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

deaddonkey15

LLMMLL wrote: »

Again what's that got to do with what were discussing or this thread in general. LON'S focus is on SEXUAL issues. Her books, documentary and most of her tweets are all about SEXUAL violence, SEXUAL harrassment, consent regarding SEX, etc.

Basically ye failed big time with your "men are sexually harassed as much as women" argument and now want to shift the goalposts to "men are physically assaulted more than women".

She's spoken about domestic violence as well, amongst other non-sexual issues.

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

That's not how you define whether a term iss useful or not. That's how you define whether a scientific concept is testable. Scientific concepts and language use are completely different things and in general most people would not ask for a term to be "proven".

But terms introduced are required to be justified. So the term Rape Culture being applied to Ireland or Western Culture does need to be justified. Just as the term Toxic masculinity should be justified, otherwise it gives permission for certain people to throw around retarded ideas. Which it has.

Culture may be against violent rape but it's incredibly judgemental of date rape, in that it's often implied to be the woman's fault or conflating other behaviours with consent. Take the Belfast trial where points of evidence were the complainant putting her hand on a footballers knee, and part of the defense closing arguments heavily implying that by going up to a bedroom she was looking for sex. I think the exact phrase used was "what did she expect to happen, playing with train sets?".

There is a degree of common sense to be applied though. In recent times, this concept of Victim blaming has been expanded to give the victim a complete pass for taking any responsibility for their own actions. Going home with four male strangers might not result in something negative but there is definite risk involved.

Let me give you an example. A few years ago, I was mugged late one night in Brisbane. I was walking very late through an area that was notorious for crime although I didn't know it at the time. I should have known since I'd lived there for a few years, but I didn't. In conversations with others, it was repeatedly brought up to show my own responsibility for what happened. If I hadn't put myself in the place (and time) then I wouldn't have been mugged. I could have gone through that area and not been mugged but I would have been considered extremely lucky. The police themselves pointed out my stupidity for being there at that time.

With the current attitude of victim blaming for women, the woman wouldn't be considered, in any way, responsible for placing herself in a dangerous position. Which is what many women do. However, in the case of a male, it's definitely a factor.

As a man I wouldn't go back to a 'party' with 3-4 male strangers and consider it to be a safe environment. I wouldn't go back with 2. I could be attacked, robbed, sexually assaulted/raped, etc. I know that certain circumstances and situations have increased inherent risk. However with your attitude of victim blaming, a woman could go or do anything and she would never be considered even remotely responsible for what happened.

While a victim should not be blamed for being a victim, there should be a degree of common sense applied. Don't get drunk with strangers without friends nearby. Don't go into a guys bedroom unless sex is a possibility. Is it perfect? Christ no. But it is a damn sight safer than telling women to do whatever they want, and be surprised when it goes pear shaped.

Although I have to wonder is this really about the safety for women... or simply so that people can feel justified in promoting victim-hood? After all, if this really was about better safety for women, the push would be for women not to put themselves in dangerous or risky positions, rather than simply passing all responsibility on to the aggressor.

The prison argument is nonsense. I assume you include the US in western cultures that are not rape cultures. Again sexual offenders tend to be segregated as they are targeted by inmates. Yet male rape is common in the US system. If inmate attitudes were truly indicative of societal attitudes then in any western country where inmates target rapists, one would expect them not to engage in rape themselves.

You argue and agree at the same time.

But rather than tackle the example, why not argue against the paragraph instead?

Your point seemed to be that you have a greater perspective on indian culture having lived in India. My point was that LON lives in Ireland. She can make statents about Ireland all she wants. I don't recall her ever saying Ireland was worse than India.

No. The point being that in describing Ireland as having a rape culture, she is showing her ignorance of cultures where rapists are protected and women are genuinely at risk. India being an example I used as having a rape culture.

You really do like to try twisting things when cornered.

That's just the typical "oh someone else has it worse so Irish people cant complain" argument which is a dodgy argument.

Did I say anywhere that people couldn't or shouldn't complain?

