Almost all young women in the UK have been sexually harassed [MOD WARNING 1st POST]

99nsr125

two wheels good wrote: »

You need to listen a bit more and try to understand the experience of women.


Here's a simple everyday tale I came across yday. Three middle aged, middle class dads" having a laugh" on public transport.

https://twitter.com/julie_cohen/status/1370013467500044289

Nice Hat ;-)

anewme

two wheels good wrote: »

You need to listen a bit more and try to understand the experience of women.


Here's a simple everyday tale I came across yday. Three middle aged, middle class dads" having a laugh" on public transport.

https://twitter.com/julie_cohen/status/1370013467500044289

I've had a few nice hat incidents. :pac: and more obvious ones.

It never ends well for them.

two wheels good

Idris Elba, asked about the difficulty of being a man during the MeToo Movement.


“It’s only difficult if you’re a man with something to hide.”

Quantum Erasure

two wheels good wrote: »

Missing the point. deliberately?
What figure would you be happy to accept? Lets say an error margin of 10% and 10% of women must be hysterical...
So 75% would that be okay?

Missing the point? The point that 'almost all women have been harassed'? Well if the stats dont bear that out, then I dont think I'm missing any point

What figure would I be happy to accept? The true figure, for a start.

Milly33

Women have just sorry gone off the wall, Im sorry but it is so annoying..You cant say boo to fecking anyone now a days without it being, racist, sexual harassment blah blah blah

two wheels good

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

Missing the point? The point that 'almost all women have been harassed'? Well if the stats dont bear that out, then I dont think I'm missing any point

What figure would I be happy to accept? The true figure, for a start.

Did you read the link in the first post?

The Mod has helpfully added a link to the report in the the first post - and I refer you to the Mod's comment about "trying to renegotiate the definition of sexual harassment because it doesn't fit into your personal world view. "


A web search easily finds the BBC report on the topic. link
The report is based on a YouGov survey.

two wheels good

99nsr125 wrote: »

Nice Hat ;-)

I can picture you in background sniggering, impressed by the bantz. Probably trying to record it to show your mates.

two wheels good

two wheels good wrote: »

Idris Elba, asked about the difficulty of being a man during the MeToo Movement.

It’s only difficult if you’re a man with something to hide.”

I'm sure the observers of any witchhunt were told the same, as were those being burnt as heretics. It constantly amazes me that people still hold up the Metoo movement as something wonderful, when it was a series of claims that weren't investigated and verified. No chance of people making false claims for personal gain, or to be show they're part of the offended group..

It didn't matter whether a man was innocent. Once the mob caught the scent of blood, they went for him. No evidence. No due process, or defense. Ibelieveher to the hilt. Meh.

Just as this survey in the OP includes a range of offenses which would be pretty minor, and even then, entirely dependent on the individuals perception. Better yet, there's no mention of verifying the claims made. Once more, it's claims taken as fact. This thread is full of people assuming that the survey is completely accurate.. a survey without verification, and done by an organisation with an inherent bias.

two wheels good

Mentioning the Mods:
I see that loathsome post saying that (I paraphrase) we should be glad it was only one murder and not a serial killer like in the old days - was dealt with promptly.


Only thing is .. I didn't get to note the username of the poster or those of the half-a-doz thankers to put on my ignore list.


Well done Mods for patrolling such steaming piles of ordure in this thread.

Sephiroth_dude

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

Missing the point? The point that 'almost all women have been harassed'? Well if the stats dont bear that out, then I dont think I'm missing any point

What figure would I be happy to accept? The true figure, for a start.

If you're just gonna ignore the mod warning in the OP don't bother posting in here, that goes for everyone else as well.

Larbre34

I'd suggest people stop posting in this thread. The debate is being limited to narrow parameters being decided by others, in which case what's the point of continuing.

Quantum Erasure

Sephiroth_dude wrote: »

If you're just gonna ignore the mod warning in the OP don't bother posting in here, that goes for everyone else as well.

Not ignoring it at all, I seem to be the only one who wants to discuss the actual surveys, tbh

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

I'd love to know where the 97% stat came from though...

