Women should be hit for wearing sexy clothing in public, one in seven believe.

[Juno]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article5875108.ece
One in seven people believe it is acceptable in some circumstances for a man to hit his wife or girlfriend if she is dressed in “sexy or revealing clothes in public”, according to the findings of a survey released today.

A similar number believed that it was all right for a man to slap his wife or girlfriend if she is “nagging or constantly moaning at him”.

The findings of the poll, conducted for the Home Office, also disclosed about a quarter of people believe that wearing sexy or revealing clothing should lead to a woman being held partly responsible for being raped or sexually assaulted.

Although a majority of 1,065 people over 18 questioned last month believe that it is never acceptable to hit or slap a woman, the poll found that those aged 25-39 were more likely to consider that there were circumstances in which it was acceptable to hit or slap a woman.

Men and women over 65 and those in the lower social class groups D and E are more likely to believe that woman should be held partly responsible for being raped or sexually assaulted, Ipsos Mori telephone poll found.

Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, said: “Violence against women and girls is unacceptable in any form no matter what the circumstances are.”

Ms Smith said that more needed to be done to challenge attitudes that condoned violence against women and girls.

Well, this is pretty sad.

[T4R0K]

BURQA TIEM !!!! :argh

[Diceman]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article5875108.ece


Well, this is pretty sad.

Indeed it is.
Hit on them ? Yes,maybe
Hit them? nope

[Mael]

This just in, one in seven people have completely forgotten the concept of chivalry and honor. :pek

[ShadowStep]

Indeed it is.
Hit on them ? Yes,maybe
Hit them? nope
Couldnt put it better myselfsmile-big

[Ice Cream]

Although a majority of 1,065 people over 18 questioned last month believe that it is never acceptable to hit or slap a woman, the poll found that those aged 25-39 were more likely to consider that there were circumstances in which it was acceptable to hit or slap a woman.


So they only surveyed 1,065 people?

Quite a low number to make this kind of statement. Oh well, guess
that can be said for any survey. =/

Kind of sad for people to think that way regardless.

[Wolfarus]

A bit suprised that this story came from the UK. Would be more understandable if it came from the ME. But the uk? :uwah

A woman can dress how she wants, provided she's ready and able to accept the consquences of her attire (aka if you dress like you're trying to sell yourself, dont bitch about the attention you get the guys)

Thinking its ok to hit your gf or wife just because she dresses badly, in your opinion, is idiotic and juvenile.

[BrianTheGoldfish]

That's higher than I'd have thought, and I'm a cynic. If you blame the victim in a rape case (for example), you're a fuckarse.

I wonder how many think women should be allowed to hit men? As a scrawny man whose ass could be kicked by a majority of women, I'm genuinely interested to know this.

[Gunners]

I would need to see the specific questions they asked people. Nagging is a vague term that can actually include slap worthy offences.

Rape situation, it's an ugly truth which no one really wants to hear. I personally think rape is a disgusting crime and offenders should be locked behind bars but there are preventive measures people can take but don't in some situations. I don't feel that they should be held liable for getting raped that's absurd. I do believe that people should take into account their surroundings as to minimise being a victim to any crime in general.

[Hi Im God]

Where's the study about it being ok for women to slap men?

Sexist study is sexist!

[erictheking]

Not really convinced at all this study is being honest.

Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, said: “Violence against women and girls is unacceptable in any form no matter what the circumstances are.”
lol.

[choco bao bao]

So they only surveyed 1,065 people?

Quite a low number to make this kind of statement. Oh well, guess
that can be said for any survey. =/
Actually, statisticians would beg to differ. If the people who were surveyed were chosen using a correct method (i.e. random selection), it's more or less reliable to estimate the population statistics using the sample size.

[korican04]

For some reason i'm not really surprised. And there is no reason for a woman to ever be raped. That's just f'ed up.

But if a female comes at me with a knife like this crazy girl did to a guy in college a couple years back i'm giving her a concussion.
(1000 people is good sample size if chosen correctly).

[Kyasurin Yakuto]

Geez. This is why us women are still not treated as fairly as we should be. -_-

[Juno]

I wonder how many think women should be allowed to hit men? As a scrawny man whose ass could be kicked by a majority of women, I'm genuinely interested to know this.

I'm curious too. The incidence of reported female on male domestic abuse has been rising over the years, and the men who come forward face a lot of scorn. It's a problem in itself that needs more campaigning to change attitudes towards male victims of abuse...

However, male on female domestic abuse will always be more common and is the cause of a third of all female homicides. The reality is that abuse goes both ways, yes, next to the other reality that abuse is targeted at women far more often to far more devastating consequences, and to treat the situation as equally affecting of men and women would be misleading. Unfortunately efforts to better this situation for women is almost always met with the attitude that the effort is anti-man or at the cost of male interests.

Rape situation, it's an ugly truth which no one really wants to hear. I personally think rape is a disgusting crime and offenders should be locked behind bars but there are preventive measures people can take but don't in some situations. I don't feel that they should be held liable for getting raped that's absurd. I do believe that people should take into account their surroundings as to minimise being a victim to any crime in general.

I agree, but this goes for all crimes and all potential victims. With rape in particular, a hell of a lot of - if not outright blame - the expectancy to lower the crime rate rests on the victims. As well intentioned as it may be, this attitude brings the behaviour of the victims under scrutiny, from what they wear, to where they go alone, to what they drink, as if it is the dark alleys and alcohol that rapes women.

Given previous statistics that show an alarming number of male college students do not realise that they have committed assault or rape, I have to wonder if it wouldn't be more effective to redirect the warnings against rape at rapists who do not understand issues of consent, instead of shaming victims for partaking in ordinary social practises.

[Aokiji]

Although a majority of 1,065 people over 18 questioned last month believe that it is never acceptable to hit or slap a woman

That's way more newsworthy.

Honestly, I hope some chick gives me a reason to exert my pimphand so much. :mad

[Grrblt]

Never acceptable to hit or slap a woman? I know tons of reasons. 6 of 7 are fucking stupid according to this survey.

[Amaretti]

I wonder if religious affiliation would have any interesting correlation to these results.

Never acceptable to hit or slap a woman? I know tons of reasons. 6 of 7 are fucking stupid according to this survey.

6 in 7 are fucking stupid because they don't consider sexy clothing an acceptable reason to hit women? :huh Seriously?

[Aokiji]

I wonder if religious affiliation would have any interesting correlation to these results.



6 in 7 are fucking stupid because they don't consider sexy clothing an acceptable reason to hit women? :huh Seriously?

How bout reading his post. lol at me defending Grblot

[erictheking]

I agree, but this goes for all crimes and all potential victims. With rape in particular, a hell of a lot of - if not outright blame - the expectancy to lower the crime rate rests on the victims. As well intentioned as it may be, this attitude brings the behaviour of the victims under scrutiny, from what they wear, to where they go alone, to what they drink, as if it is the dark alleys and alcohol that rapes women.

Given previous statistics that show an alarming number of male college students do not realise that they have committed assault or rape, I have to wonder if it wouldn't be more effective to redirect the warnings against rape at rapists who do not understand issues of consent, instead of shaming victims for partaking in ordinary social practises.
Good point.
I wonder if religious affiliation would have any interesting correlation to these results.

racist
I was thinking the same.

[T4R0K]

6 in 7 are fucking stupid because they don't consider sexy clothing an acceptable reason to hit women? :huh Seriously?

It's the survey that seems to indicate that. The survey is retarded.

[Aokiji]

religion is not a race.

Surely you meant bigot.

Also, she said I WONDER

[Jetstorm]

You should never be placing your hands on your girlfriend or wife for something like this. Ever.

Also holding a woman partly responsible for getting raped is retarded.

[Amaretti]

How bout reading his post. lol at me defending Grblot

I'm wondering if he read the article. 1 in 7 refers specifically to the number of people who think sexy clothing is an acceptable reason for hitting a woman. Not to people who think there are acceptable reasons for hitting women in general.

racist
I was thinking the same.

:hurr

[Hitomi_No_Ryu]

This is sad and shows you that a good portion of societies has an idiotic way of thinking...

[CrazyMoronX]

Yes. Punch them right in the mouth.

[Grrblt]

6 in 7 are fucking stupid because they don't consider sexy clothing an acceptable reason to hit women? :huh Seriously?

Seems I got my facts tangled up. A majority are fucking stupid, since they don't think there is any reason to hit women.

[Keiichi Song]

I wonder if religious affiliation would have any interesting correlation to these results.

Probably no doubt about it in my case...My grandma says that its just completly sinful to wear high heels yet she wants me to act more like a girl...

[Aokiji]

I'm wondering if he read the article. 1 in 7 refers specifically to the number of people who think sexy clothing is an acceptable reason for hitting a woman. Not to people who think there are acceptable reasons for hitting women in general.