However, the suggestion of a rape culture encourages the belief that rape is far more common than it is, and something actively encouraged among men.

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

It's a complete double standard on how language is used.

The thing I can't get over is how you state something as being true, seek to support it, and then argue against it later.

Which is it?

Did/does Ireland have a drink culture?
Did/does Ireland have a rape culture?

Yes/No, would be appreciated, because frankly, I'm getting confused as to what you're arguing.

What I've actually said numerous times is that I've no issue with people disagreeing with me on rape culture, though I will argue against them about it. At no point have i said my definition or LONs definition is the only one. I've clearly said the opposite. What I've argued against is people requiring to prove a general term.

You support it but you won't seek to prove it. In fact, you'll go out of your way to suggest that it can't be proven, so therefore we should simply accept that you are correct, but we can still argue with you. Yes?

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

But terms introduced are required to be justified. So the term Rape Culture being applied to Ireland or Western Culture does need to be justified. Just as the term Toxic masculinity should be justified, otherwise it gives permission for certain people to throw around retarded ideas. Which it has.

I agree. And people who say Ireland has a rape.culture have justified it. You just don't agree with their justification. Which is fine. But don't pretend that they haven't justified it. I'm using justified in the sense that they've provided evidence. Not in the sense that you have to agree with that evidence. You provide your own ideas about rape culture applying to India. I agree that India could be described as a rape culture. But one could easily point to the Delhi rape protests in 2012 as evidence that it doesn't have a rape culture. That doesn't mean you've provided no justification for calling it a rape culture.

There is a degree of common sense to be applied though. In recent times, this concept of Victim blaming has been expanded to give the victim a complete pass for taking any responsibility for their own actions. Going home with four male strangers might not result in something negative but there is definite risk involved.

Let me give you an example. A few years ago, I was mugged late one night in Brisbane. I was walking very late through an area that was notorious for crime although I didn't know it at the time. I should have known since I'd lived there for a few years, but I didn't. In conversations with others, it was repeatedly brought up to show my own responsibility for what happened. If I hadn't put myself in the place (and time) then I wouldn't have been mugged. I could have gone through that area and not been mugged but I would have been considered extremely lucky. The police themselves pointed out my stupidity for being there at that time.

With the current attitude of victim blaming for women, the woman wouldn't be considered, in any way, responsible for placing herself in a dangerous position. Which is what many women do. However, in the case of a male, it's definitely a factor.

As a man I wouldn't go back to a 'party' with 3-4 male strangers and consider it to be a safe environment. I wouldn't go back with 2. I could be attacked, robbed, sexually assaulted/raped, etc. I know that certain circumstances and situations have increased inherent risk. However with your attitude of victim blaming, a woman could go or do anything and she would never be considered even remotely responsible for what happened.

While a victim should not be blamed for being a victim, there should be a degree of common sense applied. Don't get drunk with strangers without friends nearby. Don't go into a guys bedroom unless sex is a possibility. Is it perfect? Christ no. But it is a damn sight safer than telling women to do whatever they want, and be surprised when it goes pear shaped.

Although I have to wonder is this really about the safety for women... or simply so that people can feel justified in promoting victim-hood? After all, if this really was about better safety for women, the push would be for women not to put themselves in dangerous or risky positions, rather than simply passing all responsibility on to the aggressor.

I completely disagree with you and your ideas about victimhood, but that's pretty much to be expected and I'm not going to get into it. But how often have you heard arguments for the defense in mugging cases mention that a victim shouldn't have walked down that dark alley? The defense know this wouldnt work on a jury. So why are they so eager to bring it up in a rape case?

You argue and agree at the same time.

I dont agree with your point. I agree that in many prison systems sexual offenders are targeted. That's all I agree with. I strongly disagree that this is evidence of societies attitudes to rape as there are examples of inmates who supposedly hate rapes but who rape themselves. It's an inherently contradictory population and using it as an example of general social trends is nonsense.

But rather than tackle the example, why not argue against the paragraph instead?

The example was the paragraph.