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

I found where I think it came from, other stats available at same link

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/relationships/articles-reports/2021/03/08/eurotrack-two-thirds-women-sweden-and-half-britain


Which of the following would you consider to be sexual harassment if a man, who was not a romantic or sexual partner or friend, did them to a woman?
% who said "This would always be sexual harassment" or "This would usually be sexual harassment with some exceptions"

A man trying to take a photo up a woman's skirt

Britain: 97%

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

Pdf link
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/qepiqi9xaf/YouGov%20Sexual%20harassment.pdf

Would you say you have ever been sexually harassed by a man?
[This question only contains the answers of female respondents]
GB 18-19 Oct '20
Yes, I have: 52%
No, I have not: 44%

Quantum Erasure

Examples of 'harassment' that were included in the 97% (that was actually 86%)

Being cat-called or wolf-whistled
Being stared at
Unwelcome touching, body rubbing, or groping
In-person comments or jokes
Unwelcome sexual advances or requests for sexual favours
Being physically followed
Indecent exposure
Online comments or jokes
Sharing of suggestive or indecent content online or in-person
Being forced into participating in sexual behaviour
Had images taken and / or shared without your consent

And from the survey the 97% stat came from,people who answered yes to the question

"Would you consider a man trying to take a photo up a woman's skirt as sexual harassment? "

majorities across all countries considered a man commenting on a woman’s attractiveness directly to her, a man winking at a woman and a man asking a woman out for a drink to not be forms of sexual harassment.

A man placing his hand on a woman’s lower back proved to be more contentious, with a majority of respondents in France (71%), Germany (54%), and Sweden (53%) considering this a form of sexual harassment. In Britain and Denmark the public were more split, with still 40% and 41% considering this sexual harassment respectively.

Britain was the only country in which a majority considered a man directing sexual jokes at a woman (69%) and a man looking at a woman’s breasts (53%) to be sexual harassment. Similarly, only the French were more likely to consider wolf whistling (52%) to constitute sexual harassment, than not.

Quantum Erasure

Some other interesting stats there in the answers to the first question, comparing by country surveyed (Britain Germany France Denmark Sweden)

Would you say you have ever been sexually harassed by a man?

What percentage of women in [COUNTRY] would you guess say they have
been sexually harassed by a man?

But that's probably for another thread...

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

What I find interesting is the hystrerical "you can't ask a woman out for a drink without it being sexual harassment!" line, and yet only 3-7% of women would see it as harassment.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

Examples of 'harassment' that were included in the 97% (that was actually 86%)

Would be interested to hear the results if they asked men the same questions, as to which of the following do they think as harassment.

Baggly

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

Not ignoring it at all, I seem to be the only one who wants to discuss the actual surveys, tbh

Mod

There were two parts to the mod warning, so if you missed this i suggest you read it again.

You should also be aware not to respond to mod warnings on thread. If you have an issue with that, my PM inbox is open.

Stateofyou

Milly33 wrote: »

Women have just sorry gone off the wall, Im sorry but it is so annoying..You cant say boo to fecking anyone now a days without it being, racist, sexual harassment blah blah blah

This is just code for 'I can't say all the racist, sexist, sexual harassing things I want to anymore and get away with it.'

TomTomTim

Stateofyou wrote: »

This is just code for 'I can't say all the racist, sexist, sexual harassing things I want to anymore and get away with it.'

This is the new progressive credo: any denials of racism or sexism equates to said person being guilty of the aforementioned. It's both childish, and without any sense. You essentially just want a license to slander people without any push back.

Stateofyou

TomTomTim wrote: »

This is the new progressive credo: any denials of racism or sexism equates to said person being guilty of the aforementioned. It's both childish, and without any sense. You essentially just want a license to slander people without any push back.

Key word there: progressive. Let's move on from the bs of the past.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

What I find interesting is the hystrerical "you can't ask a woman out for a drink without it being sexual harassment!" line, and yet only 3-7% of women would see it as harassment.

Probably controversial but my take is that the 3-7% jumps significantly if the guy is not good looking.

WrenBoy

Stateofyou wrote: »

Key word there: progressive. Let's move on from the bs of the past.

Tough to move on or make progress if even having the conversation on topics such as these are enough to get you branded homophobic, sexist, racist.

anewme

Lillie Modern Peddle wrote: »

Probably controversial but my take is that the 3-7% jumps significantly if the guy is not good looking.

How many times does this nonsense have to be repeated ffs.

meeeeh

I think this thread will end up with the conclusion that there is no harassment and innocent men are prosecuted for imaginary crimes.

And btw for those of you who think this is a witch hunt. Mostly women were burned at the stake for their perceived witchcraft. Here women are saying that all they want is not to be harassed when living their everyday life like walking, running, going out for a drink, going to the shop and so on. And that is compared to being burned at the stake.

