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

givyjoe

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.

Simple question for you.. taking just one of the many bat**** crazy things she has said.. do you believe that saying 'all men are potential rapists' is sexist, wrong, misandrist or none of the above?

It's a typical tactic of certain folks around here, where sexism towards men is raised and then belittled.

You complain of the littlest thing being picked on, and how many posts have we had now on one poster who 'abusing' someone on twitter.

This thread is being kept alive by the bizarre obsessions of folks perceiving others to be obsessed.

py2006

Was it Louise or Una Mullally who wrote an article pretty much stating that even if a man isn't a rapist, he is just as bad as one because he knows a rapist and is doing nothing about it to stop them.


i.e all us men hang around with rapists and turn a blind eye to it because they are our pals or colleagues!

Yer Da sells Avon

givyjoe wrote: »

Simple question for you.. taking just one of the many bat**** crazy things she has said.. do you believe that saying 'all men are potential rapists' is sexist, wrong, misandrist or none of the above?

Can you point me to where she said that? Just for some context.

kumate_champ07

pjohnson wrote: »

Did you assume my gender?

yes i did. youre not standing in front of me and i didnt look thru your post history for clues, i used the small amount of data i encountered here and made a split second decision on what your gender might be in order to complete my sentence

if i said 'she' i would have also assumed your gender,

this scenario is like playing 10pin bowling with safety bumpers and a giant bowling ball and im the pins, except we are now in a Big Lebowski dream sequence..

kumate_champ07

she is very aware of web analytics, and this subject is very beneficial to her web ranking, so she could definitely be trolling too

Will I Am Not

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

I think there should probably be a rule on Boards, where if you post a tweet made by someone who isn't a public figure, it should be a screenshot, rather than a link, and you should have to redact their username, as follows:

I think there should be a rule on Twitter where you should have to face the consequences of anything you put out there for all the world to see... oh wait... there is. And there’s also an option to make your account private if you don’t want all the world to see it.

Yer Da sells Avon

Will I Am Not wrote: »

I think there should be a rule on Twitter where you should have to face the consequences of anything you put out there for all the world to see... oh wait... there is. And there’s also an option to make your account private if you don’t want all the world to see it.

There is also an option not to send unsolicited abuse to total strangers on Twitter.

givyjoe

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

Can you point me to where she said that? Just for some context.

I believe it was her documentary 'Asking for it'. That or her twitter feed, to be honest I cant remember for sure. Others posted links to other nuggets such as 'women can't be sexist towards men'.. there's loads of this crap.

I hadn't heard of her before, but she came out with some prime nuggets of absolute crap during the documentary, which peaked my attention. i.e. how on earth did someone with such warped views end up with their own documentary on a national broadcaster.

So, do you think that such a statement is sexist etc in reference to my original question?

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

There is also an option not to send unsolicited abuse to total strangers on Twitter.

You have a problem with 'abuse' on twitter, fine. Do you not have a problem with views believing that innocent men are undeserving of sympathy? Or that the same person believes the accuser without question (or evidence)? LON believes the same.

Will I Am Not

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

There is also an option not to send unsolicited abuse to total strangers on Twitter.

I agree with that too.

professore

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.

He doesn't like LON - that's not the same thing necessarily as being a misogynist. Just because a man doesn't like a particular woman or disagrees with her views doesn't make him misogynist. Now he may well be one - but it is a very overused term these days.

the_pen_turner

Will I Am Not wrote: »

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

There is also an option not to send unsolicited abuse to total strangers on Twitter.

I agree with that too.

That applies to Louise as well

Yer Da sells Avon

givyjoe wrote: »

I believe it was her documentary 'Asking for it'. That or her twitter feed, to be honest I cant remember for sure. Others posted links to other nuggets such as 'women can't be sexist towards men'.. there's loads of this crap.

I hadn't heard of her before, but she came out with some prime nuggets of absolute crap during the documentary, which peaked my attention. i.e. how on earth did someone with such warped views end up with their own documentary on a national broadcaster.

So, do you think that such a statement is sexist etc in reference to my original question?

To give a satisfactory answer, I'd have to know how it was framed. However, if I was to take the sentence "all men are potential rapists" completely literally, without any context at all, then yes it's clearly unfair and sexist to tar all men with that brush. But I'm not convinced that Louise O'Neill was doing that.

py2006

the_pen_turner wrote: »

That applies to Louise as well

True, she has been discussed in the Gentlemens Club threads before and I do recall a year or so ago were she tweeted or shared a tweet referring to a guy as 'Needle Dick' because he questioned her views.

ohnonotgmail

py2006 wrote: »

True, she has been discussed in the Gentlemens Club threads before and I do recall a year or so ago were she tweeted or shared a tweet referring to a guy as 'Needle Dick' because he questioned her views.

"questioned her views" or posted abuse?

LLMMLL

givyjoe wrote: »

Simple question for you.. taking just one of the many bat**** crazy things she has said.. do you believe that saying 'all men are potential rapists' is sexist, wrong, misandrist or none of the above?

It's a typical tactic of certain folks around here, where sexism towards men is raised and then belittled.

You complain of the littlest thing being picked on, and how many posts have we had now on one poster who 'abusing' someone on twitter.

This thread is being kept alive by the bizarre obsessions of folks perceiving others to be obsessed.

If you think the majority of the posts on this thread are defending LON then you have a very skewed perception of reality.