No. The point being that in describing Ireland as having a rape culture, she is showing her ignorance of cultures where rapists are protected and women are genuinely at risk. India being an example I used as having a rape culture.

That's you example of a rape culture. Doesn't mean Ireland isn't one too. And since LON lives in Ireland she can talk about it freely.

You really do like to try twisting things when cornered.

I've never felt cornered by you to be honest. There may be times when we misinterpret each other but it's pretty natural that happens. For instance you seem to think I agree with you on your prison example. I just corrected you. If you want I can claim you're twisting my words because you're cornered Everytime you misunderstand a point I make?

However, the suggestion of a rape culture encourages the belief that rape is far more common than it is, and something actively encouraged among men.

No that's not what it claims at all. One definition would claim that society has certain attitudes and behaviors that tacitly excuse rape. For example court cases about rape highlighting a girl for putting her hand on someone's leg.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

You support it but you won't seek to prove it. In fact, you'll go out of your way to suggest that it can't be proven, so therefore we should simply accept that you are correct, but we can still argue with you. Yes?

Twisting my words tut tut.

I've said it can't be proven in the way that scientific theories can be proven. I have said that it can be supported by saying what you'd expect to see in one of these cultures and providing evidence towards that. The reason I say it can't be proven is that people will just say "those behaviours are not what I would define as X culture". I tried to illustrate this using the idea of drinking culture.

These are all things I've said. Some of them numerous times including that I do not expect anyone to agree with me or accept that I'm correct. Try reading my posts.

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

I agree. And people who say Ireland has a rape.culture have justified it. You just don't agree with their justification. Which is fine. But don't pretend that they haven't justified it. I'm using justified in the sense that they've provided evidence.

Right.

I can justify anything by providing 'evidence' that those who don't agree with me won't accept. Ok. I understand now.

Not in the sense that you have to agree with that evidence. You provide your own ideas about rape culture applying to India. I agree that India could be described as a rape culture. But one could easily point to the Delhi rape protests in 2012 as evidence that it doesn't have a rape culture. That doesn't mean you've provided no justification for calling it a rape culture.

But then I wasn't asked to justify my suggestion of India having a rape culture.... and the Delhi Rape Protests rather strongly point to the outrage of tolerance regarding rape that had gone before, and was still defended in many corners. An indication of a desire for change.

I completely disagree with you and your ideas about victimhood, but that's pretty much to be expected and I'm not going to get into it.

Okie dokie.

But how often have you heard arguments for the defense in mugging cases mention that a victim shouldn't have walked down that dark alley?

None. Since we should be able to walk down any street safely. Should be. The reality is vastly different. Just as a woman should be able to go to a guys home who she doesn't know and be completely safe. She should be. No argument there. If we lived in a wonderfully peaceful and safe environment.

The reality is that the world is not a risk free environment, and I've seen nothing to suggest that it's becoming one.

The defense know this wouldnt work on a jury. So why are they so eager to bring it up in a rape case?

Because they know it will work on a jury in a rape case? Why would it work on a jury in a rape case then?

I dont agree with your point. I agree that in many prison systems sexual offenders are targeted. That's all I agree with. I strongly disagree that this is evidence of societies attitudes to rape as there are examples of inmates who supposedly hate rapes but who rape themselves. It's an inherently contradictory population and using it as an example of general social trends is nonsense.

Only with the belief that everyone who hates rapists (in prison) is a rapist themselves. You do realise that many inmates are physically abusive of rapists without actually raping them or others?

The example was the paragraph.

The example was the last line of the paragraph. There was a bit before the example. Hence the use of an example.

That's you example of a rape culture. Doesn't mean Ireland isn't one too. And since LON lives in Ireland she can talk about it freely.

And I can freely call you or LON on it. I never said she couldn't say it was. I simply objected to the message of it.

I've never felt cornered by you to be honest. There may be times when we misinterpret each other but it's pretty natural that happens. For instance you seem to think I agree with you on your prison example. I just corrected you. If you want I can claim you're twisting my words because you're cornered Everytime you misunderstand a point I make?