You know what he meant.

[Amaretti]

Seems I got my facts tangled up. A majority are fucking stupid, since they don't think there is any reason to hit women.

While I agree that the idea that women are untouchable is not only asinine but insulting, and that there are situations where, if men are deserving of being hit, so are women, this survey only asks for opinions on a handful of pretty specific scenarios, none of which I would call deserving of violence (which I assume is the point). For instance, if a woman slaps a man first I think she fully deserves to be slapped back, but that's not one of the polled scenarios. As such, this poll doesn't show the general attitude to violence against women, just the attitudes towards the five most common 'reasons' given for domestic violence.

[Lucaniel]

1,065 people aren't representative of over 50 million. This survey fails.

If you want to publish something like this, at least survey 100,000...:wha

[Sama'el]

1,065 people aren't representative of over 50 million. This survey fails.

If you want to publish something like this, at least survey 100,000...:wha

Actually, to get a +-5 % margin of error, all you need is a sample of 900 people for a population of 60 million. That's an acceptable survey.

[Altron]

wow, to hit a woman for something like that is beyond low...

[Aokiji]

wow, to hit a anyone for something like that is beyond low...

I feel like a masculist, lol

[Tokoyami]

Can the women at least fight back?

[Chee]

Wow. :facepalm

[Grrblt]

While I agree that the idea that women are untouchable is not only asinine but insulting, and that there are situations where, if men are deserving of being hit, so are women, this survey only asks for opinions on a handful of pretty specific scenarios, none of which I would call deserving of violence (which I assume is the point). For instance, if a woman slaps a man first I think she fully deserves to be slapped back, but that's not one of the polled scenarios. As such, this poll doesn't show the general attitude to violence against women, just the attitudes towards the five most common 'reasons' given for domestic violence.

The article says the majority opine that there are no reasons for violence unto women. If the article is wrong then that's great. Too bad Jacqui Smith, Home Secretary (whatever that means) still thinks so.

[Mr.Uchiha]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article5875108.ece


Well, this is pretty sad.

Not really, i totally agree with this article. Women contribute less to society then men, and if they moan and bitch all day they should be punished.

If you gunna where revealing clothes then dont act all surprised when you get raped.

[Tokoyami]

Not really, i totally agree with this article. Women contribute less to society then men, and if they moan and bitch all day they should be punished.

If you gunna where revealing clothes then dont act all surprised when you get raped.Contribute LESS to society!?

What kind of twisted fuck are you? PEOPLE contribute to society not GENDERS. There are stupid men as well buddy who bitch just as much as the worst bitchy kind of girl I have met. Just because somone wants to wear revealing clothing does not in anyway suddenly remove there rights as a person.

Take your backwards thinking and go back to the 1700's please.

[Chee]

Hurm...Amelia Earhart, Rosa Parks, Emily Dickinson...and countless others aren't contributing to society?

Big fuck you there Mr. Uchiha.

Rape is still rape, doesn't matter if your wearing shorts and a tank top or a dress from the early 1900s, the woman was still raped. She said no and the male raped her. The male is 100% at fault.

[Mr.Uchiha]

Contribute LESS to society!?



Name one good thing a women has invented or discovered that has shaped human civilization?

[Tokoyami]

Name one good thing a women has invented or discovered that has shaped human civilization?

Marie curie came up with the theory of radioactivity. Thanks to her we understand how nuclear decay works in the first place.

YOU LOSE GOOD DAY SIR!

[Chee]

Amelia Earhart flew around the world before her mysterious death, opening the door for more women to take male jobs in the 1920s.
Rosa Parks helped begin the bus boycott in the Civil Rights Movement.
3 women and a man decided to sit down in a all white diner in the CRM, pushing the movement even more.
Emily Dickinson is a great writer in the 1800s, contributing to the women movement.
Women contributed in the wars.
Anne Frank wrote a diary that revealed many things about the hiding of the Jewish population and the holocaust.
Harriet Tubman helped people in the Underground Railroad, saving hundreds of black people from slavery.
Susan B. Anthony helped with the women's suffrage.


Do you want more?

[Grrblt]

Name one good thing a women has invented or discovered that has shaped human civilization?
Start here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_Nobel_Prize_laureates)

[Mr.Uchiha]

Marie curie came up with the theory of radioactivity. Thanks to her we understand how nuclear decay works in the first place.

YOU LOSE GOOD DAY SIR!

Hahaha i knew you would say that, cause i wrote a physics paper on her.

All she did was continue Rutherford's and Bohr's work after there time came. Rutherford and Bohr created the model and set the basis for Marie, All Marie did was finish it off, she didnt think of anything really.

After her it was people like Einstein that continued on the model of the atom that led to the nuclear age, not her alone. She was just a mere piece on the puzzle, and an insignificant one at that

The only reason she is written about is because that was the first time a women actually made a decent scientific discovery.

Owned.

[Tokoyami]

Hahaha i knew you would say that, cause i wrote a physics paper on her.

All she did was continue Rutherford's and Bohr's work after there time came. Rutherford and Bohr created the model and set the basis for Marie, All Marie did was finish it off, she didnt think of anything really.

After her it was people like Einstein that continued on the model of the atom that led to the nuclear age, not her alone. She was just a mere piece on the puzzle, and an insignificant one at that

The only reason she is written about is because that was the first time a women actually made a decent scientific discovery.

Owned.Then lets see you own the other examples people have given......

[Mr.Uchiha]

Amelia Earhart flew around the world before her mysterious death, opening the door for more women to take male jobs in the 1920s.
Rosa Parks helped begin the bus boycott in the Civil Rights Movement.
3 women and a man decided to sit down in a all white diner in the CRM, pushing the movement even more.
Emily Dickinson is a great writer in the 1800s, contributing to the women movement.
Women contributed in the wars.
Anne Frank wrote a diary that revealed many things about the hiding of the Jewish population and the holocaust.
Harriet Tubman helped people in the Underground Railroad, saving hundreds of black people from slavery.
Susan B. Anthony helped with the women's suffrage.

Do you want more?

Thanks for the insight. I asked for inventions and discoveries, didnt you get the memo:lmao

[Tokoyami]

Actually.

Own this then.

Stephanie Louise Kwolek: She invented kevlar.

[Chee]

Thanks for the insight. I asked for inventions and discoveries, didnt you get the memo:lmao

I don't give a rats ass what you asked for, you're insulting women and I posted a list of women that still shaped the world regardless if they were brainiacs.

Get your cock out of your ass, women got their rights about less than century ago, most of them weren't educated at the time because of their female status and weren't allowed to go to school. Women started their more equal role in the 1930s while men had all the time in the world to "invent and discover".

[Amaretti]

Name one good thing a women has invented or discovered that has shaped human civilization?

Ada Lovelace invented binary.

Regardless, the lack of female academics throughout history is largely attributed to their exclusion from education. Even so, society cannot exist without women, and the representation of one gender in high profile careers is not a determining factor in how deserving they are of being victimised.

In short, you're an ignorant little brat who contributes just as little to society as you accuse women of.

[Sama'el]

The article says the majority opine that there are no reasons for violence unto women. If the article is wrong then that's great. Too bad Jacqui Smith, Home Secretary (whatever that means) still thinks so.

Violence often is held to mean the initiation of force. There's no reason for the initiation of force on anyone.

[useeher]

Why are people even responding to Mr. Uchiha request?

Thanks for the insight. I asked for inventions and discoveries, didnt you get the memo:lmao

Someone who judges whether you deserve to be treated like a human being based on if you have invented anything.

[Sama'el]

Not really, i totally agree with this article. Women contribute less to society then men, and if they moan and bitch all day they should be punished.

If you gunna where revealing clothes then dont act all surprised when you get raped.

I'm going to have to ask you to stop trolling, or this moaning and bitching woman whose on her way to a Ph.D. is going to have to get violent with you.

[Ice Cream]

Actually, to get a +-5 % margin of error, all you need is a sample of 900 people for a population of 60 million. That's an acceptable survey.

Really? Still seems like a low representation though.


Not really, i totally agree with this article. Women contribute less to society then men, and if they moan and bitch all day they should be punished.

If you gunna where revealing clothes then dont act all surprised when you get raped.

>.>

Name one good thing a women has invented or discovered that has shaped human civilization?

http://kromeblog.kromeboy.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/dont-feed-troll.jpg

[Stark]

Lol B&.

Serves him/it right.

[Cirus]

While I find that poll idiotic and juvenile at best it does raise some interesting points.

I personally have nothing against hitting a woman as long as it is in self defence. Meaning she hit me first in the situation (equal treatment. if you think you can throw a punch or slap and not get hit back then you got another thing comming).

