#MeToo - is it just different for men and women?

[Jokester]

Sooner we get sex robots, the better!

Yeah but certain feminists believe sexbots are demeaning to women you dirty mysoginist (vibrators are fine though obviously).

 

[Amp34]

I wouldn't fault you for feeling that it has been co-opted recently enough for you to feel that way. We all perceive reality through our own minds and we can't really do anything else outside of things that can be covered by science. Not always even then, really, since there are things that can be proven to be true that people find difficult to truly reconcile with their own perception, their own feelings about how the universe is. Some things that even experts in the field, people who really understand the subject, find weird.

For more subjective things, like political ideologies, it's a far stronger thing. So it can easily feel right, even when framed in terms of logic:

Premise: My views have not changed.
Premise: I used to support X and now I don't.

Conclusion: X has changed.

That's far more comfortable than thinking "I was misled and wrong about X for years". That one took me a while to acknowledge, even after I'd seen the evidence.

You can look back 100 years or more and find people in the same situation as the people you mentioned, saying the same thing about feminism being changed. Sometimes in detail. For example, the book "Feminism Divided", which was written in the 1920s, refers to the "old feminism" that was about equality and the "new feminism" that was about women only and not about equality and which was/had taken over and changed feminism. The author was making the same mistake the people you mention are making and which many people have made and continue to make. Her "old feminism" never existed. It was a construct in her own mind, a misunderstanding about what feminism is. It was her being misled and wrong. Her "new feminism" was what feminism always had been - what was new was that she had realised it existed. She still thought her fictional "old feminism" existed, though.

You can see the same thing over and over again throughout the years. I've spoken with a fair few self-identified feminists, generally older, who look at feminism and think "that's not how it's supposed to be, that's not how it was". But it is how it was supposed to be and it is how it was. It's not feminism that's changed. Not in that way.

The liberalism thing is depressing. I like what liberalism used to be and now it's ruined. I like the concepts of tolerance, freedom, equality of treatment, acceptance of diversity...and there's another word that has been infected and corrupted by this pernicious ideology. It used to mean accepting, even welcoming, differences. Now it means a belief in biological group identity (i.e. "they're all the same", the mantra of bigots and the opposite of accepting differences), preferential treatment for "right" group identities and enforced sameness of word and deed and, to the greatest extent possible, thought. This feminist, "liberal", "diverse" ideology functions in the same way as a virus - infecting a cell and corrupting it into a factory to produce more of the virus while using it to hide from the host's immune system by presenting a facade of being the very thing it's destroying.

I'm what used to be called liberal. I'm also quite socialist. I'm quite extreme when it comes to equality of treatment, especially regarding sexism. I would, for example, desgregate everywhere. Toilets, changing rooms, absolutely everywhere. I'd also like to see the whole idea of gender thrown in the bin because it creates and supports sexism. Not binning sex (that's real) but binning gender (that's mostly wholly fake and the remaining parts are trends that should never be applied to anyone). I'm also pretty extreme regarding racial equality - I think that race doesn't exist at all, that it's a completely fake idea that no-one should believe in because it's simply not a real thing. I think that the traditional view of human sexual orientation as two discrete groups (homosexual and heterosexual) is objectively wrong too - it's actually a spectrum, so the division into discrete groups is false. Unsurprisingly, I think that it's not a sound basis on which to base law, social custom or anything else.

I'm finding it bizarre that I now find more common ground with the political right than with the political left. There's more of the above on the right than on the left now. That's weird.

Liberalism has changed significantly over the decades/centuries. Someone who considered themselves a liberal a century ago will probably consider you liberalism in the same way you consider the so called liberalism of those you're berating. That said I think you you're going over the top. The issue is not the average feminist/liberal. They are the normal people. It's the (extremely small) vocal minority that are the issue. "Ignore" them, just as we should "ignore" extremists from the "right" and not assume that those extremists are representative of people with right wing viewpoints.

