'Online Misogyny' Set To Be Outlawed

[XPertByExperien]

Meh, during the first lockdown I wore masks, and still ended up getting COVID, even after at least 2 vaccine jabs! So I have living proof that the enforced wearing of "face nappies" was, and still is, a total fallacy.

 

 

[Mister M]

1 minute ago, XPertByExperien said:

Meh, during the first lockdown I wore masks, and still ended up getting COVID, even after at least 2 vaccine jabs! So I have living proof that the enforced wearing of "face nappies" was, and still is, a total fallacy.

 

 

Just because you ended up getting covid, even though you wore masks, and had 2 vaccine jabs doesn't mean that the 'enforced wearing of face nappies' is a total fallacy. 

Nowhere did it say, or does it say, that face masks are 100% effective against the transmission or catching of the virus.

Anyway this thread is about online misogyny.

 

[leviathan13]

31 minutes ago, XPertByExperien said:

Meh, during the first lockdown I wore masks, and still ended up getting COVID, even after at least 2 vaccine jabs! So I have living proof that the enforced wearing of "face nappies" was, and still is, a total fallacy.

 

 

And, yet, i wore a mask and am double vaccinated and i never caught it...

[XPertByExperien]

37 minutes ago, leviathan13 said:

And, yet, i wore a mask and am double vaccinated and i never caught it...

You probably don't have underlying health conditions such as type 2 Diabetes like I do

Also, as of last October I am now quadruple vaccinated.

 

 

Edited February 16, 2023 by XPertByExperien

[leviathan13]

17 hours ago, XPertByExperien said:

You probably don't have underlying health conditions such as type 2 Diabetes like I do

Also, as of last October I am now quadruple vaccinated.

 

 

That wouldn't stop me catching it, it would just reduce the severity.

 

The point is, you're saying the masks were useless in your experience and i'm saying the opposite is true in my experience.

 

I also didn't have a load of other bugs and viruses that i'd normally get.

[Chekhov]

This could probably do with its own thread, but it's near enough to put on here and avoid another.

 

The Times Mon 20 Feb 23 p2

Abusers will go on [a] register in crackdown to protect women.

Domestic abusers face being put on a register of offenders and electronically tagged under new government proposals.

Violence against women and girls will be categorised will also be categorised as a national threat by teh home secretary today, pressuring police to tackle the problem.

Forces will have to treat the issue ["domestic abuse"] in the same way as terrorism, organised crime and child abuse as they attempt to rebuild public trust in the wake of scandals and falling convictions.

However, Farah Nazeer, chief executive at "Women's Aid" said the measures need to go [even] further.

 

Seriously ?

Domestic abuse is as serious as terrorism or child abuse ?

 

Apart from the obvious issues of proportionality and cost, there are at least two problems with this I can see straight away :

 

1 - More men than women suffer from violence and murder (far more in the case of the latter). So why this emphasis on women's violence ?

2 - If the police are required to give this greater time and effort they will obviously have to spend less time and effort on other things, like burglary for instance.

 

I am certain there will be the usual suspects on here who will be delighted at all this but one wonders of they would be better off just going the whole hog campaigning for everyone (or all men at any rate......) to have to have a DBS check every year and the results to be posted Online for everyone to access.

[Mister M]

50 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

This could probably do with its own thread, but it's near enough to put on here and avoid another.

 

The Times Mon 20 Feb 23 p2

Abusers will go on [a] register in crackdown to protect women.

Domestic abusers face being put on a register of offenders and electronically tagged under new government proposals.

Violence against women and girls will be categorised will also be categorised as a national threat by teh home secretary today, pressuring police to tackle the problem.

Forces will have to treat the issue ["domestic abuse"] in the same way as terrorism, organised crime and child abuse as they attempt to rebuild public trust in the wake of scandals and falling convictions.

However, Farah Nazeer, chief executive at "Women's Aid" said the measures need to go [even] further.

 

Seriously ?

Domestic abuse is as serious as terrorism or child abuse ?

