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

givyjoe

LLMMLL wrote: »

No more than anyone who think its a small minority is.

So you accept that your belief is completely unfounded, in terms of any meaningful statistics to back it up with.

What are you basing your opinion on then? A metoo hashtag? Even if there are millions who've used it, there's HUNDREDS of millions who haven't.

Grayson

Grayson wrote: »

Are you actually trying to say that studies etc are pointless because you went to 4 pubs in Limerick and it's representative of the whole world? You do realise how silly that argument is. A few hours in a pub in Limerick cannot demonstrate anymore than a what happened during those few hours in those pubs in limerick. Actually it can't even represent that since you can't have witnesses everything that happened in those pubs.

It's a dumb argument. It makes you look bad and it hurts your overall argument.

Pubs in Limerick can be viewed as a microcosm of society in general..
Have you been in a pub in Limerick?

Grayson

Deleted User wrote: »

No,..I'm talking about the laws of Nature...responsible for the propogation of the species since the dawn of time..The ones where life strives to pass on its genetic material..yeah, I wont get into an argument about "gender" or sexuality with you..

Yep, you're talking about natural law. You should google it and then google criticisms of it. It's stupid. It made sense to people in the middle ages but anyone in this day in age who believes in it needs their head examined.

And yep, it's the reason bigots think they can get away with saying that gay people are unnatural. Some even use it to say that women shouldn't work or are incapable of work because it's unnatural.
It's used by people who have the most fleeting grasp of biology and evolution to justify their offensive beliefs. That goes for Christians, Muslims Jews and really just about any religion who's adherents think they can control someones sex.

LLMMLL

givyjoe wrote: »

I'm on the mobile, so I'm not searching through your 120+ posts! It's a pain to post never mind 'stalk' old posts.

What trap Louise?! A little paranoid aren't we. What you really mean is that you do think it's a personal attack, but don't want to save me the hassle of trawling through your considerable number of posts to find it.

You don't have to search through them all. Just mid March when we discussed her mental health. Remember? When you tried to say she had delusional disorder then dropped it when I asked which of the six forms she had? Remember?

Well I looked through them all and guess what? I never said it.

givyjoe

LLMMLL wrote: »

You don't have to search through them all. Just mid March when we discussed her mental health. Remember? When you tried to say she had delusional disorder then dropped it when I asked which of the six forms she had? Remember?

Well I looked through them all and guess what? I never said it.

Do you believe it's a personal attack, simple. YES OR NO?

Ps. Someone else suggested it, not me. Have another read.

LLMMLL

givyjoe wrote: »

So you accept that your belief is completely unfounded, in terms of any meaningful statistics to back it up with.

What are you basing your opinion on then? A metoo hashtag? Even if there are millions who've used it, there's HUNDREDS of millions who haven't.

Yes metoo, personal experience, the experience of people I've talked to. The countless incidents of harrassment I've seen.

I'm quite open as to how.many men have harassed women. But I strongly believe it's more than a small minority.

LLMMLL

givyjoe wrote: »

Do you believe it's a personal attack, simple. YES OR NO?

Ps. Someone else suggested it, not me. Have another read.

You said I was being a hypocrite for questioning the intelligence of your post when I supposedly criticized others for making personal attacks on LON.

I did no such thing. Do you accept that?

givyjoe

LLMMLL wrote: »

Yes metoo, personal experience, the experience of people I've talked to. The countless incidents of harrassment I've seen.

I'm quite open as to how.many men have harassed women. But I strongly believe it's more than a small minority.

Right, so as I've said, just your opinion with nothing statistically meaningful to back up your own guesses.

In the 'countless' incidents you've seen.. did you look around and see how many men were there, NOT harassing women?

LLMMLL

givyjoe wrote: »

Right, so as I've said, just your opinion with nothing statistically meaningful to back up your own guesses.

In the 'countless' incidents you've seen.. did you look around and see how many men were there, NOT harassing women?

That would be meaningless as my claim is not that all men are harassing women at all times.

