Jessica23 Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 Oh dear now she hates the Daily Mail, the most popular British newspaper on the internet. By the way you can read about the losses here and the Guardian's tax fiddles. http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=guardian+lose+site%3Aorder-order.com%2F&hl=en&num=10&lr=&ft=i&cr=&safe=images&tbs= Guido Fawkes now! Your sources JUST GET CLASSIER. Anyone who doesn't hate the Daily Mail is just not reading it properly. Back on topic - Angry Harry and his misogynist drivel is not a credible source to cite in this or any other discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Streamline Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 Guido Fawkes now! Your sources JUST GET CLASSIER. Anyone who doesn't hate the Daily Mail is just not reading it properly. Back on topic - Angry Harry and his misogynist drivel is not a credible source to cite in this or any other discussion. You're gettiing BORING now but back on topic, your MISANDRIC DRIVEL is not "credible". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jessica23 Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 You're gettiing BORING now but back on topic, your MISANDRIC DRIVEL is not "credible". This is not how debate works, Streamline. You can't just flip a statement around and expect it to make sense, especially when I haven't posted a single thing on this or any other thread that anyone could describe as misandrist. Ever. And because this isn't adding anything to what was already a pretty sorry excuse for a debate, I'm going to leave it here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Streamline Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 This is not how debate works, Streamline. You can't just flip a statement around and expect it to make sense, especially when I haven't posted a single thing on this or any other thread that anyone could describe as misandrist. Ever. And because this isn't adding anything to what was already a pretty sorry excuse for a debate, I'm going to leave it here. Point is you haven't said anything except throw a hissy fit and a barrage of insults. That is not a debate. If you don't like it then change the record, it's that simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 But that's totally subjective. You are providing nothing but opinion. I will add that I have nothing against opinion and if personal opinion takes precedence over any evidence then maybe we should all retire from the thread and let the poll speak for itself.Skinz. I'm not only offering an opinion, I'm speaking from personal experience also. I've witnessed it first hand on far too many occasions to number, so whatever your source of statistical information is; it most probably isn't accurate. Think about it. When a women dresses provocatively she is effectively modelling herself on and mimicking the style of the commercially sexualised image of women. I'm not claiming to know whether she does it deliberately or inadvertently, although it wouldn't matter what her reason for doing it was as she'd still have given the impression that she's more game than other women who are casually dressed. I'm not saying she'd be at fault for dressing provocatively, I'm saying- based on my personal experiences of witnessing the way in which most men respond to provocatively dressed women, provocatively dressed women would most definitely be more likely to be approached, harassed, insulted or sexually assaulted than a casually dressed woman. It's not subjective, it's just the way it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 And people should avoid owning nice things so as to avoid thieves. I wonder if they've ever been the victim of crime and decided it was their own fault really for provoking it... The question asked by Kthebean was perfectly valid Cyclone. Why not try answering it instead of criticising it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evildrneil Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 I see what you are saying, however, in the mind of the average person, many of whom will at some point do jury service, the two are one and the same which is why these comments are so damaging and dangerous. You only have to look at the rants of that lunatic Angry Harry and I daresay that many people think like him. He is basically calling women who dress in a certain way 'teases' and in not so many words stating that if you prod a snake too much it will bite. Provocation. Provocation = mitigation. This inevitably results in victim blaming. I don't think that the two are one and the same in the minds of many at all. If anything it's is people like slutwalk who are confusing the two concepts and are more dangerous than the initial advice. The policeman at the origin of the whole furore said "women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimised" which is perfectly reasonable advice. He even used the word victim he did not in any way apportion blame but was simply giving sensible advice for a flawed women in a private meeting with a group of students. It was the slutwalk campaign who claimed that he was blaming women for sexual assault, which he quite clearly wasn't. Unless the hysteria can be toned down a bit it becomes impossible to have any sort of rational debate, instead you get extremists like Angry Harry and Dworkin-esque "feminists" shouting at each other. It is undoubtedly the case that your behaviour affects other's reactions to you and that in some cases it can be provocation but that whole area has become a taboo subject as any sane conversation simply has you jumped on and accused of misogyny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evildrneil Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 Excuse me Angryharry is no lunatic he speaks far more sense than I've ever heard any feminist speak that's for sure. I'm afraid you're onto a loser here - he is quite obviously a ranting lunatic with a chip on his shoulder so big he probably can't stand upright... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 The policeman at the origin of the whole furore said "women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimised" which is perfectly reasonable advice. If it was that perfect it wouldn't've sparked 40+ pages of us talking about it at the other side of the world, would it? You can call his motivations reasonable, many have, but to behave like this is all a storm in a teacup misses the point. I'd point out why but it'd all start again, and go round again, and everyone would have their 2 pence worth ... again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 If it was that perfect it wouldn't've sparked 40+ pages of us talking about it at the other side of the world, would it? You can call his motivations reasonable, many have, but to behave like this is all a storm in a teacup misses the point. I'd point out why but it'd all start again, and go round again, and everyone would have their 2 pence worth ... again. To avoid further argument why don't we all agree that you're right and wrap this one up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.