Cyclone Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 I haven't said that. The only person I've accused of being anti-feminist is Frank Sidney, in response to his claim that feminists are 'bunny boilers.' anti feminist seemed to be throw around quite freely throughout the thread, although I didn't say that you specifically had said it. It appeared to me that everyone who disagreed with just two vocal posters and said that this was a non issue was accused of anti-feminism, not being pro feminist or other similar phrases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted February 7, 2012 Author Share Posted February 7, 2012 You're a lesbian and a feminist? I am disturbed by your comment and the police have been called:rant: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 Yes, I do understand that but I do not agree with them, for reasons that I have already outlined. I also do not see this as a valid reason for not raising such issues, as that would be tantamount to bullying. That said, my experience is whatever the issue, great or small, the insults will always flow as flies round the proverbial. That is the nature of the beast. I also believe that people have the right to be offended by anything without being labelled as mad, lesbians, ugly etc. I am not evern sure that Green was personally offended, my reading of the issue is that she felt the Top Totty Ale was inappropriate and I agree it is. That does not automatically mean that either she or I are personally offended by it. So if I'm offended by... sheep in fields... or the phallic shape of cones on the road, nobody should call me mad? Despite the fact that I clearly would be? People do not have a right to be offended, and if they seek to take offence where none is present I think everyone should have the right to call them mad. Maybe not lesbian and ugly, that would really depend on their sexual orientation and their lack of good lucks and is probably not relevant anyway, but mad, definitely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jessica23 Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 anti feminist seemed to be throw around quite freely throughout the thread, although I didn't say that you specifically had said it. It appeared to me that everyone who disagreed with just two vocal posters and said that this was a non issue was accused of anti-feminism, not being pro feminist or other similar phrases. I know this isn't directed specifically at me, but since I'm clearly one of the two 'vocal posters' you're referring to, I'll repeat myself: my first post on here said effectively that this was a minor issue. The vast majority of what I posted after that was related to the insults about feminism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suffragette1 Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 anti feminist seemed to be throw around quite freely throughout the thread, although I didn't say that you specifically had said it. It appeared to me that everyone who disagreed with just two vocal posters and said that this was a non issue was accused of anti-feminism, not being pro feminist or other similar phrases. I used the term anti-feminist as there was plenty of anti-feminist sentiment expressed in a number of posts, as evidenced by a plethora of insults aimed at not on Green but those who either support or do not disagree with her. So if I'm offended by... sheep in fields... or the phallic shape of cones on the road, nobody should call me mad? Despite the fact that I clearly would be? People do not have a right to be offended, and if they seek to take offence where none is present I think everyone should have the right to call them mad. Maybe not lesbian and ugly, that would really depend on their sexual orientation and their lack of good lucks and is probably not relevant anyway, but mad, definitely. I would not bracket those examples in with Top Totty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrod Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 Are we seriously at a stage on this forum now where reasoned debate in the face of insults and ridicule is getting presented as some kind of ganging up or bullying effort? Conrod and cressida, either engage with the debate or not as you see fit. The meta-commentary isn't adding anything. In fairness I treid to do that, but was set upon by some old harridan who took the exchange straight to personal insults, so I thought it better to stay out of handbag range and just chuck the odd jar of petrol on the fire from a safe distance. Far too much in the way of spit, claws and hissing going on round here for it to be safe for a chap to join in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
splodgeyAl Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 In fairness I treid to do that, but was set upon by some old harridan who took the exchange straight to personal insults, so I thought it better to stay out of handbag range and just chuck the odd jar of petrol on the fire from a safe distance. Far too much in the way of spit, claws and hissing going on round here for it to be safe for a chap to join in. You tried to do that by suggesting she needed to get laid. That's thoughtful debate in your world is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suffragette1 Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 I think both points are perfectly valid and both are good reasons to leave things alone. Another reason I disagree with her actions is that I think wherever possible the state should stay out of our lives. Regulation is necessary in many instances but this would not be one. If you and she were not offended, and neither were the majority of the voting public would she have been right to interfere with it? Also what exactly has she achieved here. The beer she was disturbed by has had a great load of free publicity and the anti-feminists around have had a field day, it also seems she has annoyed a lot of women (although thats just from various unscientific polls). What has it achieved? The inappropriate beer tap was swiftly removed. The ensuing brouhaha has highlighted how much misogyny is still present. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jessica23 Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 What has it achieved? The inappropriate beer tap was swiftly removed. The ensuing brouhaha has highlighted how much misogyny is still present. Precisely so. I said lots of pages back that the reaction was more interesting than the incident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 What has it achieved? The inappropriate beer tap was swiftly removed. The ensuing brouhaha has highlighted how much misogyny is still present. The very fact that the establishment caved in to this ridiculous demand shows that some people are scared of being labelled misogynist simply for standing up for common sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.