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

El_Duderino 09

Dravokivich wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Ok. Not sure whey that got to do with the post You quoted.

Do you think you’re attitudes aren’t heavily influenced by culture and social norms? I’m not really sure what point you’re making.

Not by culture. The concept of social norms is no more than what flavour soup of the day we'll be served up. A different right thing to do and a policy being pushed up for it comes along very regularly.

As I said in my earlier response. My opinions were based on how the state should support it's citizens. Not because of what's happened before.

I've referenced my lack of knowing Norris because you seemed so bent on constantly referencing him as the leader of a change in culture.

That's incredibly naive. If someone doesn't think social norms and culture effect their outlook and shapes their attitudes, then they're just self unaware.

So just to clarify, do you think if you were born 200 years ago you would have been fine with gay marriage in spite of culture and social norms of the time? And do you think k of you were born in Saudi Arabia today you'd have the same outlook?

El_Duderino 09

Omackeral wrote: »

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...

We'll likewise, what do men have to campaign about? Men have legal equality don't they? But that doesn't stop there being pages and pages of complaining about feminism.

Omackeral

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

We'll likewise, what do men have to campaign about? Men have legal equality don't they?

Father's rights.

givyjoe

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

We'll likewise, what do men have to campaign about? Men have legal equality don't they? But that doesn't stop there being pages and pages of complaining about feminism.

Except they don't, with specific regard to family law cases. In practice the law, including the guards, do not treat men and women equally

LLMMLL

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



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?

Actually that’s fair enough. You didn’t say it was an incremental improvement.

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.

Acceptance only partially came from gay people living their lives. This was only possible due to campaigning. Formal campaigning initially. Without decriminalisation would anyone have felt able to share their lives with friends.

And there was plenty of less formal campaigning too. This includes gay individuals picking up people on their behaviour towards gay people.

In the early noughties I worked in a call centre where homophobic and racist conversations were fairly common. I kicked up a fuss a few times and managed to suppress a lot of it. Now I don’t think I necessarily changed anybody’s mind in there but a new entrant would have to listen to far less homophobic crap than I did. Do you think that has no impact on whether a gay person feels comfortable talking about their life?

There were also a few high profile discrimination cases after 2010 that made a difference.

The idea that attitudes changed solely due to gay people living their lives just isn’t true.

El_Duderino 09

Omackeral wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

We'll likewise, what do men have to campaign about? Men have legal equality don't they?

Father's rights.

Are there differences in laws for men and women?

Strange you'd bring it up since it hasn't been the topic of discussion up to now, but fair enough.

El_Duderino 09

givyjoe wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

We'll likewise, what do men have to campaign about? Men have legal equality don't they? But that doesn't stop there being pages and pages of complaining about feminism.

Except they don't, with specific regard to family law cases. In practice the law, including the guards, do not treat men and women equally

In practice? Now, surely you don't want to open that can of worms. Omackeral has already said that by definition, once legal parity has been achieved, you have nothing to campaign about.

If you're going to acknowledge discrepancies in how the law is applied, then you'll find all kinds of reasons for men and women to campaign.

Outlaw Pete

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

We'll likewise, what do men have to campaign about? Men have legal equality don't they? But that doesn't stop there being pages and pages of complaining about feminism.

Complaining about third wave feminism (or things third wave feminists say) =/= fighting for men's rights, how many times has that been said to you on this thread do you reckon? Must be a dozen at this stage.

But seeing as you ask: one right that men don't have, which women do, is the right to post pictures which show the nipples of their objects of desire in their respective eye candy thread. Equality of ogling I say!

givyjoe

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Are there differences in laws for men and women?

Strange you'd bring it up since it hasn't been the topic of discussion up to now, but fair enough.

Strange seen as you just asked a question and got a relevant answer. Weird right?

givyjoe

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

In practice? Now, surely you don't want to open that can of worms. Omackeral has already said that by definition, once legal parity has been achieved, you have nothing to campaign about.

If you're going to acknowledge discrepancies in how the law is applied, then you'll find all kinds of reasons for men and women to campaign.

No, you really won't. You know very well that the the courts do not treat men equally in family law cases. You also know that men are not treated equally by guards in cases of domestic violence where they are the alleged victim. We already know this, you know this.

Omackeral

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Omackeral has already said that by definition, once legal parity has been achieved, you have nothing to campaign about.

In this country, as pertains to women's rights, I feel that is the case. That's what I said before the person I was attempting to have a discussion with went off the deep end and start bringing up BLM issues and such. I also invited that other poster to lay out some things she feels are worth campaigning for for women in this country and she didn't/couldn't/wouldn't. If you have any El Duderino, I'm still all ears.

LLMMLL

Omackeral wrote: »

In this country, as pertains to women's rights, I feel that is the case. That's what I said before the person I was attempting to have a discussion with went off the deep end and start bringing up BLM issues and such. I also invited that other poster to lay out some things she feels are worth campaigning for for women in this country and she didn't/couldn't/wouldn't. If you have any El Duderino, I'm still all ears.