 

Apart from the obvious issues of proportionality and cost, there are at least two problems with this I can see straight away :

 

1 - More men than women suffer from violence and murder (far more in the case of the latter). So why this emphasis on women's violence ?

2 - If the police are required to give this greater time and effort they will obviously have to spend less time and effort on other things, like burglary for instance.

 

I am certain there will be the usual suspects on here who will be delighted at all this but one wonders of they would be better off just going the whole hog campaigning for everyone (or all men at any rate......) to have to have a DBS check every year and the results to be posted Online for everyone to access.

I read that on average 2 women are killed each week by violent partners in the UK, and 3 die each week by suicide - suspected as a consequence of domestic abuse. That's awful.

I'll take it at face value that more men are killed each week. But it's not either or. The police are able to have a strategy of tackling domestic violence, and violence against men for what ever reason.

I guess the link with child abuse is made because in a domestic situation, children maybe present, and see one of their parents being repeatedly hit and punched. That must be an awful thing for the child to see, and a burden placed on them. I don't know off hand, but I'm sure there will be research looking at the long term impact on a child of witnessing their parent being terrorised in this way. 

With regards to a register of domestic abusers. If there is evidence that people who do this, keep repeating the same pattern of behaviour then there needs to be one kept. It's not about gloating, it's just a necessary evil. But I'm clear that the responsibility for this lies with the perpetrator of the abuse.

Edited February 21, 2023 by Mister M

[The_DADDY]

8 minutes ago, Mister M said:

I read that on average 2 women are killed each week by violent partners in the UK, and 3 die each week by suicide - suspected as a consequence of domestic abuse. That's awful.

I'll take it at face value that more men are killed each week. But it's not either or. The police are able to have a strategy of tackling domestic violence, and violence against men for what ever reason.

I guess the link with child abuse is made because in a domestic situation, children maybe present, and see one of their parents being repeatedly hit and punched. That must be an awful thing for the child to see, and a burden placed on them. I don't know off hand, but I'm sure there will be research looking at the long term impact on a child of witnessing their parent being terrorised in this way. 

My bold.

I know a lad who's been having counselling for the last 7 years because of that very thing.

Nightmares are commonplace, this has led to depression and self harming.

[Mister M]

1 minute ago, The_DADDY said:

My bold.

I know a lad who's been having counselling for the last 7 years because of that very thing.

Nightmares are commonplace, this has led to depression and self harming.

I'm not surprised to be honest.

I know there's a common saying, particularly said when children have experienced something distressing that "children are resilient", not always, and not in every situation.

[Delayed]

1 hour ago, Chekhov said:

This could probably do with its own thread, but it's near enough to put on here and avoid another.

 

The Times Mon 20 Feb 23 p2

Abusers will go on [a] register in crackdown to protect women.

Domestic abusers face being put on a register of offenders and electronically tagged under new government proposals.

Violence against women and girls will be categorised will also be categorised as a national threat by teh home secretary today, pressuring police to tackle the problem.

Forces will have to treat the issue ["domestic abuse"] in the same way as terrorism, organised crime and child abuse as they attempt to rebuild public trust in the wake of scandals and falling convictions.

However, Farah Nazeer, chief executive at "Women's Aid" said the measures need to go [even] further.

 

Seriously ?

Domestic abuse is as serious as terrorism or child abuse ?

 

Apart from the obvious issues of proportionality and cost, there are at least two problems with this I can see straight away :

 

1 - More men than women suffer from violence and murder (far more in the case of the latter). So why this emphasis on women's violence ?

2 - If the police are required to give this greater time and effort they will obviously have to spend less time and effort on other things, like burglary for instance.

 

I am certain there will be the usual suspects on here who will be delighted at all this but one wonders of they would be better off just going the whole hog campaigning for everyone (or all men at any rate......) to have to have a DBS check every year and the results to be posted Online for everyone to access.

Yep it's so annoying not being able to grope your partner and then smack them about a bit without any consequences.

 

Snowflakes 

Edited February 21, 2023 by Delayed