gawd lads LON is such an eejit. She’s out there discussing culturally relevant issues and creating art on the topics, adding to the discussion and shaping the culture. What an eejit.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Well it was trumped by paddy Jackson’s ‘assumed consent’ card under NI law. I’d disagree with anyone who says removing consent after the act is a valid action. Who supports removing consent after the fact?

But the locals don’t want to discuss that, they want to get back to the circle jerk

Any opinions to discuss yourself?

So much discussion and awareness, but not much else.

El_Duderino

El_Duderino wrote:

After being terrified of actually discussing consent (the topic of LON’s play) posters will be up in arms at the fact that cultural attitude to consent is changing.

The funny thing is that the cultural attitude to consent hasn't changed. It's still wrong to disregard a woman or mans choice in having sex. If someone says or obviously indicates no, then, sex shouldn't be happening. Hence the sentencing for rape. That's our cultural answer to breaking the consent barrier.

What is changing though is the introduction of gray areas. It's interesting the way it's happening. You'll get to hear people telling us that consent is incredibly important, and that the traditional methods aren't good enough, but... you'll get no specifics or agreement on what methods are actually better. Instead, it's declarations of unrealistic situations that just don't happen in the real world.

Based on examples like the Aziz case, and others:

I meet a girl for a date. I must not take control and suggest a drink but allow her time to choose for herself. Suggestions can be a form of bullying/forcing her. I must ask her consent to touch her. I must ask her consent to appreciate her appearance. (although her belief of what I might be thinking when seeing her is more important than mine). I must ask for her consent to kiss her. I must ask her consent to invite her to my home, her home, or a hotel. [I can't be seen in any possible manner to be bullying her into making that decision.] In other words, I must seek genuine consent at every stage of the experience.... and that's without even talking about undressing, foreplay, sex, or afterplay. On top of all that, the woman can still withdraw consent (with or without actually informing me, but I should just know that she has).

Yup. Gray areas. And at the same time, women will complain that men are too timid, too gentle, too shy in the dating scene. That they want men to take control, to be assertive, and to "sweep them off their feet". That feeling of adventure, excitement and impulsiveness. That only the A.Holes and Bstards ask them out, with them never meeting nice guys. I wonder why?

Then you’ll hear the real complaining.

I suspect that most men are similar to myself on this one. I would love for there to be incredibly clear guidelines to dating behavior, consent, and rape allegations. I would love for there not to be any gray areas, and for there to be a realistic way of bringing it in. However TBH I suspect most of the people suggesting these changes haven't been part of a dating scene with an active sex life for quite some time. To be brutally honest, the traditional way of doing so worked perfectly fine. Women told us. It really was that simple.

The problem with LON or the Feminist scheme is that it seeks to remove womens voices. It encourages the belief that women can't say no. That they're incapable of making a decision based on their own intelligent, emotions, etc. Which thankfully, doesn't describe most of the women I've known in my life. But your belief in these changes for consent, really do encourage younger people to start accepting such a frame or mentality. That they need these crystal clear rules for social interaction because they're all waiting to be victims.

the purple tin

Silentcorner wrote: »

To be fair this thread has gone on longer than anyone would have predicted.

LON and those like her are like those self help charlatans that emerged back in the 80s in the States, they prey on weak willed individuals desperate for something to grasp to...anything will do....and good luck to them.

Modern feminism is a pile of nonsense, it is class driven, using gender as a shield! How many women working on zero hour contracts in sh#t conditions in this very country would identify with Irish modern day feminism, indeed how many Irish feminists reach out to those mostly foreign national women who serve up those afternoon teas, clean those hotel rooms, vacuum the homes of the wealthy, etc...absolutely none...feminists don't even see those women, they cannot relate to them. They are only concerned with equality for SOME women, you know, their own kind!

Well said. The first and second wave movements in the old days were much more about solidarity and sisterhood, improving everybodys lot. This new wave of social media feminism is more like pic-n-mix feminism; they tend to only push issues (real or percieved) that affect them personally and will at best pay lip service to women who are facing opression abroad. (can you imagine LON going to protest with Pussy Riot in Russia for instance? or fighting for women's rights in the middle east or China?)

It's also become possible to be an 'activist' from the comfort of your own home. Emily Pankhurst would turn in her grave!