Grayson

Grayson wrote: »

Yep, you're talking about natural law. You should google it and then google criticisms of it. It's stupid. It made sense to people in the middle ages but anyone in this day in age who believes in it needs their head examined.

And yep, it's the reason bigots think they can get away with saying that gay people are unnatural. Some even use it to say that women shouldn't work or are incapable of work because it's unnatural.
It's used by people who have the most fleeting grasp of biology and evolution to justify their offensive beliefs. That goes for Christians, Muslims Jews and really just about any religion who's adherents think they can control someones sex.

I've had my head examined..they said it was fine..

Carry on with your "gender is a social construct" nonsense..

Outlaw Pete

Grayson wrote: »

So she's not dangerous but she is dangerous. Nice to see you're being clear.

The nonsense she spouts is very much dangerous as it contributes to the notion that society should automatically believe any female that claims they have been sexually assaulted by a man (and therefore automatically disbelieve men that claim they are innocent of such accusations). Instead of a court system with 'Innocent until proven guilty' as it's ethos she propagates one (for men at least) based on being 'Guilty until found not guilty'. Well, that's not entirely true as she actually teaches her flock that it's perfectly fine to go public and suggest that men who have just been found 'not guilty' of such crimes are in fact still very likely guilty of them nonetheless and so what she actually propagates is a view that men should be considered guilty no matter what happens in our courts and anyone that thinks that is not dangerous has to be blinded by an agenda.

Is it any wonder, when we have people peddling views like hers in our society, that we see cases like this.

What hope has someone who has been accused of rape got of clearing their name with a society ever more focused on assuming them as guilty no matter what, even including them being found not guilty. Louise though seems capable of only having empathy for women. I suspect she might feel sorry for this lad's mother more than she actually does for him but that wouldn't do her much good now.

Sorry no Guardian links for that story. They never reported on it.

Grayson

Deleted User wrote: »

Pubs in Limerick can be viewed as a microcosm of society in general..
Have you been in a pub in Limerick?

Yes I have. And I saw 15 people get raped. Therefore rape occurs in every single pub in Ireland.

You see how stupid that argument was? Even assuming that my premise is true (It's obviously not), I cannot draw the conclusion that I did.

Assuming that my premise was true all I could conclude was that that pub was horrific. I can't draw any conclusions about the rest of the pubs in Ireland. I can't even draw conclusions about that pub the rest of the time.

And although anecdotal evidence may add colour or background to statistical evidence, it's no substitute for statistical evidence.

Likewise statistical evidence can provide general information but t can't provide specifics. So if i produced a study which shows that harassment occurs 50% of the time in pubs on nights out, that doesn't mean that you would have seen it if you went to a particular pub. It doesn't mean there's a 100% chance of seeing it if you went to two pubs. It can't provide any guidance as to whether it occurs in a particular place at a particular time.

I'm writing all this because I genuinely think you don't get the importance of logic and statistics. It's easy to think that a personal experience is universal but it's not the case.

Grayson

Deleted User wrote: »

I've had my head examined..they said it was fine..

Carry on with your "gender is a social construct" nonsense..

Where did I post that?

And go seriously, educate yourself on the problems in Natural Law. I feel strongly about it because I read and study a lot of philosophy. As an ethical system it's inherently flawed and it's based on a false premise.

Now I'm not saying i have a perfect ethical system either. I'm just saying that one is wrong.

givyjoe

LLMMLL wrote: »

That would be meaningless as my claim is not that all men are harassing women at all times.

About as meaningless as a personal and unverifiable belief that 20% or even 60% of men harass women.

LLMMLL

givyjoe wrote: »

About as meaningless as a personal and unverifiable belief that 20% or even 60% of men harass women.

I've no issue with you disagreeing with those figures. I'm not even attempting to present them as fact.

Unfortunately it's impossible to get statistics on this as women cannot tell of their harasser is an outlier or common and men are never going to accurately self report on this.

So I'll stick with my personal experience and the experiences of people I've talked to about this.

And I've no problem with you criticising that at all.

Grayson

Grayson wrote: »

I'm writing all this because I genuinely think you don't get the importance of logic and statistics. It's easy to think that a personal experience is universal but it's not the case.

