Society/Culture Feminism part 1 - continued in part 2

[Maggie5]

If you are so confident, then quote them and I will give my opinions. I trust that you will


But when I see the admin of the site calling someone a ******** while banning them at the same time, for exactly the same thing, it's not exactly a good advertisement. And then the same admin says he is the equivalent of Hitler and says "Heil me!" in relation to my very first post on this website. I'm, sorry, but how can I trust that my views will get a rational response?

Its childish, scared censorship, nothing more. I just believe that idiotic views necessarily should take just above the same level of intelligence from the opposing side to take them down. But when you resort to cheap insults instead of attacking the "point", it tells me you secretly agree there is a kernel of truth there.

I guess there are extremists on both sides here.

Are you here to judge or critique mods?
Or have something to say on thread title. I may read your post on second but not interested in the first.

Actually not sure why you are posting at all?

 

[Deadpool]

Are you here to judge or critique mods?
Or have something to say on thread title. I may read your post on second but not interested in the first.

Actually not sure why you are posting at all?

Are you going to respond to the request for a link? Can you even?

I want to know that I can post views which may or may not be opposing without being banned or abused simply for having a different opinion. Because, while I absolutely agree with a lot about feminism, my main gripe is that feminism is fundamentally intolerant.

And this site is only reinforcing that.

You are automatically treating me like the enemy, which only, sadly, confirms my suspicions. I suggest you cut down on the paranoia.

 

[Maggie5]

Have you read the rules?

Why are you really in this thread for?

You don't know you can or cannot post after reading so many pages, then that is a problem for you.

Oh and by the way, I am not here to provide links nor humour you.

 

[Deadpool]

Have you read the rules?

Why are you really in this thread for?

You don't know you can or cannot post after reading so many pages, then that is a problem for you.

Oh and by the way, I am not here to provide links nor humour you.

Why the aggression? You made the claim, I asked for a link. Why is that a problem?

What are you really afraid of?

 

[Maggie5]

Are you going to respond to the request for a link? Can you even?

I want to know that I can post views which may or may not be opposing without being banned or abused simply for having a different opinion. Because, while I absolutely agree with a lot about feminism, my main gripe is that feminism is fundamentally intolerant.

And this site is only reinforcing that.

You are automatically treating me like the enemy, which only, sadly, confirms my suspicions. I suggest you cut down on the paranoia.

Have you read the rules?

Why are you really in this thread for?

If you don't know what you can or cannot post after reading so many pages, then that is a problem for you.

Oh and by the way, I am not here to provide links nor humour you.

No paranoia on my part, you really are becoming quite tiresome.

 

[Deadpool]

Have you read the rules?

Why are you really in this thread for?

If you don't know what you can or cannot post after reading so many pages, then that is a problem for you.

Oh and by the way, I am not here to provide links nor humour you.

No paranoia on my part, you really are becoming quite tiresome.

You can cut and paste. Good for you.

What do you have against substantiating your own views? You posted an opinion- BACK IT UP!!!

 

[Maggie5]

You can cut and paste. Good for you.

What do you have against substantiating your own views? You posted an opinion- BACK IT UP!!!

On Ipad and made an error, good of you to point it out master.
Do you have any thing to contribute to the thread topic?

 

[Deadpool]

On Ipad and made an error, good of you to point it out master.
Do you have any thing to contribute to the thread topic?

Do you have anything substantiated to contribute to the thread?

 

[Maggie5]

Do you have anything substantiated to contribute to the thread?

Nope.

 

[CM86]

I want to know that I can post views which may or may not be opposing without being banned or abused simply for having a different opinion.

Just to be safe, maybe you should try a different forum?

Stop pretending this is your first account on bigfooty.

 

[cartwright]

So, we have an attention seeker and someone scared to make a post on the topic.

Think this thread might have run its course.

 

[Kynge of Begrem]

What did I say that offended you so?

Not sure that you have offended me, tell me your last username and I will get back to you .

 

[Chief]

If you are so confident, then quote them and I will give my opinions. I trust that you will.

But if they are banned and their posts deleted, doesn't that just prove their point?


But when I see the admin of the site calling someone a ******** while banning them at the same time, for exactly the same thing, it's not exactly a good advertisement. And then the same admin says he is the equivalent of Hitler and says "Heil me!" in relation to my very first post on this website. I'm, sorry, but how can I trust that my views will get a rational response?