I love men, most of my friends are male, I grew up among men, I work for my whole life with mostly men, I have a brother, husband and a son. However I'm not blind, I know my husband, my male friends or my brother never had to deal with the same harassment my female friends or I had to deal with. Some is shrugged off, some is even funny in it's pure stupidity but it is harassment that is mostly aimed at one gender. Not in order to admire women or ask them out but to humiliate them. So spare me with your witch hunt.

Stateofyou

WrenBoy wrote: »

Tough to move on or make progress if even having the conversation on topics such as these are enough to get you branded homophobic, sexist, racist.

If one is being branded a homophobic, sexist or racist then one should ask themselves why.

Is anyone here being branded as any of the above just for having the conversation?

Look everyone has something to learn here. All of us have bias and a lot of it we're blinded to. We can't be so sensitive to being called out on something but maybe be open to learning from it and doing better. No one is perfect and no one has nothing to learn. I have learned and realised things I've said, done or kept quiet about it the past were problematic. Once you know you do better and that's all any of us can do.

Stateofyou

Stateofyou wrote: »

Key word there: progressive. Let's move on from the bs of the past.

Except you're on a circular track, leading back towards a more restricted, regulated, and "protected" society.

If the focus was on women stepping up, and dealing with the problems in society, just as men have to do, then we'd be seeing something progressive. Instead, we're seeing the desire to cancel, shame, <insert negative> towards men, while also protecting women, encouraging them to be sensitive and get offended over everything, and so needing safe spaces where they feel protected.

I find it bizarre that few of these progressives see the reality they're creating.. a return to something out of a Victorian novel, where women are protected from the perceived dangers of the world. Since, of course, women are or will be, sensitive little flowers who need to be protected.

Wonder how long before women need to be protected from other women... after all, once the danger of men is mitigated, the violence that comes from other women, will naturally be the next step towards creating that safe space all women deserve.

meeeeh

Deleted User wrote: »

Except you're on a circular track, leading back towards a more restricted, regulated, and "protected" society.

If the focus was on women stepping up, and dealing with the problems in society, just as men have to do, then we'd be seeing something progressive. Instead, we're seeing the desire to cancel, shame, <insert negative> towards men, while also protecting women, encouraging them to be sensitive and get offended over everything, and so needing safe spaces where they feel protected.

I find it bizarre that few of these progressives see the reality they're creating.. a return to something out of a Victorian novel, where women are protected from the perceived dangers of the world. Since, of course, women are or will be, sensitive little flowers who need to be protected.

Wonder how long before women need to be protected from other women... after all, once the danger of men is mitigated, the violence that comes from other women, will naturally be the next step towards creating that safe space all women deserve.

As I predicted men are the real victims here. Now Klaz tell me how were you restricted? What are you not able to do since all this female fascism started? I posted my examples why I think harassment should be unacceptable. Now it's time for you to tell us how life is impacted.

Stateofyou

Deleted User wrote: »

Except you're on a circular track, leading back towards a more restricted, regulated, and "protected" society.

If the focus was on women stepping up, and dealing with the problems in society, just as men have to do, then we'd be seeing something progressive. Instead, we're seeing the desire to cancel, shame, <insert negative> towards men, while also protecting women, encouraging them to be sensitive and get offended over everything, and so needing safe spaces where they feel protected.

I find it bizarre that few of these progressives see the reality they're creating.. a return to something out of a Victorian novel, where women are protected from the perceived dangers of the world. Since, of course, women are or will be, sensitive little flowers who need to be protected.

Wonder how long before women need to be protected from other women... after all, once the danger of men is mitigated, the violence that comes from other women, will naturally be the next step towards creating that safe space all women deserve.

I disagree. Again I think that is just code for 'I can't be as sexist/racist/homophobic/sexually harassing as I want to be and I don't want to do the hard work to change,' thinking.

Women are stepping up and participating in a global movement that is saying they're not going to accept this any more. It's changed culture, workplaces, laws and minds. It's still going. At a training in my workplace I heard women saying that they've noticed a difference in how they're treated by men and they feel things are improving for the better. We're going in the right direction.

Women are bravely sharing their stories, sometimes on a national or global stage and that is not "victorian thinking" or embodying "sensitive little flowers." I see strength and courage and determination. "Victorian thinking" would be removing hard fought rights from women and expecting them to just 'cope with a grope' and let 'boys be boys.' Those days are over. And rightfully so as I think now of my daughters growing up in society.