I don't believe that women should be held accountable if they get rapped. Though I do believe women should be willing to accept the conciquinces of how they dress. If you dress like you are easy or in a sexual manor (skimpy clothing) then don't get angry when guys hit on you constantly or grope you. Think about it this way. Imagine how it would be if I dressed like a cop and you came to me for help because you thought I was a cop, and then I said "Well just because I am dressed this way does not mean I am a cop. I find it insulting that you would even think I am a cop dispite how I am dressed similar to a cop."

[Anjali]

It's stupid to believe that women should be hit for wearing sexy clothing.

[Ice Cream]

Imagine how it would be if I dressed like a cop and you came to me for help because you thought I was a cop, and then I said "Well just because I am dressed this way does not mean I am a cop. I find it insulting that you would even think I am a cop dispite how I am dressed similar to a cop."

Lol, Dave actually had a good point with that sketch.

[Stark]

Um, Cirus...

There's only 1 'P' in 'raping'...

NVM *backs up*

[MissUzumakiHinata]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article5875108.ece


Well, this is pretty sad.


about that violence against women is unnexceptable in any way, im a women and i agree with this but she needs to change her statement to violence against anyone is unnexceptable ive seen plenty of women hit men and they dont do anything about it cus they know theyll just get screwed over. One of my friends nearly got jailed cus his girlfriend was beating him and he hit her in self defense and they instantly say the man is violent... its disgracefull tbh

[Grrblt]

Violence often is held to mean the initiation of force. There's no reason for the initiation of force on anyone.

Sure there is. If they, for example, stole all your money, or they tricked you into doing something really stupid, or they came to your wedding and insulted you, etc.

The sad part is of course that most people I've talked to this about before believe that it isn't even ok to hit a girl that hit you first.

[Fruits Basket Fan]

The only thing that I partially agree with was that if a woman wears sexy clothing in public and gets rape....she is partially responsible for getting herself into such a situation by showing her assets like that.....

The rape itself is not her fault, yet the circumstances that led her into it is sort of her fault.....this is why women should be cautious about what they wear and be aware of your surroundings by making smart decisions.

The rapist should be punished, regardless :zaru!

But, meh :noworry!

[Sama'el]

Sure there is. If they, for example, stole all your money, or they tricked you into doing something really stupid, or they came to your wedding and insulted you, etc.

The sad part is of course that most people I've talked to this about before believe that it isn't even ok to hit a girl that hit you first.

Theft itself is an act of violence. Depending on what you were tricked into doing, that can be considered an act of violence.

Being insulted at a wedding isn't necessarily an act of violence. If you hit someone for an insult at a wedding, your a tad oversensitive.

The only thing that I partially agree with was that if a woman wears sexy clothing in public and gets rape....she is partially responsible for getting herself into such a situation by showing her assets like that.....

The rape itself is not her fault, yet the circumstances that led her into it is sort of her fault.....this is why women should be cautious about what they wear and be aware of your surroundings by making smart decisions.

The rapist should be punished, regardless :zaru!

But, meh :noworry!

Rape isn't a sex crime. It's a crime of violence, pure and simple. What the victim looks like has nothing to do with why someone is raping. Most often, women are raped by someone they know and trust, not strangers. And stranger rape isn't about sex. It's about violence and domination. Wearing revealing clothing makes you no more a target for rape than not.

I find it repugnant to even suggest that there might be any responsibility for rape on the part of the victim.

[Tokoyami]

Most often, women are raped by Sure there is. What?

...

[Sama'el]

What?

...

Using a touch pad often leads to accidental copy pasta. It's been fixed

[MissUzumakiHinata]

Sure there is. If they, for example, stole all your money, or they tricked you into doing something really stupid, or they came to your wedding and insulted you, etc.

The sad part is of course that most people I've talked to this about before believe that it isn't even ok to hit a girl that hit you first.

I tried to get that across in my message if a girl hits you there allowed to hit back its simple, and if a man went to the police and went my wife is abusing me or a woman hit me theyd not give a shit and probably laugh at you tho u have a mark on ya to prove it, sometimes a girl can scream rape when it clearly wasnt and boom the man is in jail serving a long sentence... what i say is that police are more leniant to women than men (and thats a fact) :pek

[The Space Cowboy]

One in seven Brits need a punch to the goddamn face.

No. The victim's responsibility ends where the crime begins. Meaning it is still your responsibility to take reasonable precautions (IE pepper spray, firearms, martial arts, not going to that part of town).

[Lord of Fire]

wow more conservatives in uk than i thought good for the uk but i dont thk its rite to smack a women for being nagging dammm thats crazy

[Sama'el]

I tried to get that across in my message if a girl hits you there allowed to hit back its simple, and if a man went to the police and went my wife is abusing me or a woman hit me theyd not give a shit and probably laugh at you tho u have a mark on ya to prove it, sometimes a girl can scream rape when it clearly wasnt and boom the man is in jail serving a long sentence... what i say is that police are more leniant to women than men (and thats a fact) :pek

The police are more lenient to women than men because of women historically have been disenfranchised and victimized by patriarchal culture. And in general, they still are even now. Women are overwhelmingly the victims of domestic violence, not men. Until that changes, the police need to be more suspect of men in cases of domestic violence and assaults against women.

[Dionysus]

The police are more lenient to women than men because of women historically have been disenfranchised and victimized by patriarchal culture. And in general, they still are even now. Women are overwhelmingly the victims of domestic violence, not men. Until that changes, the police need to be more suspect of men in cases of domestic violence and assaults against women.
No, they need to approach every case with an open mind and consider as many possibilities as possible. Though, that's too reasonable, so I suppose profiling men is fine.

[Grrblt]

Theft itself is an act of violence. Depending on what you were tricked into doing, that can be considered an act of violence.
You're redefining the word violence to fit your previous post. I could as easily say that dressing in sexy clothes is an act of violence.

[First Tsurugi]

This actually doesn't surprise me as much as I thought it would.
Pimp slap dat ho. :pimp

[Adonis]

The only thing that I partially agree with was that if a woman wears sexy clothing in public and gets rape....she is partially responsible for getting herself into such a situation by showing her assets like that.....

The rape itself is not her fault, yet the circumstances that led her into it is sort of her fault.....this is why women should be cautious about what they wear and be aware of your surroundings by making smart decisions.


You're an idiot and moronic beliefs like this perpetuate the myth that rape is a crime driven purely by lust as opposed to violence and dominance. Such comments lead me to believe there are people who honestly believe "normal" men are driven to rape because Suzy wore a miniskirt today.

The rapist may use the woman's attire as a shoddy justification for his actions, just like murderers and the like claim to have their reasons, but an outside observer actually giving credence to such bullshit is despicable.

[Fojos]

I wonder how many think women should be allowed to hit men? As a scrawny man whose ass could be kicked by a majority of women, I'm genuinely interested to know this.

Almost all. That's equality for ya.


Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, said: “Violence against people is unacceptable in any form no matter what the circumstances are.”

Fixed, even though I disagree with what was said and what I fixed. Violence is always acceptable in self-defence situations.

[Casyle]

Where's the study about it being ok for women to slap men?

Sexist study is sexist!

That's already accepted. Here at least.

Man smacks women = assault, possible jail time.

Woman smacks man = funny, nothing major.

[Sama'el]

You're redefining the word violence to fit your previous post. I could as easily say that dressing in sexy clothes is an act of violence.

No, I'm not. Theft is as much an initiation of force as punching a guy out of the blue is. Your harming a person, forcibly taking that which is not yours. And if someone tricks you into doing something that gets you hurt or robbed, that's as much an act of violence as hitting someone or mugging them.

[sadated_peon]

Ada Lovelace invented binary.


What?

I think you need to do a little research here, because you are off by a couple thousand years.

[Juno]

I tried to get that across in my message if a girl hits you there allowed to hit back its simple, and if a man went to the police and went my wife is abusing me or a woman hit me theyd not give a shit and probably laugh at you tho u have a mark on ya to prove it, sometimes a girl can scream rape when it clearly wasnt and boom the man is in jail serving a long sentence... what i say is that police are more leniant to women than men (and thats a fact) :pek

That's very unlikely. When there are men who are being cleared of rape charges because their victim was unconscious and therefore could never not give consent, and when the incidence of false rape claims are no higher than false claims in other crimes (percentage wise, in the single digits), and when only 16% of rapes in Britain are reported, and when 95% of those reports that make it to court are dismissed, the insistence that women can ruin innocent men's lives by screaming 'rape' is hugely, hugely exaggerated, especially considering 99% of rapists get away with ruining the lives of tens of thousands of women every year.

[Sama'el]

That's very unlikely. When there are men who are being cleared of rape charges because their victim was unconscious and therefore could never not give consent, and when the incidence of false rape claims are no higher than false claims in other crimes (percentage wise, in the single digits), and when only 16% of rapes in Britain are reported, and when 95% of those reports that make it to court are dismissed, the insistence that women can ruin innocent men's lives by screaming 'rape' is hugely, hugely exaggerated, especially considering 99% of rapists get away with ruining the lives of tens of thousands of women every year.

