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

LLMMLL

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Well, it's true........



And my own experiences over the last 20 odds years of how society acts in this context would absolutely back that up as I have never, not once, heard a man being referred to as a stud when he is promiscuous. Expect maybe in an ironic mocking way, but otherwise they'd more likely be spoken about in a somewhat negative fashion, with comments such as 'He'd get up on anything' or 'He must be riddled' etc. Men can also quite often be shamed for exhibiting certain sexually overt behaviours and (sometimes justifiably) get called creeps, sleazy, desperate etc, and so the stud/slut narrative you'd have us all believe is an apt one, is far from the truth of how things in actual reality are. Things are much more complex than that, but ultimately, more balanced than ever before, with regards to the positive and negative ways people can be seen today when it comes to their sexual choices.

Also from your survey:

only 6%, tended to hold a traditional double standard compared to almost 25% of men.

Boom_Bap

upandcumming wrote: »

No, just verdicts in rape cases in different countries.

I by no means agree with her stance on many things, but she is an individual who can pick and choose what she wants to bring up.
There is no onus on her to report on everything.


But I do believe there is an onus on her given the profile that she has amassed that she needs to be more conscious of what she is discussing.


For example she is tweeting recently about Beyonce and how she is underappreciated and not considered a genius. There are issues that I have with this, there hardly anybody that would consider her underappreciated. Everything that she has released has won the top tier awards in music.

begbysback

I'd go with the Magimix myself, 2 slots - no matter how bad the bread is it comes out golden - not cheap though at 160 quid

Outlaw Pete

LLMMLL wrote: »

Also from your survey:

So :P

That doesn't support your nonsense claims.

In some areas women were more judgmental of men, overall the research shows balance.

Boom_Bap wrote: »

For example she is tweeting recently about Beyonce and how she is underappreciated and not considered a genius. There are issues that I have with this, there hardly anybody that would consider her underappreciated. Everything that she has released has won the top tier awards in music.

Yeah, I seen that, and she was hailing Beyonce headlining Coachella recently as being a breakthrough for black women. I mean, please.

Wibbs

LLMMLL wrote: »

For example when there are cuts in carers allowance. Don’t these disproportianetly affect women?

Funny you should say that as I was a carer for many a year* and it took many a year for me to get the allowance and on a couple of occasions it was spelled out to me that because I was male that raised suspicion. I was also asked a few times if I had a female relative that could do it. Asked by women. So it seems that women are also disproportionally favoured for such a role and government help. Well colour me shocked. Not.

Women in western society and in Irish society are more socially supported throughout life and across the board. Anyone who denies this is blinkered or wilfully obvious fact avoidant. As I've pointed out before if you want attention from government or the media and if you want funding for your social cause you'll do little good if you front the campaign with pics of men in trouble. Slap on women, a few crying kids for the win and voila! Attention.

Hell even terrorists have copped to this. Boko Haram capture, enslave, mutilate or kill hundreds of men and little shows up in international media, but when after letting them go the first few times(after burning the men and boys to death) they kidnap a few dozen women and girls? Everyone loses their shit and the west suddenly notices. So maybe you "feminists" should climb down from your cardboard crosses every so often. And pigs might fly while Satan skates to work in the morning.



*Oh and I noticed no cuts in the allowance when I was on it. If anything, more help was doled out to me over time once I got into the system. No complaints there.

givyjoe

MikeyTaylor wrote: »

Genuinely?

Nah, more than likely a sister, friend or superfan.

LLMMLL

givyjoe wrote: »

Superfan.

This

givyjoe

LLMMLL wrote: »

Right then so you are referring to me and your response about vigilantism was in response to my suggestion of consent classes.

Let me clear it up for you, I was NOT posting in reference to your consent classes. Only the words on non-legislative action, aka acting outside of the law analogous to LON's thinking and views specific to the Paddy Jackson trial and the metoo movement.

MikeyTaylor

LLMMLL wrote: »

This

Just like I am with Laura Whitmore :-)

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

We could start a remedial thread for those struggling. Would that help?