Everyone deserves to be safe. Don't know where you're going with that hyperbole.

nullzero

meeeeh wrote: »

I think this thread will end up with the conclusion that there is no harassment and innocent men are prosecuted for imaginary crimes.

Nobody has said any of the above.

It's hysterical stuff like the above that keeps these discussions moving in circles, never being pushed towards any type of outcome.

We all accept that women get harassed and it is abhorrent. Some of the criteria for what is now deemed to be behaviour that can be classed as harassment is open to discussion.

Do we have to accept that an increasing number of interactions between men and women can be deemed as harassment to the point where having any contact with any woman becomes something that is not worth a man's time or effort for fear of being accused of something?

I don't see how that helps anyone.

meeeeh

meeeeh wrote: »

As I predicted men are the real victims here. Now Klaz tell me how were you restricted? What are you not able to do since all this female fascism started? I posted my examples why I think harassment should be unacceptable. Now it's time for to tell us how life is impacted.

Oh, yes... Men are the real victims here. Care to point out anywhere in my posts were I have made such a statement? :rolleyes:

Did I say that men weren't able to do something due to this "female fascism"?

Like, come on. I get that you really want to throw down your perceived oppressors, but can't you deal with what people have written, as opposed to making stuff up, so that you can argue with yourself?

Harassment is already unacceptable. And has been for decades. That some people break social norms, and behave in an offensive manner is nothing new. The difference is the desire to implement laws to regulate that behavior.. as opposed to reinforcing societies norms, of what is considered acceptable behavior. Probably because reinforcing social norms would mean that women would need to regulate their own behavior, whereas a law targeting men for harassment, doesn't.

meeeeh

As a perfect reply to this:

nullzero wrote: »

Do we have to accept that an increasing number of interactions between men and women can be deemed as harassment to the point where having any contact with any woman becomes something that is not worth a man's time or effort for fear of being accused of something?

I will just quote this:

nullzero wrote: »

It's hysterical stuff like the above that keeps these discussions moving in circles, never being pushed towards any type of outcome.

meeeeh

Deleted User wrote: »

Oh, yes... Men are the real victims here. Care to point out anywhere in my posts were I have made such a statement? :rolleyes:

Did I say that men weren't able to do something due to this "female fascism"?

Like, come on. I get that you really want to throw down your perceived oppressors, but can't you deal with what people have written, as opposed to making stuff up, so that you can argue with yourself?

Harassment is already unacceptable. And has been for decades. That some people break social norms, and behave in an offensive manner is nothing new. The difference is the desire to implement laws to regulate that behavior.. as opposed to reinforcing societies norms, of what is considered acceptable behavior. Probably because reinforcing social norms would mean that women would need to regulate their own behavior, whereas a law targeting men for harassment, doesn't.

So the answer is not affected at all.

livia21

meeeeh wrote: »

As I predicted men are the real victims here. Now Klaz tell me how were you restricted? What are you not able to do since all this female fascism started? I posted my examples why I think harassment should be unacceptable. Now it's time for to tell us how life is impacted.

there will proably be a video on ytube offered as evidence.When we speak out we are called nazi's.

Sexuual harassment and sexual assualt is wrong ..but i have never sseen a group of women shouting at a group of school boys in their uniform..But I and my sisters and now my daughter have to endure this

Stateofyou

nullzero wrote: »

Do we have to accept that an increasing number of interactions between men and women can be deemed as harassment to the point where having any contact with any woman becomes something that is not worth a man's time or effort for fear of being accused of something?

I don't see how that helps anyone.

Do you really believe that? That ANY contact between a woman and man will be deemed as harassment?

Can you give specific examples of what you would like to be able to do with women that you think are being or would be labelled as in inappropriate way to interact with women?

Stateofyou

Stateofyou wrote: »

I disagree. Again I think that is just code for 'I can't be as sexist/racist/homophobic/sexually harassing as I want to be and I don't want to do the hard work to change,' thinking.

I don't speak in code. If I desired to speak that way... I would. Although, then again, I have this pesky conditioning from my parents, religion, education and society, that tells me that behaving that way is wrong.. and not worthy of a respectable person. It's such a shame!

So, rather than deal with what I've written, you decide that what I write is in code, and you can interpret it for everyone?

Everyone deserves to be safe. Don't know where you're going with that hyperbole.

Closed minds. Naturally, you can't consider differing opinions. Good example, of what I said about going in a circular direction.

meeeeh

meeeeh wrote: »

So the answer is not affected at all.

Huh?

