Society/Culture Feminism part 1 - continued in part 2

[Maggie5]

I drove to about 10 different car yards today. I just wanted to wander and browse, but without fail, I was harassed at every single one by some jerk in a $30 Ed Harry shirt and smelling of cigarettes.

Haven't reported it yet, but am considering my options.

Fabulous contribution, not!

 

[Maggie5]

"Not be allowed back in" might be a victimising way of saying "nobody will be offering him a contract next year"

How did you come to the conclusion it is victimising?

 

[ShanDog]

Fabulous contribution, not!

Lighten up a bit.

 

[ShanDog]

It depends and it's not really one way or the other. When someone, or a group of people, are constantly attempting to make sexual advances on someone in the workplace, despite them making it clear that they're married and not interested, it's clearly harassment.

I don't think anyone disagrees with that. It's the once-off advance being harassment that is the issue if I'm reading it right (ie Gale to the reporter)

 

[Taylor]

How did you come to the conclusion it is victimising?

I meant it like he was setting the tone by talking about the BBL not letting him back, making it about him being targeted as opposed to uniformly rejected.

 

[YES! YES! YES!]

wrong person.

Oops.

Ah well, I guess principle still stands that it's ok for one gender to act one way but not for the other to do the same.

 

[Chief]

I have anecdote of feelings of females who work at my football club. I'm gonna tell my girlfriend now that her and her friends are wrong, and they are required to be offended

I thought you'd gotten it? Different people, situations.

 

[Juddy88]

I don't think anyone disagrees with that. It's the once-off advance being harassment that is the issue if I'm reading it right (ie Gale to the reporter)

I wouldn't really call it a one off though. He ALLEGEDLY has form and I'm sure the other allegations will be investigated thoroughly.

I don't think I've ever said that the Gayle incident in isolation, in the scheme of things, is overly serious. That doesn't mean that it's acceptable.

The major issue is the ignorance around the broader implications, social norms, and attitudes and values, that have been displayed in discussions of this topic and similar topics.

 

[ShanDog]

I wouldn't really call it a one off though. He ALLEGEDLY has form and I'm sure the other allegations will be investigated thoroughly.

I don't think I've ever said that the Gayle incident in isolation, in the scheme of things, is overly serious. That doesn't mean that it's acceptable.

The major issue is the ignorance around the broader implications, social norms, and attitudes and values, that have been displayed in discussions of this topic and similar topics.

I agree with your last paragraph. Still find it hilarious that the music between balls in the BBL includes songs like Blurred Lines. Society is laughable sometimes.

 

[Lester Burnham]

You do realise that but your logic, no one can ever really be "outraged" by anything? Why worry about the one punch death of the kid ther other day when a father murdered his two children and committed suicide? Why worry about that when there are many gun deaths in the US everyday? Why worry about that when there is mass rape and murder in African countries? The list goes on for infinity.

Or, you know, people could be concerned with multiple things, and be concerned with what they are concerned with without people questioning their morals.

Firstly, no one should be outraged by what Chris Gayle said to Mel Mclaughlin. A rolleyes would be more appropriate. Mclaughlin has accepted Gayle's apology. But it seems that people want to be outraged on her behalf and in the process paint her and other women as victims regardless as whether the women see themselves as such.

Yes, people can be concerned with multiple things but it is revealing which issues receive the most attention and many of them are trivial - I think because the battle for equality (in the West) has largely been won.

From Ayaan Hirsi Ali

That’s what feminists used to fight for, the access for girls to education. They used to fight for the recommendation of girls as fellow human beings and recommendation of their personal liberty.

I come from a place where I wasn’t allowed to wear whatever I wanted. I could not leave the house without asking permission from a male guardian, often without the company of a male. If something wrong was to happen to me – and where I come from that happens all the time, you were groped, you were harassed, you were r*ped – you had no recourse because you weren’t supposed to be where you were. You were married off as a child. And you had to obey the person you were married to – it was just your luck.

Feminists in this country and in the West fought against that and won the battle. It’s what we do with the victory. What we are now doing with that victory – and I agree with you if you condemn that – I condemn whole heartedly for the trivial bullshit it is – to go after a man who makes a scientific breakthrough and all that we organized women do is to fret about his shirt. We must reclaim and retake feminism from our fellow idiotic women.​

The only reason you are seeing more of the Chris Gayle incident is because it is much more localised and easier to relate to. It's well known that the media have always focused on events that hit closer to home and have more emotional pull. Whether that's right or not is another question, but it's got nothing to do with whether anyone cares about one incident more than another, and to suggest so is extremely ignorant.

Also , I'm not sure what you are reading, but there is plenty of empathy, distress, and concern about what is happening in Germany from what I've seen.