Every time I misunderstand your words? I bolded the sentence which basically said the same as I did. But, sure, let it go. I don't mind.

No that's not what it claims at all. One definition would claim that society has certain attitudes and behaviors that tacitly excuse rape. For example court cases about rape highlighting a girl for putting her hand on someone's leg.

So... anything that someone says to suggest responsibility for the woman in a rape case in creating the situation (of the rape) is a indication of rape culture?

Wow. Personal responsibility is really getting a beating.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Right.

I can justify anything by providing 'evidence' that those who don't agree with me won't accept. Ok. I understand now.

Exactly. When you can't prove (because something is unprovable in the traditional sense) you try and persuade using evidence. But if someone (let's say LON) provides a justification with evidence you may say ok I accept that, you may say oh no that's not evidence I don't accept it. That's the way debate works. I know some people think these things can be proven and think they're proving something with their justification and usually they completely confused as to why people dont agree with them. The reason is they haven't proved anything. Just provided evidence towards. And anyone's evidence is open to criticism.

For example, I disagree that Ireland has transitioned from a drinking culture to no longer being a drinking culture based on the justifications you have such as people drinking at home. I don't however believe that you provided no justification for your position simply because I think your evidence wasn't up to scratch.

But then I wasn't asked to justify my suggestion of India having a rape culture.... and the Delhi Rape Protests rather strongly point to the outrage of tolerance regarding rape that had gone before, and was still defended in many corners. An indication of a desire for change.

Or it shows a significant number of people, maybe a majority are outraged by rape and therefore there is no rape culture in India.

I don't actually believe the above but I'm trying to illustrate how these things are impossible to prove. Yet you have no problem using the term when it suits you (when it's about India).

None. Since we should be able to walk down any street safely. Should be. The reality is vastly different. Just as a woman should be able to go to a guys home who she doesn't know and be completely safe. She should be. No argument there. If we lived in a wonderfully peaceful and safe environment.

The reality is that the world is not a risk free environment, and I've seen nothing to suggest that it's becoming one.

I'll never agree with you that a woman who goes back to a party with 4 guys (let's not forget if you're referring to the Belfast case there were also 3 girls) should get anything other than a free pass if she is assaulted.

Because they know it will work on a jury in a rape case? Why would it work on a jury in a rape case then?

Because victim blaming is a part of our culture.

Only with the belief that everyone who hates rapists (in prison) is a rapist themselves. You do realise that many inmates are physically abusive of rapists without actually raping them or others?

I'm sure there are and I'm sure there are those that don't assault rapists at all. But many of these rape haters do commit rape. And its commonly used in popular media as an added punishment for a criminal. In nearly every crime show I've seen where criminals are captured there's a reference to them potentially getting raped in jail hahahhaha.

The example was the last line of the paragraph. There was a bit before the example. Hence the use of an example.

And by disagreeing with your example I'm disagreeing with the paragraph.

And I can freely call you or LON on it. I never said she couldn't say it was. I simply objected to the message of it.

Agreed. You can. And I will continue to point out that her saying Ireland has a rape culture is independent of whether India has a rape culture.

Every time I misunderstand your words? I bolded the sentence which basically said the same as I did. But, sure, let it go. I don't mind.

You took it out of context. I agreed the example was true but gave reasons as to why the example didn't show what you thought it showed. Taking the one line out of context and saying I was agreeing with you was misinterpreting me. I personally don't mind being misinterpreted. It happens. You seem to go on about it a lot though.

So... anything that someone says to suggest responsibility for the woman in a rape case in creating the situation (of the rape) is a indication of rape culture?

Wow. Personal responsibility is really getting a beating.

Absolutely. I don't agree a woman ever creates or has responsibility for creating a situation of rape. I wouldn't even gender that comment. I don't believe a rape victim be they man woman or child creates the situation.