Quoted for truth.

[MissUzumakiHinata]

The police are more lenient to women than men because of women historically have been disenfranchised and victimized by patriarchal culture. And in general, they still are even now. Women are overwhelmingly the victims of domestic violence, not men. Until that changes, the police need to be more suspect of men in cases of domestic violence and assaults against women.

Im a women and yes we do get targeted more but.... Police must treat everyone equally otherwise bias and personal opinions on cases will ensue, a man is more likely to be suspected due to its more common for men to be the perpertrators but.. as i said before my best friend was nearly jailed for hitting his ex-girlfriend after she beat him to near death... ok i forgot to mention he was near death.. he didnt fight back at first cus he thought that he shouldnt but he punched her, the girl ran to the police and my friend was nearly charged thank god he owned CCTV but even then before seeing the CCTV they said that he beat her.. and didnt take into consideration his injuries, ur saying all that because your own bias opinion and because ur female god im female but i understand these cases alot due to not just one friend has been nearly screwed over by this so i dont agree the police need to be more suspectant of men they just need to think who was more likely to have done the crime otherwise i believe we could get to a point in society when evidence will not matter and we will take one persons word other another just due to opinionated views

[Aokiji]

Marie curie came up with the theory of radioactivity. Thanks to her we understand how nuclear decay works in the first place.

YOU LOSE GOOD DAY SIR!

He's still kind of right.

Though this MIGHT have other reasons.

:LOS

MIGHT not HAS. :hmpf

[Sama'el]

Im a women and yes we do get targeted more but.... Police must treat everyone equally otherwise bias and personal opinions on cases will ensue, a man is more likely to be suspected due to its more common for men to be the perpertrators but.. as i said before my best friend was nearly jailed for hitting his ex-girlfriend after she beat him to near death... ok i forgot to mention he was near death.. he didnt fight back at first cus he thought that he shouldnt but he punched her, the girl ran to the police and my friend was nearly charged thank god he owned CCTV but even then before seeing the CCTV they said that he beat her.. and didnt take into consideration his injuries, ur saying all that because your own bias opinion and because ur female god im female but i understand these cases alot due to not just one friend has been nearly screwed over by this so i dont agree the police need to be more suspectant of men they just need to think who was more likely to have done the crime otherwise i believe we could get to a point in society when evidence will not matter and we will take one persons word other another just due to opinionated views

I highly doubt that. No judge, no jury, would ignore that. Your bawwing over very little here.

I have seen women who've been beat within an inch of their lives by their husbands, and the cops just dismiss it or write it off. The police are seldom that proactive about domestic violence. Hell, half of the people on the police force in my home town were abusing their wives.

[Last of the Arrancar]

One in seven Brits need a punch to the goddamn face.

No. The victim's responsibility ends where the crime begins. Meaning it is still your responsibility to take reasonable precautions (IE pepper spray, firearms, martial arts, not going to that part of town).

So women must in a way be able to prevent rape? And when law forbids you to carry a pepper spray or a gun? You're not gonna tell me I need to go take martial arts lessons, because it's my responsibility to defend myself? When I shouldn't even be attacked in the first place?

I tried to get that across in my message if a girl hits you there allowed to hit back its simple, and if a man went to the police and went my wife is abusing me or a woman hit me theyd not give a shit and probably laugh at you tho u have a mark on ya to prove it, sometimes a girl can scream rape when it clearly wasnt and boom the man is in jail serving a long sentence... what i say is that police are more leniant to women than men (and thats a fact)

There's a reason for that. How many guys get hit by a woman? And how many women are violated by men? Men are still physically stronger than women. So I'd say that a little lenience towards women is necessary.

[Grrblt]

No, I'm not. Theft is as much an initiation of force as punching a guy out of the blue is. Your harming a person, forcibly taking that which is not yours. And if someone tricks you into doing something that gets you hurt or robbed, that's as much an act of violence as hitting someone or mugging them.

By dressing in sexy clothes, you are harming a person who objects to seeing such things. It is violence as much as stealing is.

The police are more lenient to women than men because of women historically have been disenfranchised and victimized by patriarchal culture. And in general, they still are even now. Women are overwhelmingly the victims of domestic violence, not men. Until that changes, the police need to be more suspect of men in cases of domestic violence and assaults against women.
Women are not overwhelmingly the victims of domestic violence. See for example http://news.mensactivism.org/files/research_flyer.pdf

So it would be more accurate to say, the police are more lenient to women because they think that women cannot abuse men.

[Ezio Auditore Da Firenze]

In what way do you mean hit? ;)

[Nightmare]

Well this study is fucked up

[saprobe]

Rape isn't a sex crime. It's a crime of violence, pure and simple. What the victim looks like has nothing to do with why someone is raping. Most often, women are raped by someone they know and trust, not strangers. And stranger rape isn't about sex. It's about violence and domination. Wearing revealing clothing makes you no more a target for rape than not.

I find it repugnant to even suggest that there might be any responsibility for rape on the part of the victim.

I think a lot of people confuse risky behaviors with fault. Particularly with date rape, women may unknowingly put themselves at greater risk of becoming a victim through certain behaviors. ie getting very intoxicated and allowing themselves to be alone with someone who they don't know very well.

Just because a woman is making herself an easier target, that doesn't excuse the man who takes advantage of her. It's really pretty sick to attribute fault to a woman because she was too naive and trusting.

OT: I wonder what the results would be if the assailant and victim in the questions were both male and both female.

[Sama'el]

By dressing in sexy clothes, you are harming a person who objects to seeing such things. It is violence as much as stealing is.

That which neither harms you physically nor picks your pocket cannot be construed as "violence".

Quit being a troll.

Women are not overwhelmingly the victims of domestic violence. See for example http://news.mensactivism.org/files/research_flyer.pdf

So it would be more accurate to say, the police are more lenient to women because they think that women cannot abuse men.

You're citing a pamphlet that is citing a discredited study .

I don't doubt that police as sexist, and often don't think of women being able to commit violence against men. But there are also people who've seen the credible research and know that women are overwhelmingly the victims

[Lord of Fire]

Amelia Earhart flew around the world before her mysterious death, opening the door for more women to take male jobs in the 1920s.
Rosa Parks helped begin the bus boycott in the Civil Rights Movement.
3 women and a man decided to sit down in a all white diner in the CRM, pushing the movement even more.
Emily Dickinson is a great writer in the 1800s, contributing to the women movement.
Women contributed in the wars.
Anne Frank wrote a diary that revealed many things about the hiding of the Jewish population and the holocaust.
Harriet Tubman helped people in the Underground Railroad, saving hundreds of black people from slavery.
Susan B. Anthony helped with the women's suffrage.


Do you want more?



wait rosa parks didnt do anything that wasnt being already done she just got credit because she was a women and belonged to the naacp

[Sama'el]

wait rosa parks didnt do anything that wasnt being already done she just got credit because she was a women and belonged to the naacp

I am sick and tired of this constant attempt to belittle Rosa Parks and minimize what she did. I am tired of all the stories we were told as a kid that described her as being tired and having her feet hurt as a reason for not giving up her place on the bus. She was an activist and a leader in the Civil Rights movement, and she did as an act of civil disobedience. And guess what, it worked. She galvanized people into opposition against injustice.

[MissUzumakiHinata]

I highly doubt that. No judge, no jury, would ignore that. Your bawwing over very little here.

I have seen women who've been beat within an inch of their lives by their husbands, and the cops just dismiss it or write it off. The police are seldom that proactive about domestic violence. Hell, half of the people on the police force in my home town were abusing their wives.


Lol i think your going over the top here aswell wow youve seen women who've been beat with an inch of life left wow thats great isnt it but ive seen the same thing to men and the police have wrote it off didnt even care like i said the policee will suspect the man to have done something.. just because your home town is like that might mean thats its completely oposite in different towns. I heard a story of a women who stabbed her husband and guess what she made some phony story up that she was hit tho no physical evidence was proven tho there were witnesses to him gettin stabbed all-beit in the leg but even then you cant say us women are always innocent there can be women who can be just as sick as men and we shouldnt suspect men too much and same for women we should just say that everyone has the potential to do something like that and we shoulnt think that some one is innocent or guilty through gender.

Oh and you want to know one thing i do know about domestic violence i was beat by my dad when i was younger.. and i have equal views you wouldnt suspect that would you, youd probably think i would suspect all men. Remember everyone has the potential to hate so they can do something terrible im not trying to argue i just think its a little sexist how you have said things like they need to be more cautious of men or however you put it as i can say from experiance ive seen women more violent than anyone.

