great way to end your argument,

by calling someone gay and transsexual as if there is something wrong with this. you're a fuckwit. you're an insecure misogynist that tries to use his bloke powers to slag off women.

The reason I brought up feminism is because of the FB comments I saw when this went viral (before the truth came out). Women automatically assume guilt because an infinitely small percentage of males are paedophiles. It's discrimination to do such a thing. To assume guilt without substance with such a damaging claim is horrific.

It is funny to see her hide behind her kids following the backlash. She's only apologising because she's been caught out 'imagining' things. She's only saying sorry because she's copping rightful abuse for jumping the gun and doing something stupid. Stupid doesn't cut it. Not knowing her FB wasn't private doesn't cut it.

This shit hurts families. Don't know about all the other Dads but I'd be cognisant of other peoples thoughts when in public, a simple cuddle could be misconstrued and all of a sudden you're defending yourself. If it were me I would take this lady to court and aim at setting precedence for any other person who slanders an innocent Dad. I don't know if there is, but there should be laws against this with repercussions for the slanderer.

It's the same as rape, this sort of mud always sticks.

Apparently there were death threats, I don't consider that rightful abuse. Yes, I 100% back the man in question if he pursues libel charges, and I support criticism of publicly lynching people on social media, but internet warriors take retaliation too far. The same happened to the guy before his side came out, it's not OK to threaten violence or retribution to people. We have a system that deals will real offenders and real offences. Maybe it is too lenient, or too ineffective (to use your rape example, far more rape victims don't get justice than there are victims of false rape complaints due to the burden of proof- in the justice system- being on the victim to prove lack of consent. The court of public opinion may be different, the public attention span is far shorter lived than a legal record is.) but it is how we deal with offenders as a society. Fix the system, don't endorse vigilantes.

As for your reason for bringing up feminism, it seems you are conflating feminism and misandry. They are not the same, no matter how much (male) internet people tell you they are :)

Death threats are too far. However, this stupid bitch could also be making them up looking for sympathy. She's already hiding behind her kids as it is :lol: She should go on TV and publicly apologise. She put his face all over the internet so why is she afforded the luxury of privacy?

The system is broken because people are soft and so is the justice system. The intention is not to screw them up so badly that following prison they're complete psychos. A noble pursuit I guess. However vigilantism will always persist when people feel that justice was not served. I watched some meth-head get fined $700 (tax payer funded) and get a 3 month suspended sentence for driving my car which was stolen. Because of our system, she was under no obligation to tell police where she got it from and where the rest of my stuff was. Therefore, I ended up out of pocket to get my stuff replaced and the waste of organs that got caught was no worse off.

The term feminism is incorrectly used as it is how many of the people I originally referred to self identify. They stand up for women aka: hate all men irrespective of literally anything.

Feminists can hate men, that doesn't mean that hating men is feminist. Football fans can instigate ethnic violence, that doesn't mean all ethnic violence is due to football.

Sure, you may have seen some self-identifying feminists acting in a manner that you construe as man-hating but call it out for man-hating not feminism, you are just damaging your own argument and fuelling the perpetual mill of ignorance regarding gender equality in the process.

I'm curious about what those seeking 'gender equality' are asking for.

What are your demands?

True but this is getting off the issue entirely. I'm all for gender equality in terms of respect, earnings and opportunities providing men and women are assessed under the same rules. This lady made a stupid call and is hiding behind her kids and common gender stereotypes (that a man taking a photo in the proximity of children must be a predator) to get away with bringing this mans image into disrepute.

She needs to be sued for all her worth. Maybe then she will think before she jumps to a conclusion that can be so damaging.

Edited by benelsmore: 12/5/2015 02:21:31 PM

Would you ask the same question of someone who wanted racial equality?

My personal issues, which I do not claim to be reflective of the movement as a whole, revolve around:

- the use of gendered language to reinforce masculine power structures and norms
- casual objectification of women visually/sexually
- archaic notions of what constitutes a family structure and roles within that structure
- inequitable pay structures for women, and inequitable leave structures for men
- inequitable distribution of gender in positions of power
- observation of dismissal of female authority in professional discourse

This list is purely in the gender sphere. Some of these points are also applicable to POC and LGBTI persons as well.

And I have much less issue with what you are saying here than what you lead with initially. I hope that at least you can see the basis for what I've been saying here and the take away is a little more consideration of how broad a brush you use to paint those you criticise, even if your core intention is sound?

As an aside, this is by far the most civil discussion of feminism I've had on this forum :lol:

lets focus on one at a time shall we? we'll do gender for now

how do you plan to implement reforms based on the above demands?

I carelessly glossed over a misinterpretation and described those concerned with a term of self-identification. I have no problem admitting it when I'm wrong.