TomSweeney

Can't wait to see LON's piece in the examiner about this

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/irish-woman-allegedly-gang-raped-while-holidaying-in-prague-1.3453187

She must be saving up the tweets too ..

o1s1n

Zulu wrote: »

...and do you draw from that that we are living in a "Rape Culture" here in Ireland?

No, why would I? That would be idiotic.

RabbleRouser2k

TomSweeney wrote: »

Can't wait to see LON's piece in the examiner about this

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/irish-woman-allegedly-gang-raped-while-holidaying-in-prague-1.3453187

She must be saving up the tweets too ..

They're not 'white cigender hetero men' so she won't be bothered.

Sand

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

They're not 'white cigender hetero men' so she won't be bothered.

Yep, modern feminism is not necessarily about women. Its about attacking white males. LON will have little to say about this case because the perpetrators are not the right demographic for feminist thought. The Belfast case is catnip. This, not so much.

Zulu

o1s1n wrote: »

No, why would I? That would be idiotic.

phewww; exactly, it would be idiotic. However that's sadly what another poster (LLMMLL) is attempting to suggest.

givyjoe

LLMMLL wrote: »

There'd definitely be a few people getting a gold in this thread.

Irony overload. You should see if theres some vitamins you can take for that self awareness deficiency.

LLMMLL

givyjoe wrote: »

Irony overload. You should see if theres some vitamins you can take for that self awareness deficiency.

Can I get the name of your supplier?

givyjoe

LLMMLL wrote: »

Can I get the name of your supplier?

"No you are.." how clever.

deaddonkey15

TomSweeney wrote: »

Can't wait to see LON's piece in the examiner about this

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/irish-woman-allegedly-gang-raped-while-holidaying-in-prague-1.3453187

She must be saving up the tweets too ..

'Several Czech media outlets quoted police sources as saying the victim was an Irish tourist, and describing the men as Algerians born between 1994-1998.'

Don't count on it.

RabbleRouser2k

deaddonkey15 wrote: »

'Several Czech media outlets quoted police sources as saying the victim was an Irish tourist, and describing the men as Algerians born between 1994-1998.'

Don't count on it.

Yeah, she was strangely quiet when a horrific rape case-here in Ireland-by a, I believe, Brazilian Bus Driver, went to court and earned the guy a conviction.
And that case was horrific-poor girl suffered lifelong injuries, will require surgeries well into old age, and can't even give birth naturally.

LON stayed silent-it didn't fit her agenda.

Outlaw Pete

Sand wrote: »

Yep, modern feminism is not necessarily about women. Its about attacking white males. LON will have little to say about this case because the perpetrators are not the right demographic for feminist thought. The Belfast case is catnip. This, not so much.

And its not even just with regards to sex crimes that they do it. I seen lots of feminists tweeting after some of the mass shootings saying that the issue was toxic masculinity but yet not a peep after the YouTube shooting. Case and point, after Joe Cox's murder Una Mullally tweeted:


https://twitter.com/UnaMullally/status/743508726817103873

LLMMLL

givyjoe wrote: »

"No you are.." how clever.

I thought it was a suitable response to your cleverness.

RabbleRouser2k

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

And its not even just with regards to sex crimes that they do it. I seen lots of feminists tweeting after some of the mass shootings saying that the issue was toxic masculinity but yet not a peep after the YouTube shooting. Case and point, after Joe Cox's murder Una Mullally tweeted:

A few people didn't know if the shooter was male, female or trans-and it's become harder to know since their entire social media page was wiped out. (I genuinely don't know either-so this isn't me mocking the now dead shooter).

I'd imagine a 'feminist' like LON is confused with something like that. Once they're not white, she's lost.

JRant

Only a Jelly Bean of the highest order would think there is a Rape Culture in Ireland. It shows a complete lack of any critical thinking. I mean, anyone who claims that denying there is a such a culture is proof of said culture really needs to take a long hard look at themselves and their beliefs.

To me LON and her flock are just brainwashed into thinking that their opinion equals fact. You see this all the time now, nuance has no place in any discussion with people like this. You're either fully supportive or a Nazi, misogynistic, racist.