Could very well..

LLMMLL

givyjoe wrote: »

Let me clear it up for you, I was NOT posting in reference to your consent classes. Only the words on non-legislative action, aka acting outside of the law analogous to LON's thinking and views specific to the Paddy Jackson trial and the metoo movement.

So you ignored the actual example of what I meant by non legislative action to come up with one of your own to support a completely different definition?

LLMMLL

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

So :P

That doesn't support your nonsense claims.

In some areas women were more judgmental of men, overall the research shows balance.

Do you have access to the paper? I’m trying to find it.

From what I can see of the what you posted there is no claim that women are more judgemental OF men. It shows two figures directly related female judgment. They are more likely to judge BOTH men and women negatively and they are less likely to judge ONLY women negatively.

I don’t see any figure on how many judge ONLY men negatively. Am I missing it?

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Could very well..

I’m going to call it “ME NO LIKE LON, ME LIKE BRUCE WILLIS”

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

I’m going to call it “ME NO LIKE LON, ME LIKE BRUCE WILLIS”

Sounds discriminatory to me..

givyjoe

LLMMLL wrote: »

So you ignored the actual example of what I meant by non legislative action to come up with one of your own to support a completely different definition?

Are you kidding me?! And you think you don't move goalposts?!

givyjoe

LLMMLL wrote: »

I’m going to call it “ME NO LIKE LON, ME LIKE BRUCE WILLIS”

Ah, yet another classless post with more derogatory remarks on the intelligence of posters.

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

What other campaign were you referring to then? Is this classic klaz where you heavily imply something then Retreat to saying you didn’t literally say it?

Imply? Campaign? I said you were a part of many movements. You introduced the word campaign... You said you were involved in the gay rights movement, and you referred to other causes earlier in the thread that you were involved in.

As for retreat... I can't help that you read something and go off on a tangent about something unrelated.

Uh huh. You really think the experience of someone living in Ireland and someone who returned every few years are even close. You really think you are in a position to make definitive statements on the supposedly gradual pace of change in gay rights in Ireland because you had friends there? And you came back for the odd party?

I think that I can attest to the periods I did live in Ireland (which I referred to, and you've repeatedly shifted to 10 years later), and I can attest to the lifestyles/experiences of close gay friends.

As opposed to your expertise in being a part of the gay rights movement, and simply living in Ireland the whole time?

And the really funny part is that I didn't question your experience of the issues that gay people experienced... Although you have questioned mine. Interesting that.

I didn’t say you were part of a movement. I was talking about your experience of changing gay rights. Do only formal campaigners have experience of changes in rights? That’s kind of bizarre.

My experience in changing gay rights? Lol. Ahh the way you interpret things is amazing. My experience to the problems that gay people faced was through my exposure to their lives.

What year did you actually leave. You haven’t said yet. I’m pretty much focussed on 2000-present which is what I have experience of.

I left in 2007.

Well if you want the experiences of some of my friends in noughties mainstream gay clubs I’d be happy to oblige. It’s a bit different to that once club that gave discount to gay people.

haha... Your examples really do trump everyone else's don't they? Funny that.

Yes and if horrible incidents are needed to progress rights and attitudes then this idea that it was a nice gentle liberal curve of acceptance is nonsense.

Which nobody even suggested until you wrote it right now. And i'm not going to write again what was written because I'm guessing you'll misinterpret it again simply because you feel you're right on the subject.

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

Highlighting the hypocrisy. You basically
Just underlined my whole point. Thanks.

Oh! the irony.

Omackeral

Rory28 wrote: »

What else can be done? How much more equal can society be for Irish Women?

That's literally all I asked originally as well but you never really get an answer.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Imply? Campaign? I said you were a part of many movements. You introduced the word campaign... You said you were involved in the gay rights movement, and you referred to other causes earlier in the thread that you were involved in.

As for retreat... I can't help that you read something and go off on a tangent about something unrelated.

What other causes did I say I was involved with?

I think that I can attest to the periods I did live in Ireland (which I referred to, and you've repeatedly shifted to 10 years later), and I can attest to the lifestyles/experiences of close gay friends.