The average feminist still wants equality, the average liberal still wants equality. The average twitter screamer probably doesn't, but then they're usually overly opinionated people wanting exposure.

As for the topic at hand I had an interesting conversation with the GF tonight. She's been selling poppies this weekend and almost the first thing that came out of her mouth about the subject was that there are some "creepy old men". She's a military NCO with 15 years service (including Afghanistan) so not exactly thin skinned, yet selling poppies in her uniform outside a supermarket makes her uncomfortable because of some of the comments she received from men while doing so. Is that right?

Yes, there may be the occasional person going over the top, but the issue really is alive and "well" for many women (and tbh, men).

 

[Dirk Diggler]

I was reading this story this morning, and was quite shocked initially thinking that maybe there's a sub-culture here that actively encourages sexual assaults by enabling them.

Tory rape claims ignored by commons
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-41857807

Then I got to this part near the end:

The man Amanda had accused of rape, who was not an MP, strongly denied the allegation and the case was later dropped after a review of the evidence

So, this could quite easily be a case of innocent man accused of rape? This also caught my attention:

The allegation was mentioned but was not the focus of the discussion, as the incident had not taken place on the Parliamentary Estate, and the activist had not been employed on the estate.

"There was no question of formally 'referring' the allegations to other House authorities as there was already a criminal case under way

To be honest, I don't see the case to be answered here. This whole situation appears now to be getting sensationalised to the point where actual victims of sexual abuse and harassment will be lost in the ever growing sea of noise.

 

[Chris Wilson]

"Amands" says she has lost count of the number of young women she has seen plied with alcohol in the Commons' bars to the point they cannot stand, then seen escorted out by MP's and staffers. Presumably they were force fed? Presumably she did nothing to help her sisters in their none self afflicted alcohol fuelled traumas...?

Methinks Amanda exaggerates....Probably about lots of things...

 

[NewGamer11]

I was reading this story this morning, and was quite shocked initially thinking that maybe there's a sub-culture here that actively encourages sexual assaults by enabling them.

Tory rape claims ignored by commons
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-41857807

EDIT - She did actually report it to the Police. Difficult one for them to prove I suppose.

 

[Dirk Diggler]

EDIT - She did actually report it to the Police. Difficult one for them to prove I suppose.

Edit after your edit.

 

[NewGamer11]

Name and shame of 'predators' by an Indian lady: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-41862615

Fire up the lawyers.

 

[Dirk Diggler]

Difficult one for them to prove I suppose.

It can be quite difficult to prove these things, particularly if it didn't actually happen which is the point I'm making.

 

[Caracus2k]

The average feminist still wants equality, the average liberal still wants equality. The average twitter screamer probably doesn't, but then they're usually overly opinionated people wanting exposure.

Problem is they (in reality) want equality of outcome (just look at the constant lies perpetuated (by 'mainstream' feminism) to support the concept of there being a 'pay gap' somewhere around 20‰ where the expressed claim is that women, in aggregate, get paid this amount less then men because they are women not because of choices made)

So no I'm not fine with the 'majority' of modern feminists. Feminism was fine when it campaigned for equal rights and when it could point to actual identifiable incidents of discrimination. Today however it mainly occupies itself blaming women's choices on men/ the patriarchy, creating moral panics about the prevalence and severity of sexual assault in the West (like we are are seeing now) and moaning that there's not as many prominent women from the past as men to turn into statues or put on currency etc

I'm all behind reducing or seeking to eliminate inequity but inequality is the natural state of humans who are inherently not equal and attempts at forcibly seeking to redress inequality via means such as quotas or Marxist style redistribution of wealth and or control are in my view always detined to end up with a wholelot more inequity, mediocracy and failure

 

[Amp34]

Problem is they (in reality) want equality of outcome (just look at the constant lies perpetuated (by 'mainstream' feminism) to support the concept of there being a 'pay gap' somewhere around 20‰ where the expressed claim is that women, in aggregate, get paid this amount less then men because they are women not because of choices made)