Over 100 pages. The vast vast majority of people on this thread don't like her. It's time to get in touch with reality

py2006

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

"questioned her views" or posted abuse?

questioned her views as far as I remember. Correct me if I am wrong.

givyjoe

LLMMLL wrote: »

If you think the majority of the posts on this thread are defending LON then you have a very skewed perception of reality.

Over 100 pages. The vast vast majority of people on this thread don't like her. It's time to get in touch with reality

Did you even read my post?! Where did I say the vast majority are defending LON?! I think you could do with a dose of your own medicine or just perhaps improve on your reading comprehension.

freshpopcorn

LLMMLL wrote: »

If you think the majority of the posts on this thread are defending LON then you have a very skewed perception of reality.

Over 100 pages. The vast vast majority of people on this thread don't like her. It's time to get in touch with reality

I don't like her views and how shes sold in the media as this inspirational that all young women should be like.
I don't dislike her as a person and most people I know would be similar.

LLMMLL

givyjoe wrote: »

Did you even read my post?! Where did I say the vast majority are defending LON?! I think you could do with a dose of your own medicine or just perhaps improve on your reading comprehension.

Well one would assume that the people who post the vast majority of threads are the ones keeping it alive.....

If you think people pointing out the ridiculous unfair criticisms of her are the ones keeping this thread alive then yes, you have an issue with reality.

The thread has become less of a discussion and more of a feeding frenzy.

givyjoe

LLMMLL wrote: »

Well one would assume that the people who post the vast majority of threads are the ones keeping it alive.....

If you think people pointing out the ridiculous unfair criticisms of her are the ones keeping this thread alive then yes, you have an issue with reality.

Jesus wept.. let me spell it out for you. This thread had almost zero activity in it up until a few weeks ago, even at that it was just the 'ridiculous unfair criticisms' you mention and still sparse with new posts.

Over the last few days the thread is hopping, largely because of the compulsion of folks such as yourself, who feel the need to defend her over and over and over and obsessively point out the 'obsessions' of others, resulting in others having to state the obvious as to what their original problem was with the horrible views she has.

darkdubh

Wonder what Lon or that other ones take on this would be?

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/gaa-player-falsely-accused-of-rape-pleads-with-gang-to-lift-death-threat-36700452.html

LLMMLL

givyjoe wrote: »

Jesus wept.. let me spell it out for you. This thread had almost zero activity in it up until a few weeks ago, even at that it was just the 'ridiculous unfair criticisms' you mention and still sparse with new posts.

Over the last few days the thread is hopping, largely because of the compulsion of folks such as yourself, who feel the need to defend her over and over and over and obsessively point out the 'obsessions' of others, resulting in others having to state the obvious as to what their original problem was with the horrible views she has.

I just checked 3 random pages from the last 3 weeks to test what you're claiming.

The 1st page I checked had 1 post defending her by Dara. The 2nd page I checked had 4 by Hapax and the 3rd page I checked has 0 posts defending her.

Yes it is a skewed perception of yours that people defending her are keeping this thread alive.

The reason it's more active recently is that she's doing a lot of publicity around her book. But the people keeping it alive are clearly her obsessive detractors.

But like, people have no problem with her..
It's just the bile she preaches..

Someone should tell her feminism is a social construct..

givyjoe

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

To give a satisfactory answer, I'd have to know how it was framed. However, if I was to take the sentence "all men are potential rapists" completely literally, without any context at all, then yes it's clearly unfair and sexist to tar all men with that brush. But I'm not convinced that Louise O'Neill was doing that.

Sorry, what?! What more context do you need?! You're not convinced..?! In what context is it acceptable to say it.. in the context that all men have a penis, so therefore they're technically capable of rape?!

The context in which she said it, was that men are potential rapists and need/should be taught not to rape, e.g. through consent classes. Again, irony in that you're not convinced about what I'm quoting from the woman herself, when the woman in question believes that any woman making a rape accusation should be believed without question.

I can see why you might find it hard to believe that someone would think those things, let along say those words in a documentary on a national broadcaster. But here we are, after the fact.

How about, women cannot be sexist towards men? In what context is that acceptable?!

givyjoe

LLMMLL wrote: »

I just checked 3 random pages from the last 3 weeks to test what you're claiming.

The 1st page I checked had 1 post defending her by Dara. The 2nd page I checked had 4 by Hapax and the 3rd page I checked has 0 posts defending her.

Yes it is a skewed perception of yours that people defending her are keeping this thread alive.

The reason it's more active recently is that she's doing a lot of publicity around her book. But the people keeping it alive are clearly her obsessive detractors.

Again, did you read my post?! Christ on a bike.. I said the thread was barely being posted in over the last couple of weeks until the last few days. Check the last 10 pages and over what time frame those 10 pages were created.

If you really want be anal about it, how about you spend some time analysing the number of posts since day 1 and see if you can pick out any spikes in activity, over the last couple of days perhaps :rolleyes:

I wonder if LON was a man getting such 'abuse' would you be so concerned with fighting their corner so obsessively?

Will I Am Not

Candie wrote: »

The thread has become less of a discussion and more of a feeding frenzy.

Translation : Mods please lock the thread.

Skylinehead

Will I Am Not wrote: »

Translation : Mods please lock the thread.

Maybe leave that to us eh?

Will I Am Not

Skylinehead wrote: »

Maybe leave that to us eh?

I’m not asking for it to be locked.

Skylinehead

Will I Am Not wrote: »

I’m not asking for it to be locked.

You're the only one to have mentioned mod action. Not sure why.