I think a more realistic view would be that certain topics don't fit the feminist agenda. Aboriginal women are 80 times more likely to be hospitalised for assault than a white woman. This should fit your description of 'closer to home and have more emotional pull' yet feminists and social media are strangely quiet about it. A Cairns mother kills 8 children - crickets. Further afield there have been numerous cases in the UK where Pakistani gangs have targeted thousands of young white girls for horrendous abuse. We've now got the issue in Germany where several cities experienced coordinated sexual attacks by immigrants on hundreds of women in public streets.

The feminist agenda maintains that the 'patriarchy' is a product of male dominated Western society, capitalism, and colonialism. So of course any violence towards women or children outside that, such as by Indigenous males, by women or Islamic immigrants, is downplayed.

 

[Lester Burnham]

Your appeal to worse problems is noted. And dismissed.

I am happy for you that you got a book about logic for Christmas. Clearly you did not get up to the chapter on 'argumentum ad logicam' - argument from fallacy is the logical fallacy that if an argument contains a fallacy its conclusion can be dismissed.

I guess it's better than your previous efforts based on 'argumentum ad baculum' - appeal to force (someone in a position of power threatens to bring down unfortunate consequences upon anyone who dares to disagree with a proffered proposition).

 

[Chief]

I am happy for you that you got a book about logic for Christmas. Clearly you did not get up to the chapter on 'argumentum ad logicam' - argument from fallacy is the logical fallacy that if an argument contains a fallacy its conclusion can be dismissed.

I guess it's better than your previous efforts based on 'argumentum ad baculum' - appeal to force (someone in a position of power threatens to bring down unfortunate consequences upon anyone who dares to disagree with a proffered proposition).

Lol!

 

[Chief]

(I googled it because I couldn't recall the exact name of the logical fallacy... which you definitely used and which still makes your argument completely invalid. Also nice touch doubling down! Masterful. But still invalid)

 

[Chief]

(Hang on if you do something badly but then try to do the same thing again to cover up the first bad execution, is that masterful or just twice as bad?)

 

[Present Not Past]

Chris Gayle used the fact that Mel Mclaughlin was a woman journalist (instead of a male) and stated that he wanted to be interviewed by her again because he wanted to look into her eyes again. There is no way that that he would have said that to a male interviewer. He was clever - if he had said that he wanted to be interviewed by Mel again because he wanted to look at her breasts again then he should be condemned, and rightly so.
However, having said this he still has crossed the line because I haven't seen any interviews with cricketers by journalists where the interviewee have said I look forward to being intervieweed again by you because I want to look into your eyes. Why, because looking into someone's eyes is very personal and I think Chris Gayle crossed the line by making that interview too personal. I think Gayle was right to apologise to her because he was unprofessional towards her and he is right to be punished.

 

[skilts]

Excellent idea, you should always aim to win your fights by at least 100 metres. Never seen the attraction with fighting, best case scenario you get really sore hands.

I've never seen anyone win a fight. Everyone loses, especially those who don't know they have.

 

[JHF1870]

Watched the Gayle-McLaughlin interview live and thought it was pretty seedy. Felt the initial reaction in Cricket Australia condemning the actions and subsequent match fine was appropriate.

Everything thereafter - the public shaming and lynch mobbing, the hashtag campaigns, the lawyers and the damnations from public figure's and authorities is a bunch of dribble.

I'm going to toot my own horn and say that logical stinkers and cross-tie walkers ain't got no place paddling through any stream of contentiousness.

So should nuala have been fined. Same action, with a different response. Typically guys handle situations like this better, but who was to say he didnt find it uncomfortable . I knew growing up i could laugh off being bullied or made fun of. or cry about it and complain and make it feel worse. Not saying anyone should have to put up with that, but by shaking it off, you always do better. Personally, ive handled these situationsnbetter following the aforementioned

 

[DemonTim]

I thought you'd gotten it? Different people, situations.

I understand that. By juddy is telling people that they are experiencing harassment.

 

[skipper kelly]

(Hang on if you do something badly but then try to do the same thing again to cover up the first bad execution, is that masterful or just twice as bad?)

You should make an app or an add on (whatever the correct terminology is) that detects logical fallacies. Although, it would reduce the amount of posts on your website and probably close down this board.

 

[Chief]

You should make an app or an add on (whatever the correct terminology is) that detects logical fallacies. Although, it would reduce the amount of posts on your website and probably close down this board.

Let's not go crazy here!

 

[fleabitten]

 

[coerced]

Firstly, no one should be outraged by what Chris Gayle said to Mel Mclaughlin. A rolleyes would be more appropriate. Mclaughlin has accepted Gayle's apology. But it seems that people want to be outraged on her behalf and in the process paint her and other women as victims regardless as whether the women see themselves as such.

Yes, people can be concerned with multiple things but it is revealing which issues receive the most attention and many of them are trivial - I think because the battle for equality (in the West) has largely been won.

From Ayaan Hirsi Ali

That’s what feminists used to fight for, the access for girls to education. They used to fight for the recommendation of girls as fellow human beings and recommendation of their personal liberty.