So no I'm not fine with the 'majority' of modern feminists. Feminism was fine when it campaigned for equal rights and when it could point to actual identifiable incidents of discrimination. Today however it mainly occupies itself blaming women's choices on men/ the patriarchy, creating moral panics about the prevalence and severity of sexual assault in the West (like we are are seeing now) and moaning that there's not as many prominent women from the past as men to turn into statues or put on currency etc

I'm all behind reducing or seeking to eliminate inequity but inequality is the natural state of humans who are inherently not equal and attempts at forcibly seeking to redress inequality via means such as quotas or Marxist style redistribution of wealth and or control are in my view always detined to end up with a wholelot more inequity, mediocracy and failure

Who is “they”? And who would you consider mainstream feminists?

Unfortunately, as I previously mentioned, most so called feminists you actually hear about today are the ones with extreme/newsworthy viewpoints. The majority of people that consider themselves feminists arent likely to have those extreme viewpoints.

It’s no different to considering Katie Hopkins and Donald Trump as spokespeople for the majority of right wingers. Most people with right wing viewpoints dont share many/most/all of the more extreme views that Hopkins and Trump do, so is it acceptable to tar them with the same brush? If not why is it acceptable to tar people that consider themselves feminists in a similar way?

With that in mind I do agree, there is a dark shadow following the term feminism now due to the views of some of the most vocal, perhaps it’s right? Perhaps it’s also right that the same negativity should be shown towards someone considering themselves a liberal, or a right winger?

However it’s all a sideshow really because the issue being discussed here is the issue of sexual assault AND harassment. Should we really be accepting of this kind of thing? Should someone doing their job/volunteering really have to put up with (to use my example above) repeated comments from complete strangers about what they’d do to a “pretty young girl in uniform”? Or accept that being groped by a stranger is just part and parcel with going on a night out, or that it’s socially acceptable for someone with (financial/physical etc) power over them to be able to pressure you into a sexual/innapropriate relationship.

That’s the real issue at hand, and while people can make light of things by bringing up relatively isolated incidents of where things don’t seem so cut and dry, or victim blame (she/he shouldn’t have put themselves in that position), or claiming that “they just **********” and that “they should get some thicker skin and realise it’s a joke” etc, there is still a real problem for a significant number of people, for some it’s day in, day out. Not just a random comment once a month, or an accidental “brush of the shoulder”.

 

[Malevolence]

Apparently, according to one of the women at work today, offering to buy a woman a drink in a bar is now sexist. And any bloke who does so should be reported to the police because they might be trying to get her drunk to take advantage. These deluded harridans are getting worse by the ******* minute.

Thankfully the majority of other girls in the place thought she was bat **** insane.

 

[CREATIVE!11]

Apparently, according to one of the women at work today, offering to buy a woman a drink in a bar is now sexist.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

Ok.....

 

[Caracus2k]

Who is “they”? And who would you consider mainstream feminists?

Unfortunately, as I previously mentioned, most so called feminists you actually hear about today are the ones with extreme/newsworthy viewpoints.

I have to ask if your actually serious? No really are you?

When the gender pay gap nonsense is parroted by people like the current prime minister of the UK and a very recent two term US president? How much more mainstream does it have to be? It's not the 'extremes' at all its a crucial tenet of modern feminism.....

Theresea May

"If you’re a woman, you will earn less than a man."

Barack Obama

But then to be honest you set out your stall when you called Trump an 'extremist' you may not like his politics but what he says is rather mainstream and he was elected by the majority of electoral college seats on the basis of it against 'more of the same but a bit slimier' Hillary

 

[RoboCod]

Apparently, according to one of the women at work today, offering to buy a woman a drink in a bar is now sexist. And any bloke who does so should be reported to the police because they might be trying to get her drunk to take advantage. These deluded harridans are getting worse by the ******* minute.

Thankfully the majority of other girls in the place thought she was bat **** insane.

Out of interest, what is her appearance?

 

[Malevolence]

Out of interest, what is her appearance?

