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

meeeeh

meeeeh wrote: »

I want my kids to meet as many people with different POV as possible. It's much better to challenge them than protect them.

I had an anthropology lecturer who was a complete bitch. She was also feminist, leftist (in the old commie way), perfectionist and her exams were amongst most demanding. Everyone hated her but there was always engagement, heated debate and argument and the room was packed. You don't need to agree with someone for them to challenge you to think about the subject.

The worst thing is never to challenge kids and their opinions. I have no idea what her talks are like or if she is any good but I pitty children whose parents try to shelter them from 'harmful' opinions. They will be the future snowflakes.

I’m all for different POV in life’s but I get th vibe this one (and her ilk) attitude is block any different opinion, play the victim and accuse those who have different opinions as sexist/racist or something phobic..and Lou Lou does not tolerate any other opinion which doesn’t follow her narrative..there’d be an outrage from sjw groups if a man went on and talked about men’s issues on schools but a man hater like this one gets a pass to spew her stuff

And if I do have kids... I wouldn’t want them going around having a hatred against any person

meeeeh

freshpopcorn wrote: »

Anybody who I have seen challenge Louise in the past she basically labels a troll. She's very closed minded and can't accept other peoples opinion.
She could post a picture of a Ford Focus and say here's my lovely new Opel Astra. Somebody could reply that's a Ford Focus and she'd be like.
Guys I'm sick of the trolls.

I wasn't talking about online. It's safe to assume neither you or I were at her talks so we have no idea how good or bad they are. I'm not necessarily saying her talks are good because I don't know. However someone with the same opinions could be and so would someone with exactly the opposite opinions.

It's exactly the same principle as students protesting when Petersen, Dawkins or whoever else is scheduled to talk in the universities.

meeeeh

Dakota Brave Carrot wrote: »

I’m all for different POV in life’s but I get th vibe this one (and her ilk) attitude is block any different opinion, play the victim and accuse those who have different opinions as sexist/racist or something phobic..and Lou Lou does not tolerate any other opinion which doesn’t follow her narrative..there’d be an outrage from sjw groups if a man went on and talked about men’s issues on schools but a man hater like this one gets a pass to spew her stuff

And if I did have kids... I wouldn’t want them going around having a hatred against any person

In other words you would want your kids to listen only to people you approve of. I don't think you would be doing them any favours.

meeeeh

meeeeh wrote: »

In other words you would want your kids to listen only to people you approve of. I don't think you would be doing them any favours.

So you’d be all for Katie Hopkins or a far right person coming in and spouting their rubbish as well

I don’t want someone pushing being a man is bad and women are always the victim

darkdubh

darkdubh wrote: »

That knob Hozier weighing in on the "you can't call looters scumbags" thing.

https://twitter.com/Hozier/status/969995601579532289

He should move in beside those families and get to know them so

meeeeh

Dakota Brave Carrot wrote: »

So you’d be all for Katie Hopkins or a far right person coming in and spouting their rubbish as well

Katie Hopkins engages people, I draw the line at people who advocate stuff that is illegal.

the_pen_turner

meeeeh wrote: »

I want my kids to meet as many people with different POV as possible. It's much better to challenge them than protect them.

I had an anthropology lecturer who was a complete bitch. She was also feminist, leftist (in the old commie way), perfectionist and her exams were amongst most demanding. Everyone hated her but there was always engagement, heated debate and argument and the room was packed. You don't need to agree with someone for them to challenge you to think about the subject.

The worst thing is never to challenge kids and their opinions. I have no idea what her talks are like or if she is any good but I pitty children whose parents try to shelter them from 'harmful' opinions. They will be the future snowflakes.

i have no problem with someone going into a school and sparking open debate and showing no bias. we need kids to debate a topic and engage their brains so they can make their own minds up.

people like louise will go in there to only talk bout one side of the debate and will do anything to stop somone pointing out the other side. we cannot let our kids grow up with that kind of culture where they cannot voice their opinion for fear of being called a rapist , masoginist or troll by some hyped up nobody with a grudge

um7y1h83ge06nx

[Deleted User] wrote: »

He should move in beside those families and get to know them so

Well said. When we had serious problems in Limerick the vast majority of people absolutely despised the criminals, bunch of sub humans is all they were.