Its childish, scared censorship, nothing more. I just believe that idiotic views necessarily should take just above the same level of intelligence from the opposing side to take them down. But when you resort to cheap insults instead of attacking the "point", it tells me you secretly agree there is a kernel of truth there.

I guess there are extremists on both sides here.

a) You're new here? Reeeeally?

b) It is verboten to drag moderator decisions into threads. It just derails them.

c) It is OK if you think that your behaviour will be so bad that you will end up being kicked out. You can just post elsewhere, like Andrew Bolt blog comment sections.

Any further complaints about moderating can be sent here: http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/misc/contact

 

[Deadpool]

Classy responses guys.

 

[The Edukator]

All the talk a few pages back about men feeling disposable had me listening to Metallicas 'disposable heroes.' Might be more suited to 'the terrorism files' thread though. Anyone with me?

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

 

[Bardo State]

I don't think it's wrong to say that suicide is a gendered issue that isn't recognised as such. About 3 in 4 suicides in Australia are male and that is a damning statistic.

The problem is that there isn't a male equivalent of feminism to get behind any sort of gendered issue that disproportionately effect males. None that aren't toxic anyway. So all you have is the occasional, good natured but splintered campaigns here and there about say prostate cancer or men's mental health.

 

[BORK]

http://www.news.com.au/sport/sports...ans-single-punch/story-fno61i58-1227384846155
HAHAHAHAHA A woman yelled in a guys face and punched him causing grievous bodily harm. HAHAHA.

I honestly cannot see how men would be ashamed to come forward about this sort of thing happening to them.

 

[AngryRanga]

"However, an incident involving professional boxer Adam Little suggests he needs to spend a little bit more time working on his defence if he stands any chance of succeeding in his chosen career path."

But Victim Blaming!!!!

 

[kfc1]

That article is a joke

 

[cartwright]

News.com.au has a poorly written article. Shocking.

Agree though. The words the writer used were not required. Suggest you write to James Matthey whose name is attached to the article, and ask why he wrote the article the way he did.

 

[Bardo State]

The article is obviously very poor, poking fun at the victim of a serious assault. Not sure what it has to do with feminism though.

 

[kfc1]

The article is obviously very poor, poking fun at the victim of a serious assault. Not sure what it has to do with feminism though.

You would never hear the end of it if the same article was written about a female victim. Just another example of the double standards

 

[Maggie5]

http://www.independent.ie/entertain...or-her-contributions-to-society-31281264.html

Loved the muppets! Although Gonzo was my favourite.

 

[Bardo State]

You would never hear the end of it if the same article was written about a female victim. Just another example of the double standards

I get that, but again, not sure what feminism has to do with it.

Feminism deals in egalitarianism only in principle. If you ask the vast majority of feminists what they think of the article, you'd get an overwhelming response of disapproval, just like you're seeing in this thread.

But 'feminism' as a movement with momentum currently operates mainly as a media niche, producing content. And any media producer is only ever going to, or is obliged to, produce content that is interesting and relevant to their base and audience. And currently, the main regular consumers of feminist media are pretty well off white chicks.

Males for the most part don't identify with feminism today. Not to the extent that they consume the feminist content produced. So feminist content, at least in the short term will pretty much always be concerned with issues that do or could affect that middle class, white, female base. It's the same reason why feminist content is rarely concerned with Islamic issues or poorer women.

So if you're wondering why the same feminist writers concerned with female victim blaming aren't jumping on this article, it's because they're simply not obliged to. I don't wanna get all Chomsky on the issue but to think the feelings of individual authors dictates the media content produced on a macro level, then you are being naive.

 

[Slippery Pete]

When the misogyny card wears out...


http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/en...386218935?nk=df0deac21e0df861ec9741122764786c

IT’S the programming decision that could be rated M for misogyny or R, as in the real measure of vitriol still held by viewers for former Australian prime minister, Julia Gillard.

But whatever side of the political divide you stand, such is the polarising place the first female PM still holds in current history that a proposed telemovie about her life has been rejected by every local network, cable broadcaster and digital streaming service.

“They think the public were sick of the story and no one will watch this show,” Keddie, of WTFN Productions said.

“The networks think people still hate Julia..."