Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Ogdibus]

.

[Max White]

What quotes exactly are you referring to then?

[penguinofhonor]

I'm becoming convinced that you found an article, read only the headline, and are now playing a game to see how much of it you can get people to read to you. To humor you, though:

Farrell has published many controversial statements to which protesters responded. In his book The Myth of Male Power Farrell wrote, “Before we began calling it date rape...we called it exciting,” to which a protester’s sign responded “Date rape is not ‘exciting.’”

A video from ABC on Farrell’s website describes an argument from his book Why Men Earn More, as “women make less because they want different jobs.” During the rally, a representative of Steelworkers Local 1998, who represents 6800 workers across several campuses, responded, “If you consider just the one issue of pay equity, you understand that women in Ontario and Canada are earning seventy-one cents on the dollar for the equivalent kind work that men are doing.”

[Max White]

Except neither of those things are from this meeting... First is from a book, second is from a webpage.

[palsch]

A mens rights speech gets protested by feminists. Just for being a mens rights speech.

For being a group that had, in their previous event, invited along a man who suggested that continuing after a woman said no to sex was 'exciting' rather than rape.

Who had, after people protested that first event, posted photos and solicited names and contact details of the women who had been protesting. These lead to women who protested being targeted for public and private harassment.

Yes, people were pissed that they were still active. Because they regard that kind of thing as beyond the pale. It's not uncommon for people to protest the very fact that someone was invited to speak or the existence of a reprehensible group rather than the content, and often those protests slip over the line into silencing.

An older example; when Oxford Union invited Nick Griffin (leader of the BNP) and David Irving (famous holocaust denier) to take part in a debate, there were incredibly disruptive protests. Their goal wasn't to show opposition to Griffin and Irving, but to try to shut down the event entirely. The event itself was a greater offence - and had a greater impact - than any of the words that might have been said from the podium.

I generally don't agree with shutting down any group or debate, but do accept that groups who offer people platforms for their views should be judged by those views. If those views are not compatible with a safe environment for others then they should be rejected from that environment. I'd like to imagine that universities should be such safe environments.

[Max White]

Well I'm not going to defend this Farrell guy, he sounds like a jerk, but I will defend his right to express his views. When a mens rights conference gets shut down, people care a lot less than if a womans rights conference was shut down.

[kahn1234]

Society?  Human beings?  So power is evenly distributed among all individuals of the species?

The world modern feminism set out to destroy never existed.

You can go as far back as you want. Females were NOT oppressed.

[kahn1234]

Well, there were those quotes.

scare quotes that the feminists cherry picked and twisted. if you actually read his books, they say no such thing.

and it was about date rape, not rape in general.

As in, date rape, where the woman gets so smashed off her face drunk she can barely stand yet still has consensual sex (i dont care if you are drunk or not, unless the man specifically set out tor ape her or spiked her drink with drugs).

[Frumple]

Uh. Wow. Yeah, someone just failed their Knowledge (History) check. I think that was a natural one with a major penalty

[Max White]

Females were NOT oppressed.

I would disagree.
They were never a minority, and never had things as bad as say, certain racial groups (And being a female of one of this groups is a terrible place to stand in history) but yea, they were oppressed, and still are.
There are nations today where a woman earns the death penalty for being raped. It is sick beyond reason. I'm pretty confident women have always had it worse than men.

[kahn1234]

Uh. Wow. Yeah, someone just failed their Knowledge (History) check. I think that was a natural one with a major penalty

Females were NOT oppressed.

I would disagree.
They were never a minority, and never had things as bad as say, certain racial groups (And being a female of one of this groups is a terrible place to stand in history) but yea, they were oppressed, and still are.
There are nations today where a woman earns the death penalty for being raped. It is sick beyond reason. I'm pretty confident women have always had it worse than men.

I'll elaborate. the Countries in which that happens are ruled by religion (and a very barbaric one at that). I didnt take religion into account.

What i meant was (and i will start in the ancient period) that women were allowed to do jobs, they were payed, and in many cases payed well. They couldn't vote, but then again 99% of people couldn't vote, regardless of gender. They were important in all walks of like in the ancient era and were, in many cases as important if not more important as men in many aspects of life, especially religious and politics.

The rulers (as well as advisors, nobles and other important people) in the ancient world had their wife's as their best advisers, confidantes etc. Entire tribes treated their women equally as the men (especially in Germanic and Gallic tribes). Many tribes had women who went into battle partners with their husbands, weilding weapons and fighting alongside them. the Romans recorded this as quite commons, especially amongst the western and central german tribes.

IN the Dark ages and the Medieval ages, things were still like this. Women were valued. Not just for their child baring capacity, but for their friendship, love and their percieved purity. They were kept from the battlefield as many men saw women as a counter to a life of sin (especially knights and professional soldiers thought this way). Women were kept in safe areas (yes, sometimes agaisnt their will, i will concede) and as far away from danger as possible and were protected/escorted by their husbands/brothers/fathers as their families were worried and wanted to protect them. The medieval ages was a dangerous place and a woman on her own was very vulnerable, and were usually targeted by criminals.