As opposed to your expertise in being a part of the gay rights movement, and simply living in Ireland the whole time?

I also have lots of gay friends, have been involved in the gay rights movement and have lived here the entire time. And I’ve much more experience on top of that.

I haven’t shifted to ten years later. I’ve said 2000 to present. I’ve located the major turning point at 2010-2012 but am not dismissing earlier years. There just wasn’t much of a change in attitudes between 2000 and then. I’d say 2008-2012 were a very slight improvement but in general homophobic attitudes were pretty static 2000-2010.

And the really funny part is that I didn't question your experience of the issues that gay people experienced... Although you have questioned mine. Interesting that.

Yeah I absolutely question the experience of someone who has lived outside of Ireland for long periods of time in terms of chronicling the average experience of gay people in Ireland, especially when they characterise the progress as gentle and constant.

My experience in changing gay rights? Lol. Ahh the way you interpret things is amazing. My experience to the problems that gay people faced was through my exposure to their lives.

Don’t even know what you’re arguing. You seem to be creating a distinction between the words “gay rights” and “the problems that gay people faced”. You can change all my references to gay rights to “the problems that gay people faced”. All my comments still stand. The improvements in “the problems gay people faced” were not smooth incremental improvements across 2000-2018 that happened naturally because liberal young people decided to reject the previous generations conservatism.

I left in 2007.

So in the period 2000 to present 7 years here and 11 years or so with 1/4 of your time spent here? Sorry but I can’t take that seriously in terms of characterising gradual changes over that period.

haha... Your examples really do trump everyone else's don't they? Funny that.

I wouldn’t say that. I just don’t think the example of one club with a specific pro gay policy trumps the multiple clubs where casual discrimination was rife. I can give multiple examples of gay couples being pulled apart on the dance floor by bouncers in various different clubs over the years.

There’s always been gay friendly spaces. To pretend that these were somehow mainstream is really laughable.

Which nobody even suggested until you wrote it right now. And i'm not going to write again what was written because I'm guessing you'll misinterpret it again simply because you feel you're right on the subject.

That’s very much what was suggested. What I’ve been arguing is it was led by gay people, and came in fits and bursts since 2000, not incremental yearly improvements.

Outlaw Pete

LLMMLL wrote: »

From what I can see of the what you posted there is no claim that women are more judgemental OF men.

It clearly says that some were:

13% held a reverse double standard, meaning they lost respect for men who hooked up too much but not for women.

The point is that, OVERALL, the study shows that how we judge women and men when it comes to sexual choices today is more balanced now then ever has been before, a 'sea change', as the author of the article put it. Point out subtle differences, as you did, misses the point. Most reasonable people would concede that research such as that flies in the face of the of the assertion that women are judged much more harshly when it comes to the sexual choices they make than their male counterparts, or at least to the degree that they would need to be in order for you to be able to justify the labeling of it as an example of oppression.

Even we look at pop culture, almost all examples of promiscuous women have been portrayed in a positive light. Be it the girls in Friends or Sex and the City, whenever they shagged someone they'd just met, or dated guy after guy after guy, there was no societal scorn. If anything the only character being slut shamed in those shows was Joey Tribbiani and indeed I note that the millennials have labelled him a creep.

Women get to be sexually expressive in ways guys can't be, or at least, it's not as socially acceptable for them to be. Chippendales played the Olympia, Rampant rabbits and female multiple orgasams get discussed in open conversation, and have done for many a year. You can buy vibrators in Boots. Can't recall seeing their blow up doll / fleshlight section yet. Victoria Secret is on high streets. LON was even recently complaining on TLLS about women having bad sex (as their orgasms aren't prioritized enough apparently).

I mean, I just don't see evidence of this world you paint where women's sexuality is judged so harshly by our society that it amounts to being a form of oppression.

LLMMLL

givyjoe wrote: »

Are you kidding me?! And you think you don't move goalposts?!

