Society/Culture Violence in Society; Who is to blame?

[fleabitten]

Ken Lay didn't say it is ok, and he didn't say they deserved it-you are just putting words in people's mouths. He just said that is what is happening -if the Police chief Commissioner says that, maybe instead of assuming it is offensive, you could take a more openminded approach and listen to someone with expertise in the area?

I could just as easily listen to Erin Pizzey's expert opinion. She started one of the world's first women's refuge centers but came to the conclusion that more than half of the women seeking refuge were equally or more violent than their husbands. Her 40+ years working with victims of domestic violence trumps Ken Lay.

Personally, I think every case of DV is unique and we should be looking at individual circumstances, not trying to blame one gender or another regardless of whether they are victim or perpetrator.

 

[Raz0r6ack]

Feminism isn't about fighting... You quoted the definition yourself.

Being a feminist doesn't mean I can't also be an egalitarian... They are not mutually exclusive, because feminism is not about the removal of the rights of others...

Being a feminist means that you exclusively advocate women's rights when it comes to equality, egalitarianism means that you're advocating the rights of everyone (regardless of gender) when it comes to equality. You can't have it both ways.

 

[fleabitten]

Are you of the opinion, that we don't need the feminism ideology, because women are now the power sex, and men are being taken advantage of?
We need someone fighting for the right to treat men equally in our society?

No and no. Women are not the power sex and there is still work to be done in some areas. There are also areas where men are at a disadvantage. There is no such thing as "the patriarchy". More than ever, opportunity or lack of it are about class, not gender. A female from an upper class family has far more opportunity than a male from a working class family. I do think someone needs to be fighting for gender equality in other places around the world though. But as western feminism has totally jumped the shark, I'd rather men and women do that together under the banner of humanism.

 

[cartwright]

Being a feminist means that you exclusively advocate women's rights when it comes to equality, egalitarianism means that you're advocating the rights of everyone (regardless of gender) when it comes to equality. You can't have it both ways.

Only in your own mind.

 

[Floor Pie]

Being a feminist means that you exclusively advocate women's rights when it comes to equality, egalitarianism means that you're advocating the rights of everyone (regardless of gender) when it comes to equality. You can't have it both ways.

I don't know how to make it clearer than this.

It's an ideology, not a specific situation view.

Feminism is not about removing rights of others, or diminishing rights of others. I can be a feminist, and egalitarian, and whatever other ideal I wish to describe myself as, as long as the do not contradict or oppose each other.


It's not like saying I believe in human rights, and the slave trade...


I can say that I believe in equality for all, but also point out that there is still a lot of sexism in Australia. And that work still needs to be done.

 

[Floor Pie]

No and no. Women are not the power sex and there is still work to be done in some areas. There are also areas where men are at a disadvantage. There is no such thing as "the patriarchy". More than ever, opportunity or lack of it are about class, not gender. A female from an upper class family has far more opportunity than a male from a working class family. I do think someone needs to be fighting for gender equality in other places around the world though. But as western feminism has totally jumped the shark, I'd rather men and women do that together under the banner of humanism.

How has "Western feminism" jumped the shark? You just stated that work still needs to be done in some areas.

In the same way that racism is still a big problem in Australia, sexism is as well.

Just a look through this thread will show examples of men blaming women for being raped.
Regardless of gender, the only person to blame for a rape, is the rapist. I don't care what someone wears or how they dance.

 

[The Coup]

Because feminism is only about for fighting for gender specific rights and egalitarianism is about fighting for the equality of everyone.

No it isn't actually, but you don't understand the context of the word and the time it was created.

 

[Raz0r6ack]

Only in your own mind.

I don't know how to make it clearer than this.

It's an ideology, not a specific situation view.

Feminism is not about removing rights of others, or diminishing rights of others. I can be a feminist, and egalitarian, and whatever other ideal I wish to describe myself as, as long as the do not contradict or oppose each other.


It's not like saying I believe in human rights, and the slave trade...


I can say that I believe in equality for all, but also point out that there is still a lot of sexism in Australia. And that work still needs to be done.

It's got nothing to do with taking away the rights of other people. Where did I say that? All I'm saying is that feminism is only about advocating equality for women.

"I only advocate women's rights when it comes equality" and "I advocate everyone's rights when it comes equality" isn't the same thing. It totally is a contradiction to say that you are both.

It's either one or the other (hopefully the latter).

 

[Floor Pie]

It's got nothing to do with taking away the rights of other people. Where did I say that? All I'm saying is that feminism is only about advocating equality for women.

"I only advocate women's rights when it comes equality" and "I advocate everyone's rights when it comes equality" isn't the same thing. It totally is a contradiction to say that you are both.

It's either one or the other (hopefully the latter).

"I only advocate women's rights when it comes equality"
This is your misunderstanding. Not mine.

Remove the "only", and see if that helps you.

I can't make things any simpler than I have.

 

[Raz0r6ack]

"I only advocate women's rights when it comes equality"
This is your misunderstanding. Not mine.

Remove the "only", and see if that helps you.

I can't make things any simpler than I have.

Exactly, you're singling out just women, not men and women, which would be everyone.