Achasanai

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

And its not even just with regards to sex crimes that they do it. I seen lots of feminists tweeting after some of the mass shootings saying that the issue was toxic masculinity but yet not a peep after the YouTube shooting. Case and point, after Joe Cox's murder Una Mullally tweeted:


https://twitter.com/UnaMullally/status/743508726817103873

To be fair, the vast, vast majority of mass shootings are committed by men. That you have found one committed (possibly!) by a woman, and expecting Mullally to issue a condemnation isn't just weird, but nonsense: it doesn't actually disprove her point regarding toxic masculinity (whether this is a thing or not is besides the point).

Does she comment on every mass shooting?

johnnyyesno

Why is she still living with her parents? Surely she can afford her own pad at this stage?

silverharp

most triggering thread title yet

waffleman

Captain Obvious wrote: »

Again, this seems to be a complete misunderstanding of what most people mean when they use the term "rape culture". Rape culture does not mean a culture that promotes rape or deems it acceptable. It refers to a culture which makes it easier or more likely for rapes to happen.

It's victim blaming when anyone points out situations where rape is more likely to happen but for the purposes of defining "rape culture" it's ok.

I get it now.

Captain Obvious

Deleted User wrote: »

So... anything that someone says to suggest responsibility for the woman in a rape case in creating the situation (of the rape) is a indication of rape culture?

Unequivocally. You can talk about personal safety or security til the cows come home but whether the woman is drunk, promiscuous, provocatively dressed or simply in a bad situation does not make her in any way responsible for being violated. You could argue it makes her irresponsible or stupid but the only person with responsibility for the rape is the rapist. To suggest otherwise is absolutely a contribution to a rape culture.

Captain Obvious

Captain Obvious wrote: »

Unequivocally. You can talk about personal safety or security til the cows come home but whether the woman is drunk, promiscuous, provocatively dressed or simply in a bad situation does not make her in any way responsible for being violated. You could argue it makes her irresponsible or stupid but the only person with responsibility for the rape is the rapist. To suggest otherwise is absolutely a contribution to a rape culture.

I just can't accept that. I do believe in personal responsibility for the situations I place myself in. Am I 100% responsible? nope. Other people involved are responsible too, but as long as I had a reasonable chance of avoiding the danger, I would place the responsibility on myself. And since I do believe in equality of Gender, I apply the same logic to women.

When I get drunk in public, I do so with reliable friends nearby. I no longer walk the streets of a town/city alone at night. I wouldn't go back to a strangers home until I know them reasonably well. I don't put myself in situations where I don't have an easy exit strategy. I don't flirt and play with other peoples emotions without being aware of the negative reactions that might occur. etc

The point being that the world is not a safe place, and I see no reason to pretend that it is. That's not encouraging a rape culture. It's encouraging personal safety.

Captain Obvious

Deleted User wrote: »

I just can't accept that. I do believe in personal responsibility for the situations I place myself in. Am I 100% responsible? nope. Other people involved are responsible too, but as long as I had a reasonable chance of avoiding the danger, I would place the responsibility on myself. And since I do believe in equality of Gender, I apply the same logic to women.

Nobody is saying personal responsibility is not important or necessary. But failing to show it does not apportion you blame. The person who took advantage of it is to blame.

Deleted User wrote: »

When I get drunk in public, I do so with reliable friends nearby. I no longer walk the streets of a town/city alone at night. I wouldn't go back to a strangers home until I know them reasonably well. I don't put myself in situations where I don't have an easy exit strategy. I don't flirt and play with other peoples emotions without being aware of the negative reactions that might occur. etc

And if you are a woman you should be cogniscant of these dangers because they may lead to? That's right, sexual violence. Like it or not the world is not equal. Women are at a much higher danger of sexual violence.

Deleted User wrote: »

The point being that the world is not a safe place, and I see no reason to pretend that it is. That's not encouraging a rape culture. It's encouraging personal safety.

Once you start to apportion the blame to the victim there's a very real danger it starts to become a justification.