Also that what you said about Rosa Parks may we not forget yes she was a leader but we shouldnt just credit her for what happened there were many men who took part in it may we not forget one if not the biggest force in my opinion was the man Martin Luther King.. inspiring person

:hmpf:suave

[spaZ]

Wtf thats fucking dumb. How can a hot chick be responsible for being raped? Just because they are dressed up nice and are hot? LMFAO

[MissUzumakiHinata]

Wtf thats fucking dumb. How can a hot chick be responsible for being raped? Just because they are dressed up nice and are hot? LMFAO

now that im not disagreeing with but some women do make themselves stand out to such a degree where men will target them that doesnt mean they are responsible it just means they draw to much attention to themselves its too different matters

[Raiden]

Geez. This is why us women are still not treated as fairly as we should be. -_-

I don't think that it's fair to leave the discussion only on that note. Women have the capability to change the situation around entirely; you would be surprised at how a man would follow and respect a women for independence, keeping away from him from time to time, and having respect for her body. You hear it all the time in songs: Ms. Independent~Neyo-She Got Her Own~ Jamie Foxx-I-N-D-E-P-E-N-D-E-N-T~ Webbie.

[Grrblt]

That which neither harms you physically nor picks your pocket cannot be construed as "violence".

Quit being a troll.
You almost got it right.

That which doesn't harm you or an object physically cannot be construed as violence.

You're citing a pamphlet that is citing a discredited study .
Source, tits or gtfo.

I don't doubt that police as sexist, and often don't think of women being able to commit violence against men. But there are also people who've seen the credible research and know that women are overwhelmingly the victims
And where, exactly, is that research? The only research I've seen comparing domestic abuse between genders and coming up with numbers you are describing are getting their facts from police reports. One doesn't have to have graduated junior high to realize that men are less likely to report domestic violence than women are. Most of the time, no such studies are made and it is just assumed that men are on the giving end and women on the receiving. For example, www.bra.se (Swedish national council for crime prevention) has tons of studies on domestic violence against women but I couldn't find a single one about domestic violence against men.

[Al-Yasa]

hmm intresting

chill out people theres other hings to worry about

[Sama'el]

Source, tits or gtfo.

And where, exactly, is that research? The only research I've seen comparing domestic abuse between genders and coming up with numbers you are describing are getting their facts from police reports. One doesn't have to have graduated junior high to realize that men are less likely to report domestic violence than women are. Most of the time, no such studies are made and it is just assumed that men are on the giving end and women on the receiving. For example, www.bra.se (Swedish national council for crime prevention) has tons of studies on domestic violence against women but I couldn't find a single one about domestic violence against men.

The US Department of Justice's official statistics on domestic violence cited that just under 1/6th of people admitted to hospitals for domestic violence were men.

The CDC's reports on the subjected concluded, after confidential research gathering, that women are significantly more likely to be threatened with interpartner violence then men. Also, a disproportionate amount of domestic violence done against men is done by male partners.

[MissUzumakiHinata]

You almost got it right.

That which doesn't harm you or an object physically cannot be construed as violence.


Source, tits or gtfo.


And where, exactly, is that research? The only research I've seen comparing domestic abuse between genders and coming up with numbers you are describing are getting their facts from police reports. One doesn't have to have graduated junior high to realize that men are less likely to report domestic violence than women are. Most of the time, no such studies are made and it is just assumed that men are on the giving end and women on the receiving. For example, www.bra.se (Swedish national council for crime prevention) has tons of studies on domestic violence against women but I couldn't find a single one about domestic violence against men.


I 100% agree that a man is most likely not going to file a complaint due to many reasons this is probably due to them thinking number 1 the police wont listen which is most likely true as ive seen it..

A man doesnt want to feel inferior tho thats not always the case it tends to be

because of this a man may still have domestic violence against them but choose not to tell due to the fear of bing ridiculed for it as for women who will report it, overall i think u made a fair point there

and about the comment above, i still believe the only reason women are more likely isnt because they are its because a man will not report the crime so statistically you are correct only due to the fact the men are afraid to report to the police due to belief that they will not be taken seriously

[Ninja-G33k]

This just in, one in seven people have completely forgotten the concept of chivalry and honor. :pekI'm betting the folks comprising that one in seven would, if faced with an opponent with teeth, all scream like little girls and run away.

I'm betting they also all have very small penises.

All right, you one in seven! The Internet Tough Guy™ will take all you pansies on at once!

[The Cheat]

Tihs is retarded. Women wear wha they want. Boyfriends or Husbands should treat their women with respet.

[Grrblt]

The US Department of Justice's official statistics on domestic violence cited that just under 1/6th of people admitted to hospitals for domestic violence were men.
Only a small part of domestic violence requires hospitalization. Also, men would be more likely to lie about how they were injured, since in most men's opinion, getting beat on by a woman is unmanly.

The CDC's reports on the subjected concluded, after confidential research gathering, that women are significantly more likely to be threatened with interpartner violence then men.
Significant can mean anything from 10% and up. And while threats of violence is bad enough, what we're discussing here is actual violence. I can absolutely see that men would voice threats more often; doesn't mean they strike more often.

Also, a disproportionate amount of domestic violence done against men is done by male partners.
True, but not an amount large enough to make women overwhelmingly more often victims than men in heterosexual relations.

[Yammy]

Where's the study about it being ok for women to slap men?

Sexist study is sexist!

more people think its okay for a woman to hit a man than a man to hit a woman by far.

[Lucaniel]

Actually, to get a +-5 % margin of error, all you need is a sample of 900 people for a population of 60 million. That's an acceptable survey.

Well, the results can't be right, so there's obviously a problem somewhere. Unless there are a lot more closeted domestic abusers around than I thought.

Plus, the Home Office conducted this. They probably have some or the other agenda.

[Sama'el]

Women are also likely to dramatically under report domestic violence, even with all of the outreach efforts. It's the second most underreported crime in the US, right behind rape.

This evidence all points to women being at greater risk for domestic violence then men. A single discredited study isn't going to change that.

[MissUzumakiHinata]

Women are also likely to dramatically under report domestic violence, even with all of the outreach efforts. It's the second most underreported crime in the US, right behind rape.

This evidence all points to women being at greater risk for domestic violence then men. A single discredited study isn't going to change that.

why do you fight soo hard for technically your sexist views, yes a women is more likely to be threatened but why are you saying its because men are violent and dispicable people, comon just because they are under-reported i bet you when its mens who has domestic violence against them thats even more under-reported as a man will hardly ever go in to say thre "female" partner is abusing them.

it doesnt point to the statement perfectly just because its under-reported means nothing, the fact that you say that means it can be the same for men so technically what your saying is because its women who dont report fully it means there more at risk well that means you can go full circle and go men dont report often... they must be more at risk ur statements are all opinionated and far from what you believe as theres not much evidence behind ur argument

[Sama'el]

why do you fight soo hard for technically your sexist views, yes a women is more likely to be threatened but why are you saying its because men are violent and dispicable people, comon just because they are under-reported i bet you when its mens who has domestic violence against them thats even more under-reported as a man will hardly ever go in to say thre "female" partner is abusing them.

Yes, because I'm some sort of psycho-dyke who hates men :notrust

I'm not saying that men are all violent or despicable people. I'm saying that it is a fact that we still live in patriarchal society which turns a blind eye towards oppressors and places fetters on the victims. Our violent, patriarchal culture produces violent, patriarchal men. It has nothing to do with their inherent maleness and everything to do with the fact that men have been conditioned to dominate women, and that women have been conditioned by society to submit.

it doesnt point to the statement perfectly just because its under-reported means nothing, the fact that you say that means it can be the same for men so technically what your saying is because its women who dont report fully it means there more at risk well that means you can go full circle and go men dont report often... they must be more at risk ur statements are all opinionated and far from what you believe as theres not much evidence behind ur argument

I have no idea what you just wrote here...

I was pointing two trends. 1) Women report far more domestic violence then men. 2) Both men and women dramatically underreport domestic violence. The logical conclusion from that is that women are still largely on the receiving end of domestic violence, and trying to explain the apparent disparity as a result of men underreporting domestic violence is dubious.

[Yami Munesanzun]

1 out of 7 is a hardcore Puritan who just won't let it go? :pek

[Diceman]

Yes, because I'm some sort of psycho-dyke who hates men :notrust.
You aren't?:zaru

[MissUzumakiHinata]

Yes, because I'm some sort of psycho-dyke who hates men :notrust

I'm not saying that men are all violent or despicable people. I'm saying that it is a fact that we still live in patriarchal society which turns a blind eye towards oppressors and places fetters on the victims. Our violent, patriarchal culture produces violent, patriarchal men. It has nothing to do with their inherent maleness and everything to do with the fact that men have been conditioned to dominate women, and that women have been conditioned by society to submit.



I have no idea what you just wrote here...