Modern western feminism, much like the occupy movement and others is a bit like a ship with no rudder; they have drive and momentum but no direction or clear goal to aim for. Multinationals have twigged the last few years that feminism can be used as an effective marketing tool also. It's in danger of becoming de-fanged here in the west, maybe having all it's energy diverted into pointless causes rather than addressing more important issues would be a better way to put it.

El_Duderino 09

upandcumming wrote: »

Any opinions to discuss yourself?

So much discussion and awareness, but not much else.

What do you want to know? You managed to skip over a my expressed opinions to ask if I have any opinions.

If you want to know something, ask.

The Crowman

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

She doesn't even debate. The one time she did, it was with Tommy Tiernan, who'd no clue who she was.

And yet he was able to dissect her views and showcase the massive flaws inherent.

And the Jordan Peterson podcast, mind that wasn't a one on one. Her most memorable contribution to that was claiming that fairy tales were originally written by women, something she of course offered no evidence for.

El_Duderino 09

Deleted User wrote: »

The funny thing is that the cultural attitude to consent hasn't changed. It's still wrong to disregard a woman or mans choice in having sex. If someone says or obviously indicates no, then, sex shouldn't be happening. Hence the sentencing for rape. That's our cultural answer to breaking the consent barrier.

What is changing though is the introduction of gray areas. It's interesting the way it's happening. You'll get to hear people telling us that consent is incredibly important, and that the traditional methods aren't good enough, but... you'll get no specifics or agreement on what methods are actually better. Instead, it's declarations of unrealistic situations that just don't happen in the real world.

Based on examples like the Aziz case, and others:

I meet a girl for a date. I must not take control and suggest a drink but allow her time to choose for herself. Suggestions can be a form of bullying/forcing her. I must ask her consent to touch her. I must ask her consent to appreciate her appearance. (although her belief of what I might be thinking when seeing her is more important than mine). I must ask for her consent to kiss her. I must ask her consent to invite her to my home, her home, or a hotel. [I can't be seen in any possible manner to be bullying her into making that decision.] In other words, I must seek genuine consent at every stage of the experience.... and that's without even talking about undressing, foreplay, sex, or afterplay. On top of all that, the woman can still withdraw consent (with or without actually informing me, but I should just know that she has).

Yup. Gray areas. And at the same time, women will complain that men are too timid, too gentle, too shy in the dating scene. That they want men to take control, to be assertive, and to "sweep them off their feet". That feeling of adventure, excitement and impulsiveness. That only the A.Holes and Bstards ask them out, with them never meeting nice guys. I wonder why?

Then you’ll hear the real complaining.

I suspect that most men are similar to myself on this one. I would love for there to be incredibly clear guidelines to dating behavior, consent, and rape allegations. I would love for there not to be any gray areas, and for there to be a realistic way of bringing it in. However TBH I suspect most of the people suggesting these changes haven't been part of a dating scene with an active sex life for quite some time. To be brutally honest, the traditional way of doing so worked perfectly fine. Women told us. It really was that simple.

The problem with LON or the Feminist scheme is that it seeks to remove womens voices. It encourages the belief that women can't say no. That they're incapable of making a decision based on their own intelligent, emotions, etc. Which thankfully, doesn't describe most of the women I've known in my life. But your belief in these changes for consent, really do encourage younger people to start accepting such a frame or mentality. That they need these crystal clear rules for social interaction because they're all waiting to be victims.

I suppose that’s the whole point of setting up a culture wide discussion. Is to figure out what the norms are and where the gray areas are. There will always be local differences. I’m always a bit surprised at the dating culture in America where people can date more than one persons at a time. But as long as it’s culturally understood, it’s just their way of doing it.

What’s interesting about your scenarios above is that you only look at consent as something you ask for and the woman gives. Consent is a 2 way thing. The first and most obvious thing that should be discussed is the rape law in Ireland where rape can only be committed by a man.

But the tendency is to jump to OTT scenarios like you did above instead of discussing the issues close at hand.

It’s actually an important men’s issue but the men aren’t interested in forwarding their concerns. Too busy setting up threads about how stupid and terrible LON is. Meanwhile LON is writing books and plays and taking part in the national discussion.

There was no explicitly men’s advocate at the parliamentary committee session this week.

Guess who’s getting their message out there. Pity.