"Slutwalks" in N. America

[Frank Sidney]

You stated in an earlier post that you were aware that there were far more derogatory terms for women based around sexuality and sexual behaviour than there are for men.

 

Why do you believe that is? You've stated also on this thread that you believe society is misandrist. How do you square that belief with the idea that there are far more derogatory terms to describe women's sexual behaviour than mens?

 

Because historically women have been treated more derogatory than men. Unfortunately, men not of the past shouldn't have to keep apologising for what's happened in the past.

 

The boot is very much on the other foot now and men are the ones who are discriminated against. But the worm is beginning to turn...

[Frank Sidney]

I have to say, the mere presence of certain posters arguing against the misogyny, informs me that I'm on the right side of the debate.

 

You're only on that side of the debate because you're scared of your lass..

[Frank Sidney]

What do the feminists think to this?

 

http://www.disinfo.com/2011/02/one-out-of-ten-people-werent-fathered-by-the-man-they-believe-is-dad/

[Streamline]

You stated in an earlier post that you were aware that there were far more derogatory terms for women based around sexuality and sexual behaviour than there are for men.

 

Why do you believe that is? You've stated also on this thread that you believe society is misandrist. How do you square that belief with the idea that there are far more derogatory terms to describe women's sexual behaviour than mens?

 

 

No I didn't I was responding to the person's unsubstantiated claims that there were more derogatory terms for women based around sexuality. In my opinion this is probably something to do with women and childbirth out of wedlock and historical pre contraception and benefits.

 

Second part of your question I’ll answer with a question, why have men been forced to work longer for a pension and also receive it later in life yet tend to die younger?

[Halibut]

No I didn't I was responding to the person's unsubstantiated claims that there were more derogatory terms for women based around sexuality. In my opinion this is probably something to do with women and childbirth out of wedlock and historical pre contraception and benefits.

 

Second part of your question I’ll answer with a question, why have men been forced to work longer for a pension and also receive it later in life yet tend to die younger?

 

Tend to die younger than what? Giant tortoises? Goats?

[Halibut]

Because historically women have been treated more derogatory than men. Unfortunately, men not of the past shouldn't have to keep apologising for what's happened in the past.

 

The boot is very much on the other foot now and men are the ones who are discriminated against. But the worm is beginning to turn...

 

How so Frank?

[Suffragette1]

Plenty of men with mental illness are in prison so that doesn't really wash, I would say the majority of false allegations are just malicious, your words reveal that you seem to think these women should receive special treatment.

 

Nobody has lost sight of anything and i find it quite worrying you trot out things like more men acquitted for rape than wrongly imprisoned for a crime they did not commit.

 

You don't think "all" of these men who were acquitted are still rapists do you?

 

Please back this up with some hard evidence.

 

These acedemics can you please provide some information on who they work for?

 

Do I see evidence of misogyny on this thread? None whatsoever but I see a lot of misandry.

 

Plenty of men have throughout history got away with violence against women on the grounds that women provoke them to act in a heinous way.

 

How you have managed to infer that my words reveal women who make false allegations deserve special treatment is beyond me. You are the one making false claims here.

 

I 'trot out worrying facts' that more men walk away from rape, unprosecuted, unreported, acquitted than there are women who make false allegations which result in a man being wrongly imprisoned for rape - that is correct - why is this worrying? The hard evidence is there in the reported, attrition and conviction statistics. I provided a link to the Rape Crisis website. I do not for one moment believe that men who are acquitted are all innocent, no, particularly as the system is heavily weighted in their favour.

 

Over 80% of rapes occur with the accused known to the victim. Familiarity and the issue of consent does make the process tricky but, again, as Sue Lees revealed, monitoring of courts, revealed the same men appearing again and again accused of acquiantance rape - only to be freed.

 

Ooops, so many women liars out there picking on the same men, time and time again.

 

I also mentioned Liz Kelly and Sue Lees, both respected academics who have done a lot of research into rape and the criminal justice system.

 

Angry About Rape

Angry Harry Replies to a Woman Correspondent

 

 

 

K: If a man wanders alone into a dangerous area where gangs are known to operate, and is brutally beaten... should he be told it's his fault because he shouldn't have been acting so unsafely?

 

AH: If a man knows that he is doing something that is likely to lead to an unhappy circumstance, then he deserves less sympathy should that unhappy circumstance arise.

 

People must bear some responsibility for the outcomes of their actions. This is the only way in which the world can operate properly.

 

Indeed, insurance companies will not insure your goods if you do not take proper care to secure them. And I imagine that if you kept going up to black men and tweaking them on the nose saying "Hi Nig###!" I doubt that a judge will be very sympathetic towards you over the occasional beatings you might receive. He will assume that you bear some responsibility for what has happened to you. And, in my view, the same should be true when it comes to matters of sex-assault.