I’m not sure who it was in response to but I gave 5 issues and have referred to them constantly since. If you’ve been reading the thread then you saw them. Let’s not pretend that I didn’t couldn’t wouldn’t do so.

What has Bruce Willis done lately, out of interest?..last thing I saw him in was probably the sixth sense..

I wonder has he heard of Lou?..

What do ye reckon would happen if they met?..Could Lou's feminism or Bruce's raw masculinity deal with it?..Would it be a case of unstoppable force meets immovable object?..

Do ye think Louise would throw gender stereotypes to the wind and ask him to star in the lead of "Asking for it"?...Would he accept?

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.

Still waiting for an answer to what other movements or causes I’ve been involved with?

Pagan Death March

LLMMLL wrote: »

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?

Men are, rightfully, celebrated for their conquests as sex is much harder for a man to get.

It's the men who never get any are the ones who get shamed and judged by both sexes.

Outlaw Pete

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Are there differences in laws for men and women?

Doesn't have to be a difference in law, just the application of it.

For example, women often get far more lenient sentences for the same crimes as men do:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usq-IHT5ARc

Unsurprisingly when you have the likes of this nonsense going on:

Judges told: 'be more lenient to women criminals'
Women's prisons should close, says justice taskforce

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

The idea that attitudes changed solely due to gay people living their lives just isn’t true.

Another snip... because you keep putting in things that weren't said, or even hinted at.

LLMMLL wrote: »

Still waiting for an answer to what other movements or causes I’ve been involved with?

Really? Okay. My apology, I was incorrect. You said that you had connections with those involved with anti-bullying schemes. You also had personal knowledge of what scientists talk about.

So... I was incorrect in saying that you were involved in many movements... and you were incorrect....?

Benjamin Buttons

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

So :P

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

Second-wave feminist Germaine Greer has a more, ahem, nuanced view: “Someone like Beyoncé – who I think is a fantastic musician, a beautiful voice as true as a bell – why has she always got to be fúcking naked and have her tits hanging out? Why?''

DickSwiveller

Benjamin Buttons wrote: »

Second-wave feminist Germaine Greer has a more, ahem, nuanced view: “Someone like Beyoncé – who I think is a fantastic musician, a beautiful voice as true as a bell – why has she always got to be fúcking naked and have her tits hanging out? Why?''

Something I've noticed recently. The older feminists seem to have a bit of sense. Greer and others are coming across as reasonable the more O'Neill and her ilk keep getting exposure

AllForIt

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usq-IHT5ARc

My faith has been restored in women.

DickSwiveller wrote: »

Something I've noticed recently. The older feminists seem to have a bit of sense. Greer and others are coming across as reasonable the more O'Neill and her ilk keep getting exposure

Absolutely. Only been listening to Greer in last year or so and she seems like a perfectly reasonable person. I was fully aware of her for decades and It's just amazing now that the new feminists don't think she's feminists enough these days.

Ulysses Gaze

DickSwiveller wrote: »

Something I've noticed recently. The older feminists seem to have a bit of sense. Greer and others are coming across as reasonable the more O'Neill and her ilk keep getting exposure

The older feminists are getting hammered by the Third and Fourth Wave loon squad though.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/25/germaine-greer-prejudice-trans-people

“a great many women don’t think post-operative men look like or sound like women, but they daren’t say so”. As a result of this, the women’s officer at Cardiff University, Rachael Melhuish, has called for Greer to be no-platformed – Melhuish’s petition asks specifically that a lecture Greer was booked to give be cancelled, since she has “demonstrated misogynistic views towards trans women, including continually misgendering trans women and denying the existence of transphobia altogether”.

Julie Bindel has had the same problems as well.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/feb/01/julie-bindel-transphobia

RabbleRouser2k

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

The older feminists are getting hammered by the Third and Fourth Wave loon squad though.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/25/germaine-greer-prejudice-trans-people



Julie Bindel has had the same problems as well.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/feb/01/julie-bindel-transphobia

Julie Bindel's also a political lesbian...as in 'lesbian by choice'...she's cray.

AllForIt

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

Julie Bindel's also a political lesbian...as in 'lesbian by choice'...she's cray.

Never heard of her but from her Wikipedia entry she's a radical feminist who is a lesbian who came out at 15, back in the early 80's. Think I get the picture.

It's kinda odd to me that a lesbian would be so radical because they don't live with men as a partner so they are fighting a cause which they don't themselves have as big a stake in as heterosexual women do. Not that I'm denying her right to do so, but again, think I get the picture.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Another snip... because you keep putting in things that weren't said, or even hinted at.

Really? The following two quotes are interesting:

klaz wrote:

Although it is interesting that I said earlier that attitudes changed because of Gay people actions, not campaigns...

klaz wrote:

eing 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.

You say attitudes changed because of gay peoples actions not campaigns.