Stateofyou

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't speak in code. If I desired to speak that way... I would. Although, then again, I have this pesky conditioning from my parents, religion, education and society, that tells me that behaving that way is wrong.. and not worthy of a respectable person. It's such a shame!

So, rather than deal with what I've written, you decide that what I write is in code, and you can interpret it for everyone?



Closed minds. Naturally, you can't consider differing opinions. Good example, of what I said about going in a circular direction.

Okay, swap the word code for conditioning if you're more comfortable with that. I actually think that points out part of the problem here: cultural conditioning, with toxic masculinity certainly tied up in there and that's why we're all even having this discussion.

Have you considered a different opinion?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

meeeeh wrote: »

I think this thread will end up with the conclusion that there is no harassment and innocent men are prosecuted for imaginary crimes.

And btw for those of you who think this is a witch hunt. Mostly women were burned at the stake for their perceived witchcraft. Here women are saying that all they want is not to be harassed when living their everyday life like walking, running, going out for a drink, going to the shop and so on. And that is compared to being burned at the stake.

I love men, most of my friends are male, I grew up among men, I work for my whole life with mostly men, I have a brother, husband and a son. However I'm not blind, I know my husband, my male friends or my brother never had to deal with the same harassment my female friends or I had to deal with. Some is shrugged off, some is even funny in it's pure stupidity but it is harassment that is mostly aimed at one gender. Not in order to admire women or ask them out but to humiliate them. So spare me with your witch hunt.

Think you may have replied to the wrong post, here - I was highlighting the mentality that men are the victim of some sort of 'progressivness' ' as being hysterical.

meeeeh

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Think you may have replied to the wrong post, here - I was highlighting the mentality that men are the victim of some sort of 'progressivness' ' as being hysterical.

Oh I know. I agree with you. I will amend the post because I think I made it more confusing with my ramble. Applogies.

Stateofyou

Stateofyou wrote: »

Okay, swap the word code for conditioning if you're more comfortable with that. I actually think that points out part of the problem here: cultural conditioning, with toxic masculinity certainly tied up in there and that's why we're all even having this discussion.

Have you considered a different opinion?

That you would use "toxic masculinity" as some sort of go-to answer speaks volumes in itself. As for cultural conditioning, you've missed the point. We already have social norms which teach politeness and that's the reason that most men don't behave in the manner described. Mistakes and misconceptions happen. When people are willing to take the worst possible interpretation for a honest mistake, then we're in for a world of trouble. As evidenced by many of the opinions on this thread.

As for swapping code for conditioning, it doesn't hold with the context of your post. You sought to reinterpret my post as being "I think that is just code for 'I can't be as sexist/racist/homophobic/sexually harassing as I want to be and I don't want to do the hard work to change,' thinking". Your first line in response to my post.



As for my considering a differing opinion, sure, I do. You see, I'm a very respectful person, aware of personal space, and was raised to believe that it's morally wrong to make other people uncomfortable. So, the behavior listed in the survey isn't something that I have engaged in, or would want to behave in any situation. It's not something I admire, although I don't agree with many of the sentiments that many posters, like yourself, have expressed, because there's little balance involved, and little consideration for how women, themselves, behave in society.

Instead, all the problems are external.

nullzero

meeeeh wrote: »

As a perfect reply to this:



I will just quote this:

And people say the standard of posting here is poor...

seamus

Sakana wrote: »

If it wouldn't cause a medical issue, definitely.

This is all a thought experiment, because it would cause medical issues. Low testosterone in men carries a number of side effects.

It's not just a hormone that makes men horny and angry, it has an insane amount of implications in the body and has different roles and different levels of sensitivity in male and female bodies.

So, just a thought experiment. The closest real-world application one might get to what you want is to measure the testosterone levels in men and those with hypergonadism sent for treatment.

Nevertheless there is no conclusive link between abnormally high base levels of testosterone and aggression in males.

Realistically the issue is far more complex than "testosterone = violence" because statistically very few men engage in violent behaviour and there is no proven link between high base levels of testosterone and aggression.

There is a correlation, but causal is harder to prove - aggressive behaviour is known to increase testosterone levels. So there's very much a chicken-and-egg thing going on.
One of the main theories is that testosterone is a stress hormone in men; men with higher levels of stress, have higher levels of testosterone, have higher levels of aggression,

Thus it would seem that if you want to find a realistic way of reducing aggression, you need to target the root cause - teaching men, young men especially, to deal with stress in a way that doesn't manifest as anger and aggression.