 

It is all a question of degree.

 

Many women, however, seem to wish to take no responsibility for their behaviour. They seem to think that they should be able to flaunt their sexuality all over the place – in order to incite men – and then they think that they have the right to claim that they are victims when some men respond to them in a manner which is absolutely consistent with the message that they, themselves, have been sending out.

 

In my view, women who set out to entice men sexually bear more responsibility for sexual assaults against them than do women who do not set out to entice men sexually. And this should be reflected in the law.

 

K: Why should a woman NOT have the right to wear what she pleases?

 

AH: For the same reason that men do not go to work with their dicks hanging out of their trousers.

 

I tell you what; try wearing a Nazi helmet whenever you go out. See if other women agree with your right to wear what you want.

 

Furthermore, since you are soooooooo concerned about rape, should you not be advising women to dress more carefully, rather than promoting the opposite?

 

K: Are men such animals that if they see a woman dressed provocatively, they'll have no choice but to rape her?

 

AH: That is a stupid question. And so...

 

Are women such sluts that they think that they are entitled to foist their sexuality on to every passing member of the public?

 

Are women so mind-boggling stupid that they cannot see that flagrantly enticing men sexually might bring about consequences?

 

What makes women think that they have the right to overtly sexually stimulate men who happen to be in the vicinity whereas if men did a similar thing in response – perhaps with their hands – they could be prosecuted?

 

When women stick out their sexual organs uninvited into men's vision then this is not much different from men sticking out their hands uninvited for a grope. After all, in both cases they are merely trying to elicit a sexual response in the other party in the best way that they know how.

 

Let me put it this way. You do not have the right to wind me up sexually at your convenience – particularly so if I would get into trouble for responding even marginally to your enticement; i.e. to what I might see as your 'request'.

 

K: Are men unable to merely look and enjoy the view without having to have sex with her?

 

AH: Another stupid question. And so...

 

Many men do not enjoy the view. They do not like being sexually harassed. And my guess – and it is only a guess – is that in some instances where strangers rape provocatively-dressed women, they are doing so in order to teach them a lesson of some sort. They are saying, "Stop fu#cking around with my private and personal emotions." They are saying, "I see. So you want to turn me on without my permission, eh? Then let's see how you like it."

 

My guess is that they also do not like being taunted and provoked. They do not like 'sluts' continually dangling their juicy bits in front of them and saying, "But you can't have them," any more than you would like men dangling $10,000 bills in front of your nose wherever you go and saying, "Sorry, Honey, you aren't good looking enough for this kind of money."

 

Indeed, many men that I know are angered by the way in which women purposely provoke them by their clothing. And they are not prudes. They are not anti-porn, or anti-wild sex, or what have you, but they do not want unattainable sexually-provocative women stuck in their faces uninvited.

 

Others, like my good self, are more than happy to see women strutting their stuff.

 

But I do not think that women should presume that all men must be made to feel the same way – by some feminist decree. And I also do not see why women should feel that men are not entitled to feel offended by uninvited sexual displays.

 

Is it only women who can be offended in today's society?

 

Are men not permitted to feel offended?

 

Besides which, I know many women who do not appreciate the presence of sexually-provocative women in their midst.

 

Furthermore, we all have to accept that in order to safeguard our liberties, we have to tolerate many dysfunctional and/or unstable beings in our society, as well as those who are temporarily 'unbalanced' – for one reason or another. The alternative, in practice, is truly horrible. And, of course, some 20% of males have very low IQs. As such, I think that women are – as seems typical these days – being incredibly selfish if they believe that they are entitled to swirl up the passions of whomsoever they wish and then escape all responsibility for any negative consequences that might arise from the wrong kind of attention.

 

In a nutshell: People who go out of their way to provoke "an attack" are less deserving – should an attack materialise – than those who do not.

 

Most people would agree with this.

 

But Western women see themselves as so superior that they think they should be above such things. And they think that they should be able to provoke men – all men – as much as they like – and then take no responsibility!

 

(And this is true not just in the area of sex. It is true in many other areas.)

 

'Ollocks, I say.

 

Their own behaviour must be taken into account.

 

And, take it from me, it soon will be!

 

Now the above is what I call worrying.

 

I suggest that you familiarise yourself with some of the facts rather than myths about rape:

"Only certain types of women get raped"

 

It used to be thought that only certain 'types' of women got raped: women who were sexually active, 'provocative', or 'victims'. It was particularly argued that young, attractive women were the targets for rape because men seeing them were unable to control their impulses. In fact, women of all ages are raped, including children and grandmothers. Women are raped regardless of sexual experience - nuns, prostituted women, married women, women with lots of boyfriends, women who have never had sex, women with disabilities - no group of women is safe from the possibilities of sexual assault.