No I’m not kidding. I raised non legislative action as a means of reaching equality. I specifically said consent classes as an example. You responded with claims of vigilantism. When pointed out that it’s not what I meant and that it’s clearly not what I meant given my example you said you were talking about LON and not me. She pointed out that you quoted me and were clearly referring to my ideas you started spouting the usual fluff about me being LON.

There’s no goalpost moving. You were referring to my opinion on non legislative action and ignored my example on consent classes to try and mischaracterise what I was calling for. I’m not surprised, you do it all the time.

LLMMLL

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

It clearly says that some were:

That figure includes both men and women. You said:

In some areas women were more judgmental of men, overall the research shows balance.

You can’t discern whether women were more judgemental of men than men were from a figure that lumps men and women together.

givyjoe

LLMMLL wrote: »

No I’m not kidding. I raised non legislative action as a means of reaching equality. I specifically said consent classes as an example. You responded with claims of vigilantism. When pointed out that it’s not what I meant and that it’s clearly not what I meant given my example you said you were talking about LON and not me. She pointed out that you quoted me and were clearly referring to my ideas you started spouting the usual fluff about me being LON.

There’s no goalpost moving. You were referring to my opinion on non legislative action and ignored my example on consent classes to try and mischaracterise what I was calling for. I’m not surprised, you do it all the time.

More nonsense, goal post moving, deliberate miss interpretation, irony and hypocrisy. It's getting boring at this stage.

LLMMLL

givyjoe wrote: »

More nonsense, goal post moving, deliberate miss interpretation, irony and hypocrisy. It's getting boring at this stage.

If you could genuinely show there was goalpost moving you’d show it instead of saying it.

givyjoe

LLMMLL wrote: »

If you could genuinely show there was goalpost moving you’d show it instead of saying it.

I would have thought it was obvious, do you need finger puppets again?

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

Yeah I absolutely question the experience of someone who has lived outside of Ireland for long periods of time in terms of chronicling the average experience of gay people in Ireland, especially when they characterise the progress as gentle and constant.

Yup, I'm snipping out everything because it's getting drawn out and moving a miles from the actual discussion area. But you've brought this up within the last two posts. Where did I or anyone else call the social change for gay people to be gentle and constant? Or a nice gentle liberal curve.. which you introduced earlier.. just as you've attributed other statements to us which nobody has actually written.

The original dispute was that you believed that the social change came about due to the direct campaigning for gay rights.

Deleted User wrote:

Being gay received acceptance long before the SSM issue even came up for debate... and it gained that acceptance because of the gay people who lived openly gay lives, and also the shame Irish people felt for being so backward compared with the rest of Europe. No grand campaigns to change adults minds.

So... no... Attitudes changed long before the heavy campaigning of the SSM and changed naturally as Irish people sought to leave behind the conservative past given to us by our parents or the Church.

No mention of change being gentle and constant? Or a nice gentle liberal curve... and I've gone through the posts since then... and haven't found it either. Except from you. Care to post up where anyone said that?

The other thing I noticed from all the posts since that original post is how we've moved gradually away from the original question.. Perhaps return to it... or simply revert back to the area of equality for women?

LLMMLL

givyjoe wrote: »

I would have thought it was obvious, do you need finger puppets again?

Yes please. Any explanation would be an improvement on deflection.

givyjoe

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yup, I'm snipping out everything because it's getting drawn out and moving a miles from the actual discussion area. But you've brought this up within the last two posts. Where did I or anyone else call the social change for gay people to be gentle and constant? Or a nice gentle liberal curve.. which you introduced earlier.. just as you've attributed other statements to us which nobody has actually written.

The original dispute


Perhaps return to it... or simply revert back to the area of equality for women?

Why they do that when they can argue something else instead?

Omackeral

Deleted User wrote: »

The other thing I noticed from all the posts since that original post is how we've moved gradually away from the original question.. Perhaps return to it... or simply revert back to the area of equality for women?

Oh yeah, what are the issues the we need to campaign on for women in Ireland today to insure equality? Despite having identical legal rights. Still haven't got a definitive goal on that...