Whereas, while I do place value in statistics, I won't blindly follow them. There are so many cultural factors to distinguish between different locations. Statistics drawn from the US hold little relevance to Ireland since the attitudes and cultural history is so different. There's also the difference in the ethnic diversity which would affect conclusions drawn from the statistics.

Statistics are only as good as the person who is analyzing them. Which is why often you'll get Feminist theories which are completely different that the case researchers themselves, or the researchers conclusions will be very different to an analysis done later on the same "evidence". (we'll skip over the methodologies used in the research or collection of the stats) Then, it's also worth considering where the research gets it's funding and whether there is an agenda or interest in presenting certain kinds of conclusions.

Lastly, there must be the awareness that statistics often suffer from inaccuracy, due to human involvement. The statistics on Domestic abuse completely ignore the very real activity of the police in automatically assuming the male to be the aggressor in most situations, even when evidence/witnesses point otherwise. The statistics would reflect these kinds of situations, but rather the official records of the police. As such, we should be considering how accurate are the statistics being collected.

To get back to the point though, these claims of harassment being commonplace lack any statistical evidence to back them up.. We're expected to believe the claims of women that it is commonplace, but also expected to dismiss the claims of other women who believe it isn't. Until we start seeing a variety of research projects (not a few alone to choose from), we're not going to really know the truth of what the situation is.

So, talking about what people have seen is mostly what we have to rely on here, since I've seen very little actual research done on the area that relates to Ireland, or that wasn't pushing a very obvious agenda. But I'll give more credibility to those people or organisations who are pushing a more balanced viewpoint, rather than those seeking to elevate a particular gender.

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

I don't think it is a minority of men who engage in harassing behaviour.

Where's your stat so to back this up?

deaddonkey15

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

The nonsense she spouts is very much dangerous as it contributes to the notion that society should automatically believe any female that claims they have been sexually assaulted by a man (and therefore automatically disbelieve men that claim they are innocent of such accusations). Instead of a court system with 'Innocent until proven guilty' as it's ethos she propagates one (for men at least) based on being 'Guilty until found not guilty'. Well, that's not entirely true as she actually teaches her flock that it's perfectly fine to go public and suggest that men who have just been found 'not guilty' of such crimes are in fact still very likely guilty of them nonetheless and so what she actually propagates is a view that men should be considered guilty no matter what happens in our courts and anyone that thinks that is not dangerous has to be blinded by an agenda.

Is it any wonder, when we have people peddling views like hers in our society, that we see cases like this.

What hope has someone who has been accused of rape got of clearing their name with a society ever more focused on assuming them as guilty no matter what, even including them being found not guilty. Louise though seems capable of only having empathy for women. I suspect she might feel sorry for this lad's mother more than she actually does for him but that wouldn't do her much good now.

Sorry no Guardian links for that story. They never reported on it.

I recall listening to LON on the radio talking about the UCD ag science scandal and how upsetting it is for women/girls to have nude photos or videos of themselves shared online.

https://www.todayfm.com/Louise-ONeill:-It-Feels-Like-Just-Another-Incident-Where-Women-Are-Being-Belittled

It was put to her that men may be victims of this also and her reply was that it's worse for men to share pictures with their friends of a naked woman than vice versa. She claimed that male and female nudity is viewed in a different way and that the impact and consequences for men having their photos shared were not the same as for women.

Meanwhile, eight months earlier in the real world: https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/ni-teen-who-took-his-life-being-blackmailed-parents-say-1.2251295

So if the usual boring hangers on in this thread are looking for an example of why her views are dangerous then there you go. Trivialising issues that cause young boys to kill themselves - on national radio.

Listening to that interview again, it's gas how any remark on girls taking some responsibility and not sending nude photos of themselves is repeatedly dismissed as victim blaming. She managed to include a few other of her favourite buzzwords like "patriarchy" and "rape culture". It's disappointing that the interviewer didn't challenge her more.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Where's your stat so to back this up?