Outlaw Pete

Achasanai wrote: »

To be fair, the vast, vast majority of mass shootings are committed by men. That you have found one committed (possibly!) by a woman, and expecting Mullally to issue a condemnation isn't just weird, but nonsense: it doesn't actually disprove her point regarding toxic masculinity (whether this is a thing or not is besides the point).

You're missing the point, which is that radfems today use certain tragedies, and criminal behavior (mass shootings are just yet another example) to have a go at white men but yet generally ignore them when either women, or non-white men, are responsible.

Does she comment on every mass shooting?

No, that's the point. Again, we only ever hear the likes of LON, Una, Lena Dunham, Lilly Allen etc etc etc, pipe up whenever white males are responsible for such crimes, which shows us that it's not the crime itself that riles these people, it's the people carrying them out. They are just using them to vent yet more anger at the ever elusive patriarchy.

One of the more sickening examples was when Alan Hawe murdered his wife and sons and even that was used:

We hear about tragic killings like these every now and then. Nine times out of ten (I don’t have statistics, but my hunch is that the figure is far higher), the perpetrator is a man. Lots of people, men and women and non-binary people, struggle with mental illness, but it takes more than mental torture to brutally murder your own children. There is a patriarchal narrative that runs through this entire story, from the act itself to the reporting of it, and we need to allow ourselves to see it if we are to find a way to prevent similar events from happening again.

This idea of control is part of the same patriarchal worldview that refuses to label domestic violence for what it is; that insists on publishing praise for a man who has just brutally murdered his wife and three children; that almost entirely omits the one woman from the story.

A man murders four people in Cavan, and we are fed questions and statements of disbelief alongside praise of the murderer as a community man. On the front pages, we see the man and the three children he murdered. Two days in, Clodagh has all but become invisible. And you ask why feminists are so loud and angry?

This feminist even says she doesn't know the statistics, but yet has still and all no bother using the tragedy to bolster her contention that we live in a patriarchy and that that is the real issue here. Nah, the problem is that these women have an issue with men, period, and specifically, white men, given that it is them that they see as being the ones in control and every chance they can use, be it a mass shooting, a college rape, whatever, they will assess who is likely to be the perpetrator and if it's a white guy, they'll be all over it, but if it's a woman, a Muslim, a black guy etc etc, they will stay a million miles away from it as it won't be something they can use to further their usual nauseating narrative.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I just can't accept that. I do believe in personal responsibility for the situations I place myself in. Am I 100% responsible? nope. Other people involved are responsible too, but as long as I had a reasonable chance of avoiding the danger, I would place the responsibility on myself. And since I do believe in equality of Gender, I apply the same logic to women.

When I get drunk in public, I do so with reliable friends nearby. I no longer walk the streets of a town/city alone at night. I wouldn't go back to a strangers home until I know them reasonably well. I don't put myself in situations where I don't have an easy exit strategy. I don't flirt and play with other peoples emotions without being aware of the negative reactions that might occur. etc

The point being that the world is not a safe place, and I see no reason to pretend that it is. That's not encouraging a rape culture. It's encouraging personal safety.

So let's say a woman goes out with a female friend. For whatever reason the friend can no longer accompany her home. She can either get a taxi (but getting in a car with a stranger is risky, you should have known that) or walk home alone (walking home alone is risky you should have known that).

Ok so she gets home safe this time (phew, look at all those risks she was taking), next day a guy at work is flirting with her. She's into him, would quite like to go on a date, she might even like to kiss him at the end of said date. But she definitely does not want to have sex with him. But she's taken your training course and is aware that "flirting may have negative reactions". So sorry potential future husband, shes not going to flirt with you. It's too risky.

In fairness to you you seem to walk the walk on this one. If you truly are constantly looking for exit scenarios then well....... I don't even know what to say to that. But it's not the way the vast majority of people live or want to live.

But if you want to live your life compulsively obsessed with safety that's fine. But I don't think anyone, even women, should be held responsible for flirting, or how they get home after a night out. I would hate to live in a society like that.