The Closure Of The Women's Safety Thread

You’re missing the point of why this case is being used though. Because people have been doing all you’ve said already, for decades, and this case is essentially the point where enough people have said enough already, they’re not going to tolerate any more women being blamed for violence perpetrated against them by men, when a woman is attacked, by a man.

Nobody is hijacking anything, they were making the same point before this case ever happened, and now more people are seeing that they have a point, because of the circumstances of this case where people who were always looking for reasons to hold women responsible for being attacked by men, they don’t have any reason in this case where they can roll out the usual excuses by way of holding women responsible when they are attacked by men.

They’re making the point you’re making in saying that it’s not women who should need to be careful, it’s the men who would think to attack any woman, who should be careful, because more and more people just aren’t going to tolerate their behaviour or their attitudes towards women any more. They’re doing exactly what you’re suggesting in calling men out, but they’re doing it as a preventative action, as opposed to calling men out after the fact. In plain terms what they’re saying to men is don’t get any ideas, because people aren’t going to tolerate your attitude and behaviour towards women. My son is aware from a very young age, that if he were ever to raise his hand to a woman, being punished by the Courts will be the least of his concerns. He understands the inference in that statement perfectly.

People up and down the country are abused in different ways Jack and no amount of discussion will change that.

You must surely be able to understand why anyone would refuse to accept that idea though? It’s precisely because of people refusing to accept that idea, that legislation came into effect making spousal rape a criminal offence in Irish law in 1990, or new laws regarding coercive control and domestic violence offences came into effect in Irish law three years ago. They came into effect because of women who had been victims of that kind of behaviour perpetrated by men, refusing to accept that they were somehow responsible for the behaviours and attitudes of the men who attacked them.

It took a hell of a lot of discussion to make people realise that they had a valid point, because people when they were confronted with the idea, immediately went on the defensive and imagined they were being accused of something which wouldn’t occur to them ever, ignoring the fact that it already occurs to men that their attitudes and behaviours towards women are acceptable, and it occurs to women already that they should just accept that kind of behaviour and attitudes as a fact of life, precisely because of the idea that women can do nothing about it - by the time they become women, they have already formed the belief that people don’t care enough to want to make sure men don’t think they can treat women like they do.

Our positions aren’t so diametrically opposed at all though. It’s true I have no interest in high-minded nonsense like pointing out that as long as there are humans there will be suffering and all the rest of it.

The discussion was about what is it that causes men to think it’s acceptable to commit violence against women. That’s not looking for world peace or wanting to discuss any specific case, it’s not looking to discuss the specifics of any case even, because the phenomenon of men committing violence against women, or men hurting women, if you want to frame it in those terms, is already pretty specific. Instead, you want to discuss some abstract high-minded idea about human suffering, in order to completely avoid any discussion about the fact that it’s men who are committing violence against women is the issue.

The idea of pointing out that “abuse will still happen”, well it’s not bloody armadillos are playing the victim when faced with the prospect of their entitlement to make a woman feel unsafe or uncomfortable being infringed upon to the degree that they must defend their entitlement, to the death if necessary, and the targets of their ire are women.

I won’t argue with the rest of your post either, it’s plain as day there’s no point when you’re determined to shut down any conversation which might veer towards actually identifying, specifying and addressing a specific issue which has the effect of women bearing the brunt of suffering the consequences of men feeling as though they’re entitled to behave however they like towards women and there’s nobody is going to take that entitlement from them or prevent them from inflicting the consequences of their inability to exercise self-control on women, because it’s women who suffer because of mens attitudes and behaviours towards them, precisely because they’re women.

It’s not any “dark side of humanity”, it’s men, who are committing violence against women. It’s men who should be ashamed, not the women who are afraid to point out that men aren’t entitled to treat them like they’re nothing. Your empathy is wildly misplaced if you can only identify with men who want to play the victim or play the whataboutery card, when the point being made couldn’t be any clearer. It’s being disingenuous to try and pretend we have to address everything else and nothing before we can make the point that what we’re talking about is men committing violence against women.

Personally i would think that more women would feel threatened by a man who while waxing lyrical about preventing male violence towards them is openly inferring that a male in their care would be subject to 'punishment' that's not entertained by the law of the land.

Quite clearly its not a comment on a single thread since you are the single person who seems to be judge, jury and executioner for everything on here now, to the absurd point where you admin your own moderator actions.

And since you ask, yes I would.

Having one person running and deciding everything in isolation is a dictatorship where only 1 voice and 1 opinion matters.

I'd rather just ignore trolls & idiots myself than have to view the site through a Beasty filter.

It's not a pot-shot (or "a moan" for that matter) its an opinion.

Having only 1 person making the decisions never works out very well as even with the best will in the world there will be bias and prejudice. Perhaps you prefer the "keep your head down and say nothing approach"? but I personally dont believe its viable for a site such as this which purports to want (and in fact lives or dies on) discussion.

Of course when only a certain type of opinion becomes welcome, people will indeed vote with their feet, as many of the posters, moderators & admins seem to have already done.