You further say there were NO grand campaigns to change adult minds.

Really? Okay. My apology, I was incorrect. You said that you had connections with those involved with anti-bullying schemes. You also had personal knowledge of what scientists talk about.

So... I was incorrect in saying that you were involved in many movements... and you were incorrect....?

I said the following:

i actually know the people responsible for anti gay bullying campaigns in schools. They’re there because the campaigned for it

So I said I knew the people. Not that I was involved in it. Also anti gay bullying is part of the gay rights movement. Even if I was involved with that particular aspect it would still be the same movement.

What does knowing what scientists talk about have to do with any cause or movement? I’m genuinely mystified here.

So yes you were incorrect. I’ve no idea what you mean by:

. and you were incorrect....?

El_Duderino 09

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

We'll likewise, what do men have to campaign about? Men have legal equality don't they? But that doesn't stop there being pages and pages of complaining about feminism.

Complaining about third wave feminism (or things third wave feminists say) =/= fighting for men's rights, how many times has that been said to you on this thread do you reckon? Must be a dozen at this stage.

But seeing as you ask: one right that men don't have, which women do, is the right to post pictures which show the nipples of their objects of desire in their respective eye candy thread. Equality of ogling I say!

I can safely say I've never seen anyone tell me "Complaining about third wave feminism (or things third wave feminists say) =/= fighting for men's rights". It's something that I've said in this and other threads and received pushback against in fact. Lots of posters think complaining about feminism is a form of fighting for men's rights. I'd eat my proverbial hat you can quote someone saying that to me in this thread, let alone a dozen times.

Rights re showing nipples. Sounds serious. Assuming you feel strongly about it, what's the best course of action?

El_Duderino 09

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Are there differences in laws for men and women?

Doesn't have to be a difference in law, just the application of it.

For example, women often get far more lenient sentences for the same crimes as men do:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usq-IHT5ARc

Unsurprisingly when you have the likes of this nonsense going on:

Judges told: 'be more lenient to women criminals'
Women's prisons should close, says justice taskforce

Stall the ball. earlier you said that once the laws are the same then equality has been achieved by definition and there's nothing left to campaign about. But now, all of a sudden, it matters to your group, there's another important qualifying factor of HOW the law is implemented.

So now it might be the case that even if the laws are the same for men and women, there might be things left to campaign about. That kinda undoes the pages and pages of back and forth with LLMMLL.

El_Duderino 09

I would have thought how laws are implemented would definitely be important. But earlier in the thread the same poster said that once the laws are the same for men and women, they are by definition equal and they don’t need to campaign on that point any longer. If be interested in their response.

I think it’s been established among the posters on these threads they feminism is primarily concern with women’s issues. If you’re waiting for them to do the men’s rights work, you should be prepared to wait, or activate.

El_Duderino 09

givyjoe wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Are there differences in laws for men and women?

Strange you'd bring it up since it hasn't been the topic of discussion up to now, but fair enough.

Strange seen as you just asked a question and got a relevant answer. Weird right?

Strange that I asked a follow up question? I would have thought that was completely normal behaviour.

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

Really? The following two quotes are interesting:

You say attitudes changed because of gay peoples actions not campaigns.

Which is still a huge leap of logic to accuse me of writing three different statements which you cannot actually quote.

You further say there were NO grand campaigns to change adult minds.

Nope. I said I can't recall of any grand campaigns during that period. You do realise that you're leaving out chunks of info here? I said in the previous paragraph:

Quoted from Klaz -- "Now, I can't recall of a single piece of advertising or campaigning while I lived in Ireland until I left in my 30s which sought to raise awareness or acceptance of gay people. In fact, most acceptance came from being exposed to them in University, and later having colleagues in work who were "camp", or obviously gay. It was their behavior and attitude that made being gay acceptable. "
(oddly enough from the link I provided.. Did you even bother rereading it?)


Stop looking for a black and white answer. I'm sure there were promotional campaigns in Dublin, although I have no memory of similar campaigns either while I worked there or aimed at the rest of the country. But I'm guessing that the Gay rights movements were campaigning in various ways. However, that doesn't change that homosexuality gained far more acceptance in Irish society through the efforts of gay people simply to live their lives... by being exposed to gay people, mainstream society adapted over time.

So yes you were incorrect. I’ve no idea what you mean by:

It was a polite reference to the three statements that you have accused me of making which I didn't and you have yet to find any quotations to support yourself (otherwise you would have already). It was a suggestion to admit that you were wrong, like I admitted to being wrong...

Outlaw Pete

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I'd eat my proverbial hat you can quote someone saying that to me in this thread..

Apologies, I thought you were Louise.

Rights re showing nipples. Sounds serious. Assuming you feel strongly about it, what's the best course of action?

Well, suppose I could just post a topless woman in the Beautiful Women thread everytime a topless man is posted in the Beautiful Men thread, but I think I'd get in trouble.