 

[Floor Pie]

Exactly, you're singling out just women, not men and women, which would be everyone.

No I'm not.

I believe women should be treated equally to men.
That doesn't contradict my belief that all people should be treated equally...

 

[scon]

If you advocate for everyone's rights you advocate for the rights of feminists who advocate for human rights also.
However I'm sure you can find some desperate oppositions, conflicts and deeply indoctrinated ideological brainwashing issues in that Raz0r6ack

 

[fleabitten]

How has "Western feminism" jumped the shark? You just stated that work still needs to be done in some areas.

In the same way that racism is still a big problem in Australia, sexism is as well.

Just a look through this thread will show examples of men blaming women for being raped.
Regardless of gender, the only person to blame for a rape, is the rapist. I don't care what someone wears or how they dance.

It's jumped the shark because of crap like "ban bossy". I can come up with a long list if you really need one, but that's a pretty good example of the kind of thing I'm talking about. And just because there is still work to be done, doesn't mean that feminism hasn't gone past its used by date. As I said, there are areas where men are disadvantaged, too. It's no longer about men having things better than women. Both genders have their advantages and disadvantages. So why divide ourselves up and fight for each gender separately when we can just aim for equality for all people? Like it or not, feminism has been tainted by the extremists who are either growing in number or just getting louder and louder despite having less and less to actually complain about. Whether there are good intentions or not, the term itself is divisive and counterproductive.

 

[Raz0r6ack]

No I'm not.

I believe women should be treated equally to men.
That doesn't contradict my belief that all people should be treated equally...

Yes it does, by identifying yourself as a feminist it means that you are only willing to advocate for women's rights on the grounds of equality - There is nothing about advocating men's rights on the ground of equality when it comes feminism (that would be Masculism). That is why the word is called feminism (in reference to femininity) and it specifically targets women's rights on the ground of equality.

Feminism - the advocacy of women's rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes.
Masculism - the advocacy of men's rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes.
Egalitarian - a person who advocates or supports the principle of equality for all people.

 

[Floor Pie]

It's jumped the shark because of crap like "ban bossy". I can come up with a long list if you really need one, but that's a pretty good example of the kind of thing I'm talking about. And just because there is still work to be done, doesn't mean that feminism hasn't gone past its used by date. As I said, there are areas where men are disadvantaged, too. It's no longer about men having things better than women. Both genders have their advantages and disadvantages. So why divide ourselves up and fight for each gender separately when we can just aim for equality for all people? Like it or not, feminism has been tainted by the extremists who are either growing in number or just getting louder and louder despite having less and less to actually complain about. Whether there are good intentions or not, the term itself is divisive and counterproductive.

What is ban bossy? (just googled).
Just because a feminist supports a stupid idea, doesn't mean it's feminism.

You can't say that there are still disparities between men a women in some areas, but feminism has jumped the shark.
Like it or not, feminism hasn't changed. People's idea of what it means, has.
Now that we both know what feminism means, we can start to educate others, right? Instead of just insisting it should remain with negative connotations?

Women are still treated differently to men. Not all women and not all men, but it's still an issue.

Rather than dividing people into feminists and anti-feminists, why don't we all agree that women should be treated equally to men, and men should be treated equally to women?

Because there are plenty of sexists who hide out in the extreme anti-feminism area, and plenty who hide out in the extreme feminism area.
If people unite and agree that women should be treated equally to men, we can expose the extremists for what they are.

Rather than continuing down this road of "I'm not a feminist, because I believe abortion is murder" sort of guff.

 

[Floor Pie]

Yes it does, by identifying yourself as a feminist it means that you are only willing to advocate for women's rights on the grounds of equality - There is nothing about advocating men's rights on the ground of equality when it comes feminism (that would be Masculism). That is why the word is called feminism (in reference to femininity) and it specifically targets women's rights on the ground of equality.

Feminism - the advocacy of women's rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes.
Masculism - the advocacy of men's rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes.
Egalitarian - a person who advocates or supports the principle of equality for all people.

Full circle in one page...

By identifying myself as a feminist, it means I advocate for the equality of women. Not that I am only willing to advocate for women's rights on the grounds of equality...


How does Feminism, Masculism and Egalitarianism contradict or oppose each other?

 

[romeoh]

I could just as easily listen to Erin Pizzey's expert opinion. She started one of the world's first women's refuge centers but came to the conclusion that more than half of the women seeking refuge were equally or more violent than their husbands. Her 40+ years working with victims of domestic violence trumps Ken Lay.

Personally, I think every case of DV is unique and we should be looking at individual circumstances, not trying to blame one gender or another regardless of whether they are victim or perpetrator.

Never heard of Pizzey and would have to read some of her work but her theory is not supported by the data in Australia.

 

[fleabitten]

What is ban bossy? (just googled).
Just because a feminist supports a stupid idea, doesn't mean it's feminism.

You can't say that there are still disparities between men a women in some areas, but feminism has jumped the shark.
Like it or not, feminism hasn't changed. People's idea of what it means, has.
Now that we both know what feminism means, we can start to educate others, right? Instead of just insisting it should remain with negative connotations?

