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

Bunny Colvin

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

No, it's not fair game. As a result of her tweet being posted on this thread, she had to put up with abuse from some random stranger, who then had the audacity to lie about her reason for blocking him.

The poor thing. If she can put out tweets like that then she better be able to handle a backlash.

kumate_champ07

Bunny Colvin wrote: »

The girl in question is mentally unhinged. Read her tweets - it's all there in black and white. Fair play to that poster for not pulling his punches.

could be, but why act shocked if you get blocked for saying something rude like that

kumate_champ07

LLMMLL wrote: »

That makes no sense

in his head maybe

yerwanthere123

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

No, it's not fair game. As a result of her tweet being posted on this thread, she had to put up with abuse from some random stranger, who then had the audacity to lie about her reason for blocking him.

This woman has stated that she wouldn't feel any sympathy for the 4 accused even if they're innocent, because apparently they're "privileged". She's also stated that the fact that some men have disagreed with her tweet has in fact made her angry at "all men". She's angry at all men, even those who have zero knowledge of the case or her twitter account, because some people on the internet disagreed with her sexist views. This is a seriously twisted way of thinking.

Whilst I wouldn't sent her abuse for it, nor do I agree with the people who are doing it, I don't feel one ounce of sympathy for her.

AllForIt

twit her

pjohnson

kumate_champ07 wrote: »

in his head maybe

Did you assume my gender?

Yer Da sells Avon

Bunny Colvin wrote: »

The poor thing. If she can put out tweets like that then she better be able to handle a backlash.

Ok, here's something else he tweeted at her (in response to a photo that included her boyfriend)...



Is that an acceptable 'backlash' for someone whose only 'crime' is that she expressed an opinion that some misogynistic idiot didn't like?

LLMMLL

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

Ok, here's something else he tweeted at her (in response to a photo that included her boyfriend)...



Is that an acceptable 'backlash' for someone whose only 'crime' is that she expressed an opinion that some misogynistic idiot didn't like?

How dare she block his intelligent debating skills.....

Yer Da sells Avon

LLMMLL wrote: »

How dare she block his intelligent debating skills.....

And no doubt that tweeter and his fellow misogynists will accuse her of carving out some kind of 'echo chamber'.

py2006

Misogyny is the most misused word on the net these days. Feminists (of a certain kind) use it to dismiss any man (and only men) who disagree with or call out their hypocrisy, double standards and down right misandry.

pjohnson

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

And no doubt that tweeter and his fellow misogynists will accuse her of carving out some kind of 'echo chamber'.

Every male is a misogynist

givyjoe

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

And no doubt that tweeter and his fellow misogynists will accuse her of carving out some kind of 'echo chamber'.

Are you referencing folks on this thread? Care to elaborate on who you mean?

Perhaps I missed the misogynist part of his tweet, but calling someone 'unhinged' is misogynist is it?

Outlaw Pete

_Dara_ wrote: »

I never said anything about him promoting sexual violence.

Here we go again. You clearly suggest something and then when you're called out on it by a user, you squirm away from it and pretend you did no such thing.

You say you never said Trump promoted sexual violence, but you said you agreed with a user who did, which is the same bloody thing and here's how you did that. In response to the user making the claim that Trump was encouraging sexual violence, I said:

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

That whole episode was blown out of all proportion.... and continues to be.

You jumped in and said:

_Dara_ wrote: »

YOU think it was blown out of all proportion. I disagree, as do many others.

He deserved all the derision he received over that.

That's endorsing what the user said, clearly, and so quit now trying to pretend you didn't.

Yer Da sells Avon

givyjoe wrote: »

Are you referencing folks on this thread? Care to elaborate on who you mean?

Perhaps I missed the misogynist part of his tweet, but calling someone 'unhinged' is misogynist is it?

I'm referencing some guy on Twitter. I've blanked his name out because it's not fair to share his real name on here. I'd say trawling through her tweets so you can express pity with her "poor sod" boyfriend is definitely misogynistic. Don't worry though - I've been on AH long enough to know that, for some people, nothing is ever misogyny.

ohnonotgmail

Bunny Colvin wrote: »

The girl in question is mentally unhinged. Read her tweets - it's all there in black and white. Fair play to that poster for not pulling his punches.

Oh for the days of intelligent debate. now the first response seems to be personal abuse.

Bunny Colvin

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Oh for the days of intelligent debate. now the first response seems to be personal abuse.