I lived about a 3 minute drive away from where the innocent Shane Gheoghan lived and was murdered. I do not understand what mentality we have in this country where there is a sizable minority that care about criminals more than the victims.

Charmeleon

meeeeh wrote: »

In other words you would want your kids to listen only to people you approve of. I don't think you would be doing them any favours.

Depends, would you want a scientologist coming into a school to talk about how great scientology is?

The problem with Louise is that she actively targets one particular demographic for group punishment and wants to exclude them from participating in the 'conversation'. If that was any other group in society we would all agree that is toxic and divisive.

meeeeh

Charmeleon wrote: »

Depends, would you want a scientologist coming into a school to talk about how great scientology is?
.

No but I don't think any religion should be in schools, I would have no problem with them in universities where attendance is not mandatory.

Edit: I see quite a few of you attended her talks considering you all know what she talks about.

the_pen_turner

meeeeh wrote: »

No but I don't think any religion should be in schools, I would have no problem with them in universities where attendance is not mandatory.

Edit: I see quite a few of you attended her talks considering you all know what she talks about.

im not claiming to know what she talked about but if its in any way similar to what she writes or tweets then its far too toxic for any kids to be exposed to

meeeeh

the_pen_turner wrote: »

im not claiming to know what she talked about but if its in any way similar to what she writes or tweets then its far too toxic for any kids to be exposed to

So you actually don't know what she talks about but you would keep your kids away because they could possibly maybe be damaged by what she says. Will you be requesting safe spaces in their school too?

freshpopcorn

meeeeh wrote: »

So you actually don't know what she talks about but you would keep your kids away because they could possibly maybe be damaged by what she says. Will you be requesting safe spaces in their school too?

People can just make an educated guess what her talks are about based on her articles, guest appearances on tv, tweets,etc. It's unlikely she's going to change that much.

The Rape of Lucretia

Dakota Brave Carrot wrote: »

I don’t want someone pushing being a man is bad and women are always the victim

What if she is right though, and its you who cant see it and are trying to shut her down ?

the_pen_turner

meeeeh wrote: »

So you actually don't know what she talks about but you would keep your kids away because they could possibly maybe be damaged by what she says. Will you be requesting safe spaces in their school too?

even if she was there 100% doing something other than her normal stuff i wouldnt be happy. you are introducing kids to her and some might think that if this other stuff is supported then her hate stuff is accepted too.

people like her should not be let anywhere near vulnerable youths. end of. i know that would be unfair but we should do things like this to stop people that spread hate and try to twist the minds of our children.


also our schools should be safe places from this sort of 1 sided hate speech . we need to support debate and allow people to have an opinion of their own

the_pen_turner

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

What if she is right though, and its you who cant see it and are trying to shut her down ?

because all of the data and facts show that she is wrong and that women are no more victims than men

The Rape of Lucretia

the_pen_turner wrote: »

because all of the data and facts show that she is wrong and that women are no more victims than men

From your perspective. We arent talking about a binary mathematical answer here. From her's, the answer is the opposite. So who decides who should not be heard ?

meeeeh

the_pen_turner wrote: »

also our schools should be safe places from this sort of 1 sided hate speech . we need to support debate and allow people to have an opinion of their own

You do realise that in that case you just forced your opinion of her on your kids? You are not supporting debate, you are making sure your kids will have opinions you approve of.

um7y1h83ge06nx

Well given her support of the degenerates that were looting in Dublin you may as well bring a few criminals in to chat to the kids as well.

meeeeh

Garrett Incalculable Schoolgirl wrote: »

Well given her support of the degenerates that were looting in Dublin you may as well bring a few criminals in to chat to the kids as well.