 

"Most complaints of sexual assault are false reports"

 

This argument relies on ideas such as women getting involved in situations with men and then changing their minds at the last minute, or regretting it the next morning. The most extreme version suggests that women cry rape when it was only sex that they regretted later or did not enjoy. Some of these beliefs come from the idea that women have historically claimed to have been raped in order to protect their reputation. Or because they do not wish to take responsibility for the fact that they 'took risks' by accepting an invitation for coffee or a lift. But there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that there are more false complaints of rape than other crimes. And logic suggests that the proportion is probably less than say for theft, which people often use to support a fraudulent insurance claim. There is no similar gain for a woman reporting rape - indeed why would anyone subject themselves to a lengthy interrogation about intimate violation, and a medical examination about something that did not happen?

 

"Women ask for it by the way they dress or their behaviour"

 

This argument suggests that women are responsible for sexually arousing men through their dress or 'flirting'. Some people believe that if women invite men in after a date or allow him to pay for dinner this means they are also agreeing to have sex. In some societies, even being alone or going out for the evening with a man can be regarded as tacit permission. But we all have the right to choose when and with whom we have sex, and no-one has the right to presume this - consent means free agreement, an agreement that is explicitly made between two people where there is no threat or coercion.

 

Implicit within this view is the idea that men cannot control their sexual desires, and also that women should know this and adapt their behaviour accordingly. Why do so many men feel comfortable with this view of themselves? It is insulting and demeaning to men who do not think that their penises operate independently of their brains.

 

Ref. Professor Liz Kelly is Director of this research unit.

[Frank Sidney]

 

 

Ooops, so many women liars out there.

 

Yes there are-

What do the feminists think to this?

 

http://www.disinfo.com/2011/02/one-out-of-ten-people-werent-fathered-by-the-man-they-believe-is-dad/

 

I note you have failed to comment on this. To be honest I'd rather be raped than discover a child wasn't mine after raising him/her for 16 years. Its deplorable.

 

Nobody has yet answered Danot's excellent post that asked if feminists would be happy for their 13 year old daughter to go out dressed as a "slut."

[Cyclone]

You've refused to define what dressing like a slut means haven't you, making it impossible to answer that question.

[quisquose]

I think it's fairly obvious to most people that whilst in the middle of a "debate" your only response is pull up a typo there must be something seriously wrong with your views.

 

If I have insulted you which I don't recall you have certainly contradicted yourself and continually calling people misogynists because they have a different view to is typical bullying behaviour.

 

I rarely pick on typo's, but your recollection that there was some sort of debate at the time is somewhat puzzling. For the purposes of clarification I will say that you have directed a number of insults at a number of people that don't share your misogynistic views. You might recall that the particular insult to me was a sexual one using rather childish language. My reply, in which I redefined the typo, was merely using humour to turn your attempt at an insult into a funny compliment. Needless to say, your next post consisted of more insults.

 

Sadly, it really does seem like the behaviour of a person who knows they are losing the argument.

 

 

Perhaps quisquose would like to go back to check the spelling of post 599 which he seems reluctant to answer. Very convenient.

 

You asked me a number of questions, which I answered as honestly as I could, but only led to further questions. By the time you got to #599 I had been subjected to some offensive comments and had pretty much given up on this thread. Again, despite my best efforts to answer your questions I notice a snide remark. This is becoming quite predictable.

 

Reading back, I can now see that your evolving questions are merely trying to prove some sort of hypocrisy in my position. I can tell you now, there is no hypocrisy in my position. I have a teenage daughter, and whilst her mother and myself might have had some influence on the way she dressed up until going to secondary school, I can tell you that we don't now ... and nor do we intend to. She is, money permitting, as free to wear what she wants as you and I are. She is her own person.

 

What I will add is that within my circle of female friends, with the exception of one who was 'flashed' at whilst she was in a school playground, I don't know of any that have been subjected to a serious sexual assault. This is despite the fact that they have all, on occasion, worn some pretty sexy clothing. This may be luck, it might be because they are sensible, because they are always aware of their circumstances, but most likely it is because they all have a instinctive aversion to unpleasant men. What I do know is that what they have chosen to wear has had nothing to do with their safety.

 

I would only be a hypocrite if I tried to prevent my daughter or my son from enjoying the same freedoms that their parents enjoyed. I will give them both the same advice that I was given; don't drink too much, stay together with your friends, look after each other, plan your way home, don't go with strangers, etc.