This was the same throughout the medieval ages, the Renaissance and the Industrial revolution. Women were highly valued as partners, friends, childbearers and important parts of the community and family. If you look at the letters written by women throughout the 1500-late 1800's, they were happy with their lot. they knew they were important as they knew they were the ones responsible for the next generation of thinkers, engineers, scientists, soldiers, military leaders and politicians. They knew they were extremely important in society and many men, through manners, chivalry and gentlemanly behaviour recognised this. they respected women. they wanted to do their best to PROTECT women.

They may not have been able to vote (the same as most men) but they were important, and, in Britain anyway, they received the vote at the same time as the common man (the 1860's. proven by the fact there were females on the voting register at the time).

Unless the country was severely religious, their lot was nowhere near as bad as they make out.

Even today, the Feminists arguments do not stand up. The continued feminisation of things such as education (again, using Britain as an example) in the switch to modeler education (which favours females) at the behest of do-or-die 4 hour long exams (at the end of two-3 years on everything/anything that could have been covered in those three years) which both sexes did very well on is just one example of the damage feminism is doing.

Boys aren't allowed to be boys and usual male pass times are demonised (such as fighting, rough play etc).

They are payed the same, at least at the start. I will pay anyone 1000 great british pounds if they can find a job advertisement that has one wage for a female and another for a male. The difference in pay is due to the proven fact that men chase pay rises more aggressively than women, and thus receive them more often.

[Zangi]

Uh. Wow. Yeah, someone just failed their Knowledge (History) check. I think that was a natural one with a major penalty

Females were NOT oppressed.

I would disagree.
They were never a minority, and never had things as bad as say, certain racial groups (And being a female of one of this groups is a terrible place to stand in history) but yea, they were oppressed, and still are.
There are nations today where a woman earns the death penalty for being raped. It is sick beyond reason. I'm pretty confident women have always had it worse than men.

I'll elaborate. the Countries in which that happens are ruled by religion (and a very barbaric one at that). I didnt take religion into account.

What i meant was (and i will start in the ancient period) that women were allowed to do jobs, they were payed, and in many cases payed well. They couldn't vote, but then again 99% of people couldn't vote, regardless of gender. They were important in all walks of like in the ancient era and were, in many cases as important if not more important as men in many aspects of life, especially religious and politics.

The rulers (as well as advisors, nobles and other important people) in the ancient world had their wife's as their best advisers, confidantes etc. Entire tribes treated their women equally as the men (especially in Germanic and Gallic tribes). Many tribes had women who went into battle partners with their husbands, weilding weapons and fighting alongside them. the Romans recorded this as quite commons, especially amongst the western and central german tribes.

IN the Dark ages and the Medieval ages, things were still like this. Women were valued. Not just for their child baring capacity, but for their friendship, love and their percieved purity. They were kept from the battlefield as many men saw women as a counter to a life of sin (especially knights and professional soldiers thought this way). Women were kept in safe areas (yes, sometimes agaisnt their will, i will concede) and as far away from danger as possible and were protected/escorted by their husbands/brothers/fathers as their families were worried and wanted to protect them. The medieval ages was a dangerous place and a woman on her own was very vulnerable, and were usually targeted by criminals.

This was the same throughout the medieval ages, the Renaissance and the Industrial revolution. Women were highly valued as partners, friends, childbearers and important parts of the community and family. If you look at the letters written by women throughout the 1500-late 1800's, they were happy with their lot. they knew they were important as they knew they were the ones responsible for the next generation of thinkers, engineers, scientists, soldiers, military leaders and politicians. They knew they were extremely important in society and many men, through manners, chivalry and gentlemanly behaviour recognised this. they respected women. they wanted to do their best to PROTECT women.

They may not have been able to vote (the same as most men) but they were important, and, in Britain anyway, they received the vote at the same time as the common man (the 1860's. proven by the fact there were females on the voting register at the time).

Unless the country was severely religious, their lot was nowhere near as bad as they make out.

That totally sounds like what you would be taught in a grade school history class, laced with propaganda. 

Like how you can teach kids that your country/people never committed genocide... and instead putting things in a positive light.  Then reality, knowledge shatters that illusion later on... or maybe not.  People can be thickheaded.

[Ogdibus]

.

[kahn1234]

That totally sounds like what you would be taught in a grade school history class, laced with propaganda. 

Like how you can teach kids that your country/people never committed genocide... and instead putting things in a positive light.  Then reality, knowledge shatters that illusion later on... or maybe not.  People can be thickheaded.

Or you could actually do some research instead of dismissing things you dont like with insults. (which is a typical feminists response to criticism and things they dont like to hear, by the way)

[Kansa]

The fact about the women being able to vote at the same time as men in Britain is simply not true, women were not give the vote until 1918 after the first world war and even then their minimum voting age was higher than the men's one.

Oh and the reason that male pass times such as fighting are being demonized is that they can actually hurt people when they are done, stuff that is usually considered female pass times don't usually end up with someone getting hurt