Let's try to be rational, shall we?

the_pen_turner

meeeeh wrote: »

You do realise that in that case you just forced your opinion of her on your kids? You are not supporting debate, you are making sure your kids will have opinions you approve of.

there is a small bit of truth in that but you also have to teach kids that you need to stand up for themselves and not to lower themselves to debate with someone who has no respect for their opinion.

for there to be proper debate you need to see both sides equally and fairly. you cant do that with her type, they wont debate , all they will do is insult you and belittle you instead of letting your points stand for themselves

the_pen_turner

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

From your perspective. We arent talking about a binary mathematical answer here. From her's, the answer is the opposite. So who decides who should not be heard ?

the problem is that she isnt looking at it as a grey scale , she only sees black adn white. she believes that all men are rapists and that women are the only victims.
all the facts disprove her.
if she was talking sense that was true and could be shown to be true with facts then she would be rightly shown as someone worth listning to.

we can only draw our opinions of her from the crap she puts out

um7y1h83ge06nx

meeeeh wrote: »

Let's try to be rational, shall we?

Supporting crime is almost as bad as the crime itself. And she is the one that moans about so called "rape culture". She should choose what side of the fence she is on.

The Rape of Lucretia

meeeeh wrote: »

Let's try to be rational, shall we?

By being supportive of men ?
True feminists should be promoting sympathy and understanding for men, all born with an insuperable handicap of being rapists. Then stigmatised by an element of the feminist movement because they are through no fault of their own, born with this trait. What a double whammy. Men are the real victims here.

meeeeh

Garrett Incalculable Schoolgirl wrote: »

Supporting crime is almost as bad as the crime itself. And she is the one that moans about so called "rape culture". She should choose what side of the fence she is on.

You are still irrational. English is not my first language but even I can understand arguing what to call criminals is not the same as supporting criminals.

Charmeleon

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

What if she is right though, and its you who cant see it and are trying to shut her down ?

What if she goes into a school and instead of saying ‘Girls, the world is out there waiting for you. You are so lucky to live in a time when you not only have equal rights with men, but you live in a country where the highest office in the land was twice occupied by women elected by the entire population. You have every career opportunity open to to you and many industries are actively looking to employ you over similarly qualified men. You can expect to earn more than your male peers right through to your mid-thirties and can then expect support and understanding for whatever career or home life choice you make. Violence against women has been under decline and you are less likely to be randomly attacked on the streets. Go out and be confident, brave and go get what you want in life.’

Instead they will very likely get: ‘The world hates you because of your gender. You will be harshly discriminated against and are highly likely to be sexually assaulted by any male that crosses your path. When that does happen, society will blame you and celebrate your attacker. Rapists are treated like royalty. Any criticism you receive is motivated by misogyny. He will get the promotion, not you.’ You will end up squashed by a patriarchal state that does not listen to your voice.’

The problem with her worldview is it programs girls to expect failure and hatred in a time when they are much more likely than ever before to achieve any goal they set. It’s destructive and devisive, paranoid and plain wrong.

Outlaw Pete

Her comments have nothing to do with crime, the support of it, or otherwise. Nor do her comments have anything to do with her disapproval, or dislike, of young suspects of criminal behaviour being referred to as 'scumbags'. All this is about is her nauseating desire to virtue signalling to her flock. That's all that was on her mind when she tweeted what she did and had all those who posted their exploits on social media, showing of their loot, been white, she'd have never opened her mouth.

meeeeh

Charmeleon wrote: »

You are so lucky to live in a time when you not only have equal rights with men, but you live in a country where the highest office in the land was twice occupied by women elected by the entire population.

I have no objections to the rest but you are not seriously applauding the achievement of two women being elected into the office that has no power and so little significance one left it before it was over. You have Merkel deciding the shape of Europe and you have presidents here deciding menus for state dinners. Find something a bit less patronising.

Charmeleon

meeeeh wrote: »

I have no objections to the rest but you are not seriously applauding the achievement of two women being elected into the office that has no power and so little significance one left it before it was over. You have Merkel deciding the shape of Europe and you have presidents here deciding menus for state dinners. Find something a bit less patronising.

The point is they are elected by the people in the street, the Taoiseach can only be elected by the Dáil.

meeeeh

Charmeleon wrote: »

The point is they are elected by the people in the street, the Taoiseach can only be elected by the Dáil.

So are contestants in reality shows. They have very little influence.