Women are still treated differently to men. Not all women and not all men, but it's still an issue.

Rather than dividing people into feminists and anti-feminists, why don't we all agree that women should be treated equally to men, and men should be treated equally to women?

Because there are plenty of sexists who hide out in the extreme anti-feminism area, and plenty who hide out in the extreme feminism area.
If people unite and agree that women should be treated equally to men, we can expose the extremists for what they are.

Rather than continuing down this road of "I'm not a feminist, because I believe abortion is murder" sort of guff.

Instead of using all that energy explaining to people what feminism is supposed to be (to both anti-feminists and people who identify as feminists but have lost the plot), why not just ditch the label altogether? It's always going to be a divisive term because within the very name is the suggestion that its all about serving the interests of one gender. Rather than addressing violence against women, why not just address violence? Sometimes it might be more about empowering or protecting a certain segment of the population, but when you make your whole movement about the interests of one group of people, you're going to alienate people, and not all of those people are your enemies. You and I probably have pretty similar views on how we think our society should function, but here we are arguing about feminism. You consider yourself a feminist and I'm all like * feminism, even though we're basically on the same page.

 

[fleabitten]

Never heard of Pizzey and would have to read some of her work but her theory is not supported by the data in Australia.

Is there data to show that most women who attack men are doing so in self-defence? I can't imagine that there is, seeing as there isn't even reliable data on women attacking men at all, due to the fact that we're much less likely to report it or seek help. But feminists will applaud Ken Lay while they send Pizzey death threats and kill her dog.

 

[romeoh]

Is there data to show that most women who attack men are doing so in self-defence? I can't imagine that there is, seeing as there isn't even reliable data on women attacking men at all, due to the fact that we're much less likely to report it or seek help. But feminists will applaud Ken Lay while they send Pizzey death threats and kill her dog.

If you can't accept what our Chief Commissioner has to say about DV, then I think u cannot be cereal.
Go and google Domestic Violence Victoria ( July 2014), have a read and see if there is anything there to concern you, instead of squealing about feminism and other side issues.
For example- funnily enough this report mentions that women often don't report incidents.

 

[fleabitten]

If you can't accept what our Chief Commissioner has to say about DV, then I think u cannot be cereal.

When he's suggesting that most female perpetrators of domestic violence are acting in self-defense, then yeah I'm not going to accept that. It's victim blaming. The kind of thing that sets feminists into hysterics if the victim happens to be a woman. I actually just searched for the comments you claim that he made and I only found an interview where he addresses victim-blaming. So that would be pretty ironic if he did indeed make that statement. No doubt there are some women who kill or seriously hurt their spouse in self-defense. But that goes both ways. I'm sure there are men who are marked down as the abuser when they didn't start the fight. It's just not a very productive thing to say and something that's hard to prove even if you're the chief of police.

 

[romeoh]

When he's suggesting that most female perpetrators of domestic violence are acting in self-defense, then yeah I'm not going to accept that. It's victim blaming. The kind of thing that sets feminists into hysterics if the victim happens to be a woman. I actually just searched for the comments you claim that he made and I only found an interview where he addresses victim-blaming. So that would be pretty ironic if he did indeed make that statement. No doubt there are some women who kill or seriously hurt their spouse in self-defense. But that goes both ways. I'm sure there are men who are marked down as the abuser when they didn't start the fight. It's just not a very productive thing to say and something that's hard to prove even if you're the chief of police.

I told you where I heard the comment.( radio)
But again you are making such a big deal of a lesser issue-go and read the DVV article. There are more pressing concerns I would have thought.

 

[Floor Pie]

Instead of using all that energy explaining to people what feminism is supposed to be (to both anti-feminists and people who identify as feminists but have lost the plot), why not just ditch the label altogether? It's always going to be a divisive term because within the very name is the suggestion that its all about serving the interests of one gender. Rather than addressing violence against women, why not just address violence? Sometimes it might be more about empowering or protecting a certain segment of the population, but when you make your whole movement about the interests of one group of people, you're going to alienate people, and not all of those people are your enemies. You and I probably have pretty similar views on how we think our society should function, but here we are arguing about feminism. You consider yourself a feminist and I'm all like **** feminism, even though we're basically on the same page.

Ok, I'll stop defending feminism, if you stop blaming it?
Because feminism isn't causing problems..

And saying things like;

The kind of thing that sets feminists into hysterics if the victim happens to be a woman.

Doesn't benefit anyone.

Turning issues into anti-feminism campaigns detracts from the actual issue, and polarises it.

 

[fleabitten]

And another classic tactic. Hey what does it matter if something a feminist says is untrue or unfair? That's a side issue! Stop making a big deal and fall in line!

 

[fleabitten]

That last comment was in response to romeoh.

Ok, I'll stop defending feminism, if you stop blaming it?
Because feminism isn't causing problems..

Feminism is totally causing problems. Or rather, people who claim to be feminists are causing problems. There are people in this thread that I could totally sit down with and have a rational conversation and, hopefully, we'd both walk away with a more well-rounded view of gender issues. There are also the typical sheep that make those kinds of conversations almost impossible. And this stuff in here is mild compared to some of the crazies I encounter.