Late 20s, brunette and very attractive (a solid 7/10). Crazy eyes though, looks like she's sucked the soul out of a mad cat lady.

 

[Narj]

She sounds like the type that has a moan and rolls her eyes when you hold the door open for her. Obviously because being polite means you're a mysoginistic sexual predator.

 

[Jean-F]

Late 20s, brunette and very attractive (a solid 7/10). Crazy eyes though, looks like she's sucked the soul out of a mad cat lady.

Be still my foolish heart, were I single, and a whole lot younger, she sounds right up my Strasse,
I’m reasonably sure that by applying some Amish type “gentle persuasion”, I could show her that
she’d been led astray by some warped minded feminists, who spoke with forked tongues.

 

[Amp34]

I have to ask if your actually serious? No really are you?

When the gender pay gap nonsense is parroted by people like the current prime minister of the UK and a very recent two term US president? How much more mainstream does it have to be? It's not the 'extremes' at all its a crucial tenet of modern feminism.....

Theresea May

"If you’re a woman, you will earn less than a man."

Barack Obama

So, is that quote correct?

Yes.

Have you taken it out of context? Probably.

If we must discuss the pay gap in this thread then let’s be clear. I generally agree with the points on it you’re making, BUT there are two seperate pay gaps that many people seem to misunderstand.

There’s that pay gap between two people doing the same job with the same experience, which is fairly minimal/non existent in general now (but still exists in some companies). Then there’s the pay gap you’re talking about. The general male/female pay gap that transcends industries. The debate regarding that is why are industries with predominantly female employees paid less than industries with predominantly male employees. Why is there such a defined boundary between them and why is there such a large sex gap between workers in certain industries.

These two pay gaps are generally pretty clearly separated by most non sensationalist news organizations and politicians.

It’s been discussed to death on this forum and I’m not going to continue discussing it in this thread, because it’s irrelevant to the point at hand, which is sexual assault and harassment.

But then to be honest you set out your stall when you called Trump an 'extremist' you may not like his politics but what he says is rather mainstream and he was elected by the majority of electoral college seats on the basis of it against 'more of the same but a bit slimier' Hillary

Except that’s a strawman, because if you read my post properly I didn’t call Trump an extremist. I said he had some pretty extreme “right” wing views. The fact you fail to see the similarity there is actually a good indicator of the bias in your viewpoint. If someone with some extreme “right” wing viewpoints says something then of course they don’t represent all people with right wing viewpoints, yet if a self declared feminist says something then it’s what the majority think? Think about that for a moment.

Edit: And in case you missed it with your defence of Trump, it has nothing to do with any individual, but the premise. An outspoken minority does not necessarily represent the views of the majority that fall under the same political grouping. It could be any vocal person whatever the side of the argument they sit on, left, right, liberal, feminist etc.

 

[SpeedFreak]

A woman touched my knee at work today. I wasn't offended because she was attractive. If she was ugly I would have been outraged.

 

[Caracus2k]

So, is that quote correct?

Yes.

Have you taken it out of context? Probably.

Did you miss the hyperlink to May's full speech and the YouTube link to all of Obama's? There so the context can be seen.

Just talking about May's speech the comment I highlighted can at best be described as highly misleading and in the context of a planned pre written speech cannot be excused as a clumsy usage of English on the spot.

And as for your Trump nonsense someone with extreme views is by definition an extremist....

extremist
ɪkˈstriːmɪst,ɛkˈstriːmɪst/
noun
derogatory

1. a person who holds extreme political or religious views,

So I don't think many people are going to take you at face value in your claim to not be calling him an extremist by virtue of you not actually using the word 'extremist' but by saying that he was a person who holds extreme views... Pure sophistry on your part

'Most people with right wing viewpoints dont share many/most/all of the more extreme views that Hopkins and Trump do'

Trump and Hopkins for that matter are quite mainstream in their expressed views if your politics lean right as opposed to being on the 'left' or 'centre'.