Leg End Reject

Would any straight women, or gay man, really want men to have low testosterone levels?

It's as preposterous as suggesting artificially lowering oestrogen levels to ensure women are less attractive to men and therefore safer.

nullzero

Stateofyou wrote: »

Do you really believe that? That ANY contact between a woman and man will be deemed as harassment?

Can you give specific examples of what you would like to be able to do with women that you think are being or would be labelled as in inappropriate way to interact with women?

The notion that a man asking a woman out for drink should be seen as harassment isn't a good starting off point.

My point is that accepting something like that is a slippery slope that could and probably would lead on to more preposterous notions being accepted as fact.

We see similar logic being applied to other issues, the thin end of the wedge type argument, why should it not apply here?

TanookiMario

Sakana wrote: »

Would you sign up for the tracking device?

No. Why would I?

I do not identify as a man so unless everyone gets tracked I would be exempt.

It is interesting though that your solution looks at the survey and only sees half of the story.

97% of women aged 18 to 24 have been harassed.

The follow up question to this, for the purposes of prevention, should be "who is doing the harassing"?

Anyone answering this question with the simple answer "men" is clearly not committed to resolving the issue in any meaningful way.

What % of men aged 18 and over are harassing or have harassed women?
25%? 50%? More?
What about under 18s? Do we see this behavior there? To what extent?

If you have a society where 97% of a certain demographic are experiencing harassment then this is a major issue that needs to be resolved.

How do we solve it though?

Remember that here in Ireland you can find situations where someone has stabbed a 17 year old boy six times with a broken bottle and has been given only an 18 month prison term. The perpetrator will then re-enter society and will take advantage of the welfare system to receive income and housing as he will surely not be able to hold down a job.

That is to say that some of the people out there really do not care at all about any possible consequences of their actions.

So how can the solution be to violate the rights of everyone as a preventative measure when there are still people out there who will break the law anyway because they just don't care? This is very similar to the lockdowns for COVID where I can see police stopping motorists on Naas Road as I go by in a LUAS carriage where about 10 people are sitting next to each other with no masks on because they actually don't care.

When you look at this recent case in London, it's horrible. Shocking. You ask yourself how could anyone even think to do something like this?

Yet, the person who did it almost certainly knew it was wrong. They knew it would come with the most severe consequences if they were ever caught. Yet they did it anyway.

What can normal people do in the face of that?

TomTomTim

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Think you may have replied to the wrong post, here - I was highlighting the mentality that men are the victim of some sort of 'progressivness' ' as being hysterical.

You're saying this in a thread where someone was suggesting that males should take something to reduce their masculinity. It's not one bit rational to imply
that there's no misandry at play. If I made a statement like that about Africans, you'd be quick to call me a racist, which you'd be correct in doing.

meeeeh

TomTomTim wrote: »

You're saying this in a thread where someone was suggesting that males should take something to reduce their masculinity. It's not one bit rational to imply
that there's no misandry at play. If I made a statement like that about Africans, you'd be quick to call me a racist, which you'd be correct in doing.

NO a completely bonkers suggestion is given more credence and attention in order to imply that's actually pervasive opinion. I'd call that clutching at straws but you are free to argue imaginary testosterone treatments you seem think you'll be subjected to.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

TomTomTim wrote: »

You're saying this in a thread where someone was suggesting that males should take something to reduce their masculinity. It's not one bit rational to imply
that there's no misandry at play. If I made a statement like that about Africans, you'd be quick to call me a racist, which you'd be correct in doing.

There's misandry in the same way there's toxic masculity: it's there but it's not prevalent; and lets not exagerate it. That gets no one anything useful.

nullzero

meeeeh wrote: »

NO a completely bonkers suggestion is given more credence and attention in order to imply that's actually pervasive opinion. I'd call that clutching at straws but you are free to argue imaginary testosterone treatments you seem think you'll be subjected to.

Talking about a suggestion made by a poster is not the same as thinking you will be subjected to that suggestion in reality.

More bad faith discussion.

Quantum Erasure

TomTomTim wrote: »

This is the new progressive credo: any denials of racism or sexism equates to said person being guilty of the aforementioned. It's both childish, and without any sense. You essentially just want a license to slander people without any push back.

stateofyou wrote:

if one is being branded a homophobic, sexist or racist then one should ask themselves why.

Is anyone here being branded as any of the above just for having the conversation?.

On the racism front, look at what happened Sharon Osbourne. But 'progress' shure...