I was pointing two trends. 1) Women report far more domestic violence then men. 2) Both men and women dramatically underreport domestic violence. The logical conclusion from that is that women are still largely on the receiving end of domestic violence, and trying to explain the apparent disparity as a result of men underreporting domestic violence is dubious.

both of us have our different opinions due to different circumstance all i can say is ive seen more situations in my life of women abusing than the other way around for this is believe the way i do, you porbably have your own reasons for believing that men are more likely to act that way i just think that everyone has the ability to do that and due to this we shouldnt help any specific gender more than the other, i think that just cus there are more known cases of men abusing women that the police should always take the womens side cus it wont always be the case, im not saying all men are innocent as my dad beat me when i was a child but im just saying we cant accuse men any more than women cus thats sexist imo

btw as ive said before i dont want to argue with you i just support my opinion strongly

[Purgatory]

I'd like to hit the person who made this article if she was a woman

Lol UK.

[MissUzumakiHinata]

I'd like to hit the person who made this article if she was a woman

Lol UK.

Do it i wont stop you nor will i tell hehe

[Quincy James]

BURQA TIEM !!!! :argh
Looks like it :C

[Juno]

In MissUzumakiHinata's world, Chris Brown is in hiding nursing his injuries and Rihanna is whizzing around on her jet ski and flexing her biceps at paparazzi.

The lengths people will go to deny the level of domestic violence against women amazes me. Why do you do it? It's funny how you can say that the majority of the world's murderers, thieves, rapists, and perpetrators of common physical assault are male and no one will accuse you of being sexist and anti-male. But if you point out that the majority of spousal abusers are also male, and so the majority of victims are logically female, suddenly you're a sexist out to disenfranchise men? Gimme a break. There's a limit to how much you can deceive yourselves.

Men are the victims of domestic abuse and that is indisputable. What is also indisputable is that women make up the vast majority of victims. Going by the number of deaths attributed to domestic violence, there are twice as many women dead at the hands of their partners than men. That is a fact that can't be hidden by under-reporting.

Do it i wont stop you nor will i tell hehe

He's trolling, but you're too dumb to match him for it. The journalist is male. Does that change your opinion on whether he should be beaten?

[MissUzumakiHinata]

In MissUzumakiHinata's world, Chris Brown is in hiding nursing his injuries and Rihanna is whizzing around on her jet ski and flexing her biceps at paparazzi.

The lengths people will go to deny the level of domestic violence against women amazes me. Why do you do it? It's funny how you can say that the majority of murderers, thieves, rapists, and perpetrators of common physical assault are male and no one will accuse you of being sexist and anti-male. But if you point out that the majority of spousal abusers are also male, and so the majority of victims are logically female, suddenly you're a sexist out to disenfranchise men? Gimme a break. There's a limit to how much you can deceive yourselves.

Men are the victims of domestic abuse and that is indisputable. What is also indisputable is that women make up the vast majority of victims. Going by the number of deaths attributed to domestic violence, there are twice as many women dead at the hands of their partners than men. That is a fact that can't be hidden by under-reporting.



He's trolling, but you're too dumb to match him for it. The journalist is male. Does that change your opinion on whether he should be beaten?

Ahem get your facts right im female.. and im not saying it doesnt exist im just supporting the opposite side i think its annoying that women shouldnt be allowed to hit men and get away with it down to personal events that ive witnessed my opinions are like this, where is your evidence that im trying to go against the fact that women are abused huh actually i was abused u freaking moron ive already stated that, im just trying to illustrate my point and all people like you do are try to deny anything i say, sure its obvious women are victaims but you cant deny that men arent either.. and where do u get off saying sarcastic comments like that, in your world people who dont share the same views as urself are branded like idiots am i right cus thats what your trying to show so stop being a bitch and actually read what i type before saying things.

And no it doesnt change my opinion on whether they should be hit wow take a joke as a joke not a way to try and belittle me

:pek im not againast you i just think its annoying how your being sarcastic about what im saying cus u dont want to accept my opinion as valid

[Sama'el]

I'd like to hit the person who made this article if she was a woman

Lol UK.

Stop trolling. :pek:gun

[Lee1993]

:facepalm one out of 9 are idiots

[The Pink Ninja]

And it's stats like this that result in me having no patriotism.

A country where one in seven people don't just outright condemn rape but hold the victims accountable is one where the population would be best served by being reduced by one seventh.

Apparently some people only care if you're under-age. otherwise, fuck you and your personal trauma.

The stat that says 1/7 would hit their GF or wife for dressing revealingly, is, if anything even worse. People not thinking can result in some saying rape victims are partly responsible (i.e. the logic of getting robbed when showing off expensive property).

But 1/7 think it's okay to hit their gf because she's dressing provocatively?

That means they think the woman is their property.

Cuts off their balls.

[hahathatsfunny13]

I wonder if most women would hit back. If a man hit me, he sure as hell would get a beating right back. Any man who hits a woman is a disgusting coward.

[Nic]

I don't think violence against anyone is acceptable to be honest. Sure I understand why a guy might be upset in such a circumstance but still.

[Yume-chan]

I don't believe that women should be held accountable if they get rapped. Though I do believe women should be willing to accept the conciquinces of how they dress. If you dress like you are easy or in a sexual manor (skimpy clothing) then don't get angry when guys hit on you constantly or grope you. Think about it this way. Imagine how it would be if I dressed like a cop and you came to me for help because you thought I was a cop, and then I said "Well just because I am dressed this way does not mean I am a cop. I find it insulting that you would even think I am a cop dispite how I am dressed similar to a cop."But the uniform of a cop is an official indication of their role. That's not the same thing at all as making an assumption based on stereotypical preconceptions. I've been in many situations where men assume from my style of dress and dyed hair that I'm open to being hit on, but in fact it's women I'm interested in attracting (or it's just a hot day). Women are also placed in a frustrating position because the same chauvinistic culture that would condemn them for dressing provocatively labels them unfavorably if they don't live up to society's standards of beauty. There's very little leeway between being considered ugly and as a slut.

[Darklyre]

I wonder if most women would hit back. If a man hit me, he sure as hell would get a beating right back. Any man who hits a woman is a disgusting coward.

If a woman hit me for no reason, then you can bet your ass that I will be giving her a concrete nosejob.

[ZeroBlack]

Men and women over 65 and those in the lower social class groups D and E are more likely to believe that woman should be held partly responsible for being raped or sexually assaulted, Ipsos Mori telephone poll found.


Not surprised due to this. But this is still very sad.

[Fojos]

But 1/7 think it's okay to hit their gf because she's dressing provocatively?

That means they think the woman is their property.

Cuts off their balls.

You do realize part of that 1/7th also included females, right?




I don't doubt that police as sexist, and often don't think of women being able to commit violence against men. But there are also people who've seen the credible research and know that women are overwhelmingly the victims

You can't have credible research when the majority of abused people never tell authority about it. That's like saying 9 out of 20 people do drugs when you asked like 10000 people only, it's useless.

You tell one person to stop trolling yet you do it yourself, awesome.

It doesn't take a genius to realize that many studies out there at the moment are very biased.

[Jin-E]

About the question regarding the clothing style, i think that needs to be qualified somewhat.

If a GF/Wife dress relatively revealing because she is comfortable with that style and have no hidden thoughts behind it, then that should be her business.

However, if she dress sexually just to flirt with other people and having guys ogle her, then of course a Boyfriend/Husband would be pissed about that and rightfuly so.

So, i can understand men being furious about that, but not beating the crap out of her.

[Sama'el]

You can't have credible research when the majority of abused people never tell authority about it. That's like saying 9 out of 20 people do drugs when you asked like 10000 people only, it's useless.

You tell one person to stop trolling yet you do it yourself, awesome.

It doesn't take a genius to realize that many studies out there at the moment are very biased.

Yes you can actually. There are plenty of ways of studying a problem without resorting to surveys or self-reporting.

[Sefarian]

Nobody should ever have violence brought down on them for their choice of clothing, anyone who thinks otherwise is fucking retarded.

As for the whole arguement going on about whether or not it's ever morally acceptable to strike a female as a male... all I'm going to say is that it's only acceptable when its an actual act of self defense. If the woman doesn't pose an actual threat to you, just remove yourself from the situation or restrain them. If they do pose a threat to you as a male, then I feel you'd have the right to remove that threat to whatever means are necessary the same as if they were a man.

Of course, this may be a difficult thing for some people to actually do... and I think women should act under the same type of thought too towards men. You shouldn't just go around smacking people, period, and it's okay to protect yourself from attack... but if someone smacks you and theres no possible way that they could inflict bodily harm upon you that doesn't give you a liscense to beat the hell out of them. A persons sex shouldn't have anything to do with that.

Off topic: First post since spraining my left hand and not being able to effectively type on a keyboard, woot!