I come from a place where I wasn’t allowed to wear whatever I wanted. I could not leave the house without asking permission from a male guardian, often without the company of a male. If something wrong was to happen to me – and where I come from that happens all the time, you were groped, you were harassed, you were r*ped – you had no recourse because you weren’t supposed to be where you were. You were married off as a child. And you had to obey the person you were married to – it was just your luck.

Feminists in this country and in the West fought against that and won the battle. It’s what we do with the victory. What we are now doing with that victory – and I agree with you if you condemn that – I condemn whole heartedly for the trivial bullshit it is – to go after a man who makes a scientific breakthrough and all that we organized women do is to fret about his shirt. We must reclaim and retake feminism from our fellow idiotic women.​

I think a more realistic view would be that certain topics don't fit the feminist agenda. Aboriginal women are 80 times more likely to be hospitalised for assault than a white woman. This should fit your description of 'closer to home and have more emotional pull' yet feminists and social media are strangely quiet about it. A Cairns mother kills 8 children - crickets. Further afield there have been numerous cases in the UK where Pakistani gangs have targeted thousands of young white girls for horrendous abuse. We've now got the issue in Germany where several cities experienced coordinated sexual attacks by immigrants on hundreds of women in public streets.

The feminist agenda maintains that the 'patriarchy' is a product of male dominated Western society, capitalism, and colonialism. So of course any violence towards women or children outside that, such as by Indigenous males, by women or Islamic immigrants, is downplayed.

Do you mean like Australia's most read prominent feminist, Clementine Ford, who earlier in the week said:

How quickly comes the narrative of shock around these "community" men who murder their wives and/or children, particularly when those men come from solid middle-class backgrounds in the largely white country towns that popular fiction likes to imagine as the fertile ground of Australia's grassroots. When these men murder their families, testimonies are published identifying such gruesome, horrifying behaviour as "out of character", as if there could be a circumstance in which one murders their family to establish such behaviour as a trait.

Yet today writes on the violence in Cologne:

That the attackers have all been described as being of Arab or North African descent has been eagerly embraced by conservative commentators, anti-immigration campaigners and garden variety racists. And yet, no evidence has emerged yet which suggests this heinous, frightening activity was coordinated solely by new arrivals in Germany. Even if it were, over one million people entered Germany last year - a portion of 1000 of them accounts for 0.1 per cent of that number.

and;

What feminists like myself are refusing to do is to participate in the charade pretending these things only matter, are only important, are only violent - indeed, only become REAL - when perpetrated by certain kinds of men. Violence against women occurs throughout all cultures because patriarchy and misogyny thrive everywhere. And yet, in the west we have found countless ways to mitigate it, erase it entirely or acknowledge it but place the blame squarely on the victim's shoulders. If you care about women, care about all women. If you condemn the attacks in Cologne (as you should), condemn also the same, less organised attacks involving the same violation of bodily autonomy that women complain of daily (as you must). Women have the right to be protected from all harassment and violation, not just the kind you disapprove of. You cannot have it both ways.

Bold emphasis mine. Ford does want it both ways. She wants to expose Little's crime as a manifestation of an disturbing, unseen culture within the white middle class male population (which may indeed exist) yet wishes to deny the potential existence of a similar disgusting undercurrent in another culture.

As you have noted, feminism, as much of its thought exists today, is less about universal women's rights, and more about dismantling the perceived orthodoxy.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

Great post ^

 

[Maggie5]

Do you mean like Australia's most read prominent feminist, Clementine Ford, who earlier in the week said:



Yet today writes on the violence in Cologne:


and;


Bold emphasis mine. Ford does want it both ways. She wants to expose Little's crime as a manifestation of an disturbing, unseen culture within the white middle class male population (which may indeed exist) yet wishes to deny the potential existence of a similar disgusting undercurrent in another culture.

As you have noted, feminism, as much of its thought exists today, is less about universal women's rights, and more about dismantling the perceived orthodoxy.

Found little wrong in what you posted, in fact what is so wrong about :
"If you condemn the attacks in Cologne (as you should), condemn also the same, less organised attacks involving the same violation of bodily autonomy that women complain of daily (as you must). Women have the right to be protected from all harassment and violation, not just the kind you disapprove of. You cannot have it both ways."

 

[coerced]

Found little wrong in what you posted, in fact what is so wrong about :
"If you condemn the attacks in Cologne (as you should), condemn also the same, less organised attacks involving the same violation of bodily autonomy that women complain of daily (as you must). Women have the right to be protected from all harassment and violation, not just the kind you disapprove of. You cannot have it both ways."

Who isn't condemning those?

It's a gigantic strawman fallacy, in conjunction with a moral equivalence fallacy that because bad acts happen in Western society, the relevancy and danger of these other bad acts are diminished. Yet even Ford admits:

Oh, but this was on such a large SCALE some people cry. Show me where western men have hunted in packs this large! It's true that attacks of this size are a rarity.

Yes, it is a rarity. This kind of open contempt for women is unacceptable in Western society. It is far more acceptable in societies where the men who committed the acts are from.