Read the thread

tipp_Gunner wrote:

A vast minority of men and women harass each other

Where's your stat to back this up.

sydthebeat

LLMMLL wrote: »

Read the thread

That's tantamount to psychological torture!!!

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

Read the thread

I havent seen any solid numbers to suggest how big this issue is so until i am presented with them im going to assume this whole flimsy campaign is built on the usual baseless bullshít spouted by failed people with victim complex the world over

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I havent seen any solid numbers to suggest how big this issue is so until i am presented with them im going to assume this whole flimsy campaign is built on the usual baseless bullshít spouted by failed people with victim complex the world over

Where's your stat that it's a minority?

sydthebeat

sydthebeat wrote: »

That's tantamount to psychological torture!!!

And yet you still follow the thread with great interest. It doesnt fit your narrative so it must be 'psychological' torture.

The common sense consensus was reached very early on in this thread that this woman and her brand of journalism is total hogwash aimed at dividing men and women but yet we have a couple of headbangers hanging on in the hope they can change the perception despite providing no evidence to the contrary.

Sunny Disposition

In fairness to Louise she has challenged the patriarchy in a way that no other Irish writer has done.

She may be the most important Irish voice since Bob Geldof and her blind persistence and willingness to face down trolls has brought the country to the brink of a new age, where a majority will be 'woke' , willing to judge people on the quality of their character rather than tired gender stereotypes.

Almost every Saturday she brilliantly excoriates age old prejudice, with more and more supreme commentary. If the Eight Ammendment t is Consigned to history it will be largely her victory. That's the kind of influence she has won.

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

Where's your stat that it's a minority?

Back to this strawman retort again. So you think the majority of men have inclinations to rape and harrass a woman?? Honestly?

1.087 m in Ireland as of 2018 between the ages of 25-54 and we are all potential rapists???? All of us have sexually harassed women or committed rape?

https://www.indexmundi.com/ireland/demographics_profile.html

Outlaw Pete

Sunny Disposition wrote: »

Almost every Saturday she....

...spouts illogical misandric nonsense with more holes in it than the titanic.

garbo speaks

Sunny Disposition wrote: »

In fairness to Louise she has challenged the patriarchy in a way that no other Irish writer has done.

She may be the most important Irish voice since Bob Geldof and her blind persistence and willingness to face down trolls has brought the country to the brink of a new age, where a majority will be 'woke' , willing to judge people on the quality of their character rather than tired gender stereotypes.

Almost every Saturday she brilliantly excoriates age old prejudice, with more and more supreme commentary. If the Eight Ammendment t is Consigned to history it will be largely her victory. That's the kind of influence she has won.

I hope to god that post was being sarcastic

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Back to this strawman retort again. So you think the majority of men have inclinations to rape and harrass a woman?? Honestly?

1.087 m in Ireland as of 2018 between the ages of 25-54 and we are all potential rapists???? All of us have sexually harassed women or committed rape?

https://www.indexmundi.com/ireland/demographics_profile.html

Lol seriously? You claimed that it was a vast minority of men who harassed.

Your stat to back that up is the population??? LOL

Yer Da sells Avon

Omackeral wrote: »

Just to come back to this and your Exhibit A talk. The above statement is made by someone who thinks Alison Spittle, she of Culchie Club fame, is hilarious. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, no further questions.

That hurts. Why, not too long ago, someone sent me a PM to tell me that something I posted was, and I quote, "fcuking hilarious". The weeks have not been kind to my sense of humour.

Sunny Disposition

Sunny Disposition wrote: »

In fairness to Louise she has challenged the patriarchy in a way that no other Irish writer has done.

She may be the most important Irish voice since Bob Geldof and her blind persistence and willingness to face down trolls has brought the country to the brink of a new age, where a majority will be 'woke' , willing to judge people on the quality of their character rather than tired gender stereotypes.

Almost every Saturday she brilliantly excoriates age old prejudice, with more and more supreme commentary. If the Eight Ammendment t is Consigned to history it will be largely her victory. That's the kind of influence she has won.

Supreme Commentary? Did i miss this?