You'd think in this day and age that gender equality wouldn't be an issue. In my job - Geotechnical Engineer, the only issues I've had with gender have been manual labour related. As in the petite geologist we had was incapable of doing the grunt work without assistance (carrying large soils samples and equipment etc.). The major issues we had were clients ringing and asking for her to come to site so they could perve on her...... Sad that it exists in this day and age.

Edited by benelsmore: 12/5/2015 02:39:18 PM

god forbid men should be allowed to admire the female form

we cant destroy the human species until we remove such desires from the psyche

This is the exact problem, men who can't disassociate between admiration and objectification.

It is OK to be attracted to women, and to find women beautiful.

It is not OK to judge a woman on her looks. To cat-call and make overt sexual approaches to women in the course of everyday life. To say things like "She's dumb but I'd fuck her" or "She's smart but fugly as hell". To ask Brad Pitt what his latest work is and then Angelina Jolie who she is wearing. To tell women they should smile more, because they will look prettier (as if being pretty is what they should aspire to be.) To use body shaming insults such as "ugly bitch" and "fat cow" to attack a woman, placing emphasis on their appearance. To do this in front of our sons, teaching them it's acceptable and granting implicit permission to do so to their female classmates. To start doing this to girls as young as primary school level. To recoil defensively when you have hurt or offended a woman and have the gall to tell her to "calm down, it's all a bit of fun."

The next time you feel the need to, say, comment on whether Mel McLaughlin is boneable stop and think about why you feel you need to say it. Do you really need to vocalise your opinion on her fuckability in a thread about her interviewing someone, or are you just trying to prove how manly and sexually dominant you are to the rest of the men in the thread?

As to your earlier post. All groundswell societal movements rely on education and evolution. It's why I flagellate myself here in the hope that some minor shifts in values can be fostered. If not in the people I debate, in those watching from the sidelines. I don't expect anyone to agree with me completely, nor do I claim to be the bulletproof paragon of moral decency, but hopefully the issues I raise prompt some thought as to how others outside the cis male gender feel about what we consider normal behaviour.

The problem also exists among feminists who cant disassociate between admiration and objectification.
ie they assume the first is always the latter.

You cant control how everyone thinks and communicates. If you think you're going to change the attitude of anyone by being an online 'activist' via social media or forums, then think again. You're wasting your time.

The very people you're targeting will not be open to accept your message.

I'll get back to this later, too busy now to devote subject time it requires.

What a load of crap, haha. Here's a cheat sheet for you: are you in a context where vocally assessing someone's beauty is acceptable - such as within your own relationship, at a singles mixer, on Tinder etc, or did they overtly give you permission to through words or actions (note: dressing "provocatively" or behaving in any way other than physically interacting with you does not count at all)? If not, you are objectifying. Feminist object to the male gaze in the context of everyday life where it is completely unwarranted.


I may not convert rusted on non-believers, but nothing will. They are the ones that must be dragged kicking and screaming into the modern world like the slave owners of the south ;) You can never control what people think, but you can control how they act by ensuring that a critical mass of society will push back against undesirable actions (again, see: racism.)

What a dissenting voice does is give agency to the other side of the story, and allow the more fair-minded observers to make a better informed decision. I don't fight my fight here, I fight my fight in my life and my world and this forum just happens to be somewhere I regularly am. Today I am discussing what it means to be feminist and my problems with the gender dynamic in society. Tonight I may run interference on the train home by starting a conversation about something harmless like sport with a guy who sits down next to a woman, who looks noticeably uncomfortable, and starts pushing her for conversation. Tomorrow I may be helping a female friend or co-worker skill up in my profession. Not all actions have to be as blunt or aggressive as argument. Be it making someone feel a little safer, or advocating for change in your own workforce, or even just checking what language you use can all make a difference.


I'm not targeting the wilfully deaf.

You're entitled to your opinion, but there is no pay discrimination against women. That's a feminist myth which has been well and truly debunked. If there really was an inequitable pay structure where women were paid less for the same work, every single business in the country would sack male staff and replace them with cheaper labour (ie women).

Basic commercial commonsense.

you miss my point ..im not homophobic . the reason why i said he might be Bruce Jenner is because he is so pro feminine that he decided to take the female form.
you misunderstand me. it wasnt meant as a slag towards gay people. or women or transgender. it was aimed specifically at mumbruz

Edited by Socawho: 12/5/2015 06:41:33 PM

Edited by Socawho: 12/5/2015 06:43:39 PM

If you're born with a penis, you're a man. If you're born with a vagina, you're a woman. End of.