[Grrblt]

What is also indisputable is that women make up the vast majority of victims.
No, that is not indisputable. The studies actually made on the subject (properly, not just counting police reports) dispute it.

Going by the number of deaths attributed to domestic violence, there are twice as many women dead at the hands of their partners than men. That is a fact that can't be hidden by under-reporting.

Only a miniscule part of domestic violence ends up in death.

[Enclave]

For some reason i'm not really surprised. And there is no reason for a woman to ever be raped. That's just f'ed up.

But if a female comes at me with a knife like this crazy girl did to a guy in college a couple years back i'm giving her a concussion.
(1000 people is good sample size if chosen correctly).

Damn straight.


The idea that it's never ok to hit a woman is ridiculous. It's ok to hit a woman as often as it's ok to hit a man, and that's when they are a current and real threat to your own personal physical well being.

If a woman comes at you with real intent to do bodily harm and can back up that intent? I don't see the problem in smacking her ass to the ground just as I don't see a problem in smacking some guy's ass to the ground in the exact same scenario.

[Lain]

I think it's funny when women dress like skanks and then say "Well, it's to attract guys... but only to attract the RIGHT guys."

As if ONLY the right guys are going to hit on her.

[Juno]

No, that is not indisputable. The studies actually made on the subject (properly, not just counting police reports) dispute it.


Oh for goodness sake...

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/pubs-sum/181867.htm - nearly 25% of women and 7.6% of men were raped and/or physically assaulted by a current or former spouse, cohabiting partner, or dating partner/acquaintance at some time in their lifetime (based on survey of 16,000 participants, equally male and female).

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/pubs-sum/183781.htm - Approximately 1.3 million women and 835,000 men are physically assaulted by an intimate partner annually in the United States.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/ipv01.pdf - Intimate partner violence made up 20% of all nonfatal violent crime experienced by women in 2001.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/ipv01.pdf - Intimate partners committed 3% of the nonfatal violence against men.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/ipv01.pdf - In 2000, 1,247 women and 440 men were killed by an intimate partner. In recent years, an intimate partner killed approximately 33% of female murder victims and 4% of male murder victims.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/pubs-sum/183781.htm - Most perpetrators of sexual violence are men. Among acts of sexual violence committed against women since the age of 18, 100% of rapes, 92% of physical assaults, and 97% of stalking acts were perpetrated by men. Sexual violence against men is also mainly male violence: 70% of rapes, 86% of physical assaults, and 65% of stalking acts were perpetrated by men.

And you're telling me that men are not the majority perpetrators of domestic abuse? You seem to just be arguing from personal incredulity because there is no research that backs up what you're saying. Men are the overwhelming majority perpetrators in all violent crime, so please explain how domestic violence comes to be the supposed exception?

Only a miniscule part of domestic violence ends up in death.

And it reflects the wider problem. If far more women are killed by domestic violence than men, then it's not much of a stretch to realise that more women are abused, period.

[ShadowTeady]

As i always know , women shouldn;t be slapped or hit over silly things

Now i see people can cause of silly things , that is just really not good at all

[MissUzumakiHinata]

Oh for goodness sake...

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/pubs-sum/181867.htm - nearly 25% of women and 7.6% of men were raped and/or physically assaulted by a current or former spouse, cohabiting partner, or dating partner/acquaintance at some time in their lifetime (based on survey of 16,000 participants, equally male and female).

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/pubs-sum/183781.htm - Approximately 1.3 million women and 835,000 men are physically assaulted by an intimate partner annually in the United States.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/ipv01.pdf - Intimate partner violence made up 20% of all nonfatal violent crime experienced by women in 2001.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/ipv01.pdf - Intimate partners committed 3% of the nonfatal violence against men.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/ipv01.pdf - In 2000, 1,247 women and 440 men were killed by an intimate partner. In recent years, an intimate partner killed approximately 33% of female murder victims and 4% of male murder victims.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/pubs-sum/183781.htm - Most perpetrators of sexual violence are men. Among acts of sexual violence committed against women since the age of 18, 100% of rapes, 92% of physical assaults, and 97% of stalking acts were perpetrated by men. Sexual violence against men is also mainly male violence: 70% of rapes, 86% of physical assaults, and 65% of stalking acts were perpetrated by men.

And you're telling me that men are not the majority perpetrators of domestic abuse? You seem to just be arguing from personal incredulity because there is no research that backs up what you're saying. Men are the overwhelming majority perpetrators in all violent crime, so please explain how domestic violence comes to be the supposed exception?



And it reflects the wider problem. If far more women are killed by domestic violence than men, then it's not much of a stretch to realise that more women are abused, period.

i still fail to believe xD joking....

though u say this i just wanted too get my point across yesterday that men dont go forward so you cant always say that it ent disputable that women are more victims i believe you but... because men dont come forward were able to dispute cus violence doesnt have to be a dead body at the end you know... it could be mental and physical abuse sooo men could sometimes get domestic violence against them and say nothing about it but women do..

though i do believe women are more victims i like to dispute against the most supported just due to i believe they deserve a chance if that :P

and yesterday you said i was a guy... ahem ur wrong

:suave:harley

[Grrblt]

Oh for goodness sake...

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/pubs-sum/181867.htm - nearly 25% of women and 7.6% of men were raped and/or physically assaulted by a current or former spouse, cohabiting partner, or dating partner/acquaintance at some time in their lifetime (based on survey of 16,000 participants, equally male and female).
If you had actually read that article and not just the headline, you'd have found that 1.5 percent of women and 0.9 percent of men said they were physically assaulted or raped by partner in the 12 previous months.

Reality: women were the victims of domestic abuse a lot more often than men. The survey polled people over 18, thus including 80 year olds who were beaten by their husband 40 years ago. You can't use data of the past to show there's a problem now.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/pubs-sum/183781.htm - Approximately 1.3 million women and 835,000 men are physically assaulted by an intimate partner annually in the United States.
Exactly. Women 60%, men 40%. Isn't this what feminists usually argue is an acceptable ratio for equality?

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/ipv01.pdf - Intimate partner violence made up 20% of all nonfatal violent crime experienced by women in 2001.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/ipv01.pdf - Intimate partners committed 3% of the nonfatal violence against men.
Women get beat on considerably less by strangers than men do. These stats are good for the women.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/ipv01.pdf - In 2000, 1,247 women and 440 men were killed by an intimate partner. In recent years, an intimate partner killed approximately 33% of female murder victims and 4% of male murder victims.
Again we see that women get murdered considerably less by strangers than men do. Boo hoo, women have it so bad, since only 3,600 women get murdered annually compared to 11,000 men.

And like I said before, domestic violence with fatal consequences are a tiny part of the whole problem. Unequal distribution between the sexes does not mean one sex is worse off in domestic violence, only that one sex is worse off when it comes to the most extreme form of it.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/pubs-sum/183781.htm - Most perpetrators of sexual violence are men. Among acts of sexual violence committed against women since the age of 18, 100% of rapes, 92% of physical assaults, and 97% of stalking acts were perpetrated by men. Sexual violence against men is also mainly male violence: 70% of rapes, 86% of physical assaults, and 65% of stalking acts were perpetrated by men.
These surveys were carried out by phone. How many men do you know that would say "yeah, I was raped by a chick" to a total stranger over the phone? It is in modern society extremely shameful for men to admit something like that. I know you will reply that it's shameful for women too, but that doesn't compare at all.

And you're telling me that men are not the majority perpetrators of domestic abuse? You seem to just be arguing from personal incredulity because there is no research that backs up what you're saying. Men are the overwhelming majority perpetrators in all violent crime, so please explain how domestic violence comes to be the supposed exception?
Because domestic violence is a small part of all violence. That's like saying "Chinese and Indians are the overwhelming inhabitants of Asia, so please explain how inhabitants of Japan comes to be the supposed exception?".

And it reflects the wider problem. If far more women are killed by domestic violence than men, then it's not much of a stretch to realise that more women are abused, period.
"If far more people are killed by guns than by fists, then it's not much of a stretch to realize that guns are used to do violence more often than fists".

That should help you see the fallacy you just made.


Finally, I recommend http://www.dohc.ie/publications/men_domestic_violence.html

[Oxvial]

Lol waa the hell is wrong with this post I love it :laugh

[Sama'el]

Oh poor victimized men...

Cry me a fucking river, Grrblt. Men still dominate society. They still are disproportionately rewarded by society. And guess what, in spite of your sophistry, women still are the majority of victims of domestic violence. Your invalid logic, especially about the relationship between violence by intimate partners and strangers, cannot change that.

[Grrblt]

Oh poor victimized men...

Cry me a fucking river, Grrblt. Men still dominate society.
A few select men dominate society. Don't try to put that on all men or most men. The lowest tiers of society are equally disproportionately populated by men as the highest are. And the lowest have room for more people.