Ah yes, Intelligent debate with someone who tweets absolute lunacy like that, good luck with that one.

ohnonotgmail

Bunny Colvin wrote: »

Ah yes, Intelligent debate with someone who tweets absolute lunacy like that, good luck with that one.

responding with personal abuse only makes the responder look like an idiot. why would you do that to yourself?

givyjoe

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

I'm referencing some guy on Twitter. I've blanked his name out because it's not fair to share his real name on here. I'd say trawling through her tweets so you can express pity with her "poor sod" boyfriend is definitely misogynistic. Don't worry though - I've been on AH long enough to know that, for some people, nothing is ever misogyny.

I seriously think you could do with checking a dictionary. In your rather loose opinion, you think that's misogyny, when in reality the reference someone being a poor sod isn't because of his or her gender, it's because of the persons barmy views.

Again, more irony. Nothing is ever misogyny to some, just as EVERYTHING is misogyny to others.

At this point it seems certain posters who don't like the fact a thread exists on LON and her crazy views, are simply seeking to derail it.

Bunny Colvin

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

responding with personal abuse only makes the responder look like an idiot. why would you do that to yourself?

Do you want me to answer for the poster? Alright. Maybe he was riled up reading those tweets? What he said was correct anyway so it makes no odds. Anyone who tweets that sexist tripe is mentally unhinged, so fair play to him for saying it like it is. He got blocked, he'll move on from this ordeal I'm sure and so will she.

pjohnson

givyjoe wrote: »

I seriously think you could do with checking a dictionary. In your rather loose opinion, you think that's misogyny, when in reality the reference someone being a poor sod isn't because of his or her gender, it's because of the persons barmy views.

Again, more irony. Nothing is ever misogyny to some, just as EVERYTHING is misogyny to others.

At this point it seems certain posters who don't like the fact a thread exists on LON and her crazy views, are simply seeking to derail it.

The new meaning of misogyny is whether or not you agree with LON views.

py2006

pjohnson wrote: »

The new meaning of misogyny is whether or not you agree with LON views.

Yes, if you disagree with LON or think her views are twisted you literally hate ALL women and should be silenced.

Yer Da sells Avon

givyjoe wrote: »

At this point it seems certain posters who don't like the fact a thread exists on LON and her crazy views, are simply seeking to derail it.

I think it was derailed by whoever thought it was a good idea to drag the tweets of some randomer into it. Go after them, not me. It sounds like you'd prefer if the thread was just an echo chamber for people who perceive Louise O'Neill's opinions as misandry.

LLMMLL

givyjoe wrote: »

At this point it seems certain posters who don't like the fact a thread exists on LON and her crazy views, are simply seeking to derail it.

It's not really about her views though. It's about is she going out with Tubridy? What did she say about her parents? Would you date her? Does she block people on twitter? Does she know the background of every cast member of movies she likes?

ohnonotgmail

Bunny Colvin wrote: »

Do you want me to answer for the poster? Alright. Maybe he was riled up reading those tweets? What he said was correct anyway so it makes no odds. Anyone who tweets that sexist tripe is mentally unhinged, so fair play to him for saying it like it is. He got blocked, he'll move on from this ordeal I'm sure and so will she.

i'm sure they will move on and find somebody else to troll.

kunst nugget

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

I think it was derailed by whoever thought it was a good idea to drag the tweets of some randomer into it. Go after them, not me. It sounds like you'd prefer if the thread was just an echo chamber for people who perceive Louise O'Neill's opinions as misandry.

C'mon Hapaz, echo chambers only happen with liberal, misandric feminists, they could never happen here…

Bunny Colvin

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

i'm sure they will move on and find somebody else to troll.

Or maybe, just maybe she's the one trolling half the population.

C'mon Hapaz, echo chambers only happen with liberal, misandric feminists, they could never happen here…

py2006

Bunny Colvin wrote: »

Or maybe, just maybe she's the one trolling half the population.

Interesting. Would love it if she was making up her stuff.

Also, only half the population?

Icemancometh

pilly wrote: »

Please show me any link where someone says normal sex is technically rape??? :rolleyes:

It's a fairly common belief among a fairly uncommon group of feminists, ie rad-fems. Here's a quora article on it: https://www.quora.com/Why-do-some-radical-feminists-consider-PIV-to-be-rape-and-a-tool-for-the-subjugation-of-women-What-are-verifiable-reasons-supporting-the-arguments-in-pieces-such-as-%E2%80%9CWhy-Do-We-Keep-Having-PIV%E2%80%9D-What-sound-arguments-are-there

ohnonotgmail

Bunny Colvin wrote: »

Or maybe, just maybe she's the one trolling half the population.

Maybe she is. But the people who only post personal abuse are definitely trolls. Oddly you seem to keep defending them.