Edited by 433: 12/5/2015 06:44:17 PM

Your entitled to your opinion, but you are citing a conspiracy theory. No it hasn't been debunked, yes women are paid less on average than men. Why isn't the workforce all female? Because there is a bias grounded in the notion that all women will get pregnant and take maternity leave, leaving the corporation understaffed and doomed to failure.

Currently in Australia, graduate females earn 4% less than graduate males. Note that number, it's lower than the real-term pay gap that is the cause of much hand-wringing by those who deny wage discrepancy because it is profession based, not overall (women earn less overall because they fill a greater percentage of lower paying jobs. That 4% is comparative to a male in the same job.) If (*if*) that young woman decides to have children, she is statistically more likely to be overlooked for career progression through promotion and thus further financially disadvantaged (conversely, fathers earn more than childless males of the same age!)

You want this to be a myth, you want it badly to be debunked because it doesn't fit comfortably in your world view, but it's the climate change denial of the gender discourse.

Sex v gender. Sex is your chromosomes (XX, XY, Intersex), gender is how you identify. The brain is a complex series of neural interactions and has little to do with your physical container.

You can be sexed male and gendered female, and vice-versa. You can even be non-gendered. Gender is more important than sex, and is far more complicated that your one line assertion.

lmao that's not even a real thing



So it's just a HUGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGE coincidence that most people with penises "identify" as men and people with vaginas "identify" as female.?

Sources?

Because here's mine

You may not have intended to slag off gay people, or women/trans people, but you did call the person you were attacking a "knob jockey". You are asserting being gay as an undesirable quality that lessens someone. That's attacking gay people, whether it was your intention or not.

As for the Jenner thing, ehhhhh. It's a tough one and you probably shouldn't have gone there in a public discourse. Suggesting that a man must either be a woman or want to be a woman to care about women's rights devalues these rights as something unimportant that a man shouldn't care about and can very easily be read in a bad way.

I for one don't believe you are homophobic, misogynistic, or inherently bigoted. I certainly don't know you well enough to make that call. You were, however, carelessly using a homophobic slur and it should be called out as such. Maybe not so harshly, but it's better than ignoring problematic language.

I'm sure you trust your opinion piece (that doesn't contradict what I said at all, just trivialises the fact there's a smaller gap) as gospel, but I trust the Australian Bureau of Statistics Census Data, which has no agenda and for two consecutive censuses had women earning between 4 and 8% less in the same occupation over 85% of occupations. I won't change your mind, but who'd expect that of someone who doesn't believe that intersex people exist when it is medically recognised.

As for gender identity, no it isn't a coincidence that cis gender is most common. The hormonal changes associated with sex influence but do not cause gender.

You are incredibly insular and close-minded. I feel sorry for you that you struggle so much to understand the problems of others.

About 1% of the population identify as the opposite gender. You could also say that most people with penises like to have sex with women. But not all people with penises do.

What if you're born with both?

Using any Hollywood examples is a bit ridiculous imo. Have you seen any talk shows/interviews involving Bradley Cooper, Ryan Gosling or Channing Tatum. It's literally just women screaming at them to take their clothes off, hosts encouraging it and hardly any discussion about their actual work. Then there's movies like Magic Mike etc.

Show me that PhD of yours in genetics please mate. Yet again you show yourself to be fucking clueless :lol:

You could literally saunter on over to Wikipedia to actually learn something, but instead I'm sure you'll keep spending your time spouting 100% scientifically incorrect shit like that.

On second thoughts removing words from the language may help someone like you communicate a bit more efficiently.
You have a tendency to ramble which makes focusing on any particular point of discussion difficult.

In an earlier post you made remarks which I now interpret as assumptive on how I (rather than the hypothetical I) might react.

You are way off the mark and I wouldnt describe your comments on this topic so far as fair minded.

Given you're not actually a woman, I dont think you can empathise to how a woman feels in different situations.

As for your points about when "the male gaze" is warranted and when it is not... you do realise many people meet their wives and partners in the working environment - one of those places you deem unacceptable to even look at the opposite sex.

Back to objectification, everyone is objectified. That's what happens when others know nothing about you.

The government objectifies you, your bank objectifies you and women very much objectify men whether for physical or financial reasons. edit: women also objectify women. Ever wonder why all the girls employed in dress shops are pretty? Because its better marketing. That's just the way the world works. This is a pointless argument which goes nowhere and will solve nothing.

If you havent been paying attention, a critical mass has pushed back against undesirable actions. We dealt with most of this 40 years ago. Its only stirred up now for political and corporate reasons. That is to the gain of political parties and corporate entities that exploit outrage. (which is largely based in appealing to narcissism rather than altruism. the me generation never ended... its gotten much worse)



Edited by ricecrackers: 12/5/2015 08:34:40 PM