They still are disproportionately rewarded by society.
How? By being forced to do military service, by not having a right to see their children, by getting convicted of rape in public opinion as soon as a woman says the words, by getting laughed at by the police when making the same claim about a woman, or by being on the receiving end of all violence far more often than women are? That sounds so rewarding.

And guess what, in spite of your sophistry, women still are the majority of victims of domestic violence.
Some studies claim that. Some claim otherwise. And the difference isn't very big.

Your invalid logic, especially about the relationship between violence by intimate partners and strangers, cannot change that.
What invalid logic?

Your post clearly demonstrates what is wrong with today's feminism: it is stuck in the time when women's problems were far greater than men's, and it has failed to update their view of reality now that things are more even. At least in Sweden where I live, there are currently no laws that favor men but several that favor women, and yet you will have to look for a long time before you see a proclaimed feminist who tries to do something about it.

[Pilaf]

I just blogged about this.

Copy pasta:

In our society, men are almost expected to be promiscuous and sexually shallow. Even when it's not explicitly smiled upon it's treated with a sort of benevolent "meh, whatever" attitude. However when a woman expresses her sexuality openly she's often labeled as a "whore" or worse. By both genders.

It makes me extremely angry. For instance last week at work, a bunch of the people I work with were talking about this "trashy" girl from a nearby town who had a tattoo of a penis on her butt cheek. This honestly seemed to make them angry, almost violently so. They were calling her names like "trashy" and "a slut".

I don't understand why it bothers them so much. It's not hurting anyone. It's the way she chooses to express herself. She obviously is quote fond of penises. Most heterosexual women are. Why should I be outraged at her open expression of her enjoyment of said organ? I'm happy that she's honest about what she likes, and that she's confident and brave enough to openly display it. Leave her be, I say.

And I don't like words like "slut" when they're exclusively applied to women. The guy who was calling her that over and over often brags about his promiscuous sexual lifestyle, having coitus with multiple women over the span of several short weeks, not truly loving or even being friends with any of them. Many of his exploits are intoxicated at the time. Make no mistakes - I consider this form of sex to be rape and abuse. If a rapist is calling somebody else a "slut", there's a gross hypocrisy of character and action.

Perhaps it's time for people of my gender to evaluate their own "sluttiness". It's 2009. Sexism and Patriarchal Hypocrisy are sooo 20th century. Become a modern man, like me. It just feels better not to hate people because of the Christian bullshit dogma that permeates our society. It just feels better to not believe a woman should be raped or beaten for how she dresses in public. It's okay to accept people who express themselves differently from you. Honestly. You'll feel better. Your stress levels will be way down.

If you don't catch up with the world, you'll just be left behind and feel more and more alienated as women become more and more empowered and honest about their feelings and lifestyle.

[Vermillionage]

:sag:sag:sag:sag

[Sama'el]

A few select men dominate society. Don't try to put that on all men or most men. The lowest tiers of society are equally disproportionately populated by men as the highest are. And the lowest have room for more people.

Of course they do. That doesn't change the fact that this still is a patriarchal society, albeit one in its death throes. The patriarchal family is still alive, and men at all levels of society tend to have power over the women in their lives.

How? By being forced to do military service, by not having a right to see their children, by getting convicted of rape in public opinion as soon as a woman says the words, by getting laughed at by the police when making the same claim about a woman, or by being on the receiving end of all violence far more often than women are? That sounds so rewarding.

Men haven't been forced to do military service since Viet Nam. They are still entitled to visitation rights unless there is a compelling reason to revoke them. Far from being convicted by public opinion, most people will start blaming the victim for being raped.

As for men being on the recieiving end of more violence, they also commit a whole lot more of it. And there is a large overlap between the two categories. Violent men are often the victims of other violent men.

Some studies claim that. Some claim otherwise. And the difference isn't very big.

The difference is that your studies have been widely discredited for improper methodology.

What invalid logic?

Let me diagram it for you.
Premise: Women are disproportionately the victims of violence by intimates.
Conclusion: "Women get beat on considerably less by strangers than men do. These stats are good for the women." (your words)

If you can't see how the conclusion doesn't follow from the premise, you need to take a course in logic. Either way, I'd consider violence by intimate partners far more heinous than violence by strangers.

Your post clearly demonstrates what is wrong with today's feminism: it is stuck in the time when women's problems were far greater than men's, and it has failed to update their view of reality now that things are more even. At least in Sweden where I live, there are currently no laws that favor men but several that favor women, and yet you will have to look for a long time before you see a proclaimed feminist who tries to do something about it.

There is a whole lot more to social power than just law, hon. Things are more even, but they are far from egalitarian, especially in the United States, where I live. I live around knuckle-dragging troglodytes who still think that it is acceptable for a man to beat his wife, and people who blame a rape victim for being raped.

The laws might have changed, but the culture and social institutions have yet to completely redress these problems.

[saprobe]

Men haven't been forced to do military service since Viet Nam.

In the U.S. Lots of countries have conscript armies.

[DeterminedIdiot]

why hit them?

[Cardboard Tube Knight]

I can think a lot better reasons to hit someone...

But I bet I can find some women who think they should be hit too.

[Agmaster]

You should never be placing your hands on your girlfriend or wife for something like this. Ever.


Walking to the apartment after a night out. She's been flirting with everyone else, she's in a bad mood because you did something stupid (toilet seat? toothbrush? dirty bed, whatever). <~~~This right here, I already know it's not good enough reason to.
GF; blah blah,personal insults, jabs and snipes using info that I thought we knew not to use against each other.
Me; blah blah, come back on her and start in on her little flaws and oddities.
GF; "You motherfucker!" She's tipsy, hell or just easily upset by what I say, starts scratching, slapping, and clawing at me.
Me; Ok Jetstorm. Go.

I have seen women who've been beat within an inch of their lives by their husbands, and the cops just dismiss it or write it off. The police are seldom that proactive about domestic violence. Hell, half of the people on the police force in my home town were abusing their wives.

You're generalizing specific examples over the whole of the world. Using evocative language (women only hit men, whereas men violate women, when that specific discussion wasn't referencing rape), and personal examples that are...what? To be seen as scripture? All cops abuse their wives? Or all forces have some? What percentage?

I can't help but think you would not be so passionate if the tables were turned and this was and equally matriarchial society as it is today. I shudder to think of meeting you back in the day in that fake world. No no, that's a lie. You're interesting, but the point is you are letting your drive ruin your arguments. But hey, I'm just some emotionless man, dropping a couple of pennies without them being asked for.

[Cardboard Tube Knight]

Walking to the apartment after a night out. She's been flirting with everyone else, she's in a bad mood because you did something stupid (toilet seat? toothbrush? dirty bed, whatever). <~~~This right here, I already know it's not good enough reason to.
GF; blah blah,personal insults, jabs and snipes using info that I thought we knew not to use against each other.
Me; blah blah, come back on her and start in on her little flaws and oddities.
GF; "You motherfucker!" She's tipsy, hell or just easily upset by what I say, starts scratching, slapping, and clawing at me.
Me; Ok Jetstorm. Go.



You're generalizing specific examples over the whole of the world. Using evocative language (women only hit men, whereas men violate women, when that specific discussion wasn't referencing rape), and personal examples that are...what? To be seen as scripture? All cops abuse their wives? Or all forces have some? What percentage?

I can't help but think you would not be so passionate if the tables were turned and this was and equally matriarchial society as it is today. I shudder to think of meeting you back in the day in that fake world. No no, that's a lie. You're interesting, but the point is you are letting your drive ruin your arguments. But hey, I'm just some emotionless man, dropping a couple of pennies without them being asked for.

If she's drunk just restrain her.

[Sama'el]

You're generalizing specific examples over the whole of the world. Using evocative language (women only hit men, whereas men violate women, when that specific discussion wasn't referencing rape), and personal examples that are...what? To be seen as scripture? All cops abuse their wives? Or all forces have some? What percentage?

I can't help but think you would not be so passionate if the tables were turned and this was and equally matriarchial society as it is today. I shudder to think of meeting you back in the day in that fake world. No no, that's a lie. You're interesting, but the point is you are letting your drive ruin your arguments. But hey, I'm just some emotionless man, dropping a couple of pennies without them being asked for.

I qualified all of my statements. I did not make any more generalizations than he did. It's called providing a counter example.

You automatically assume that because I'm a feminist unwilling to make do with mere legal equality that I'm some matriarchist nut. That is not the case. Don't pretend that you're not biased in this matter either, that you can transcend gender socialization and view this objectively, because you can't. I make statements about the very real lack of any substantive equality, and you assume automatically that I'm out to get you and every other man.

[Sugar&Spice]

......................:oh

[Agmaster]

You automatically assume that because I'm a feminist unwilling to make do with mere legal equality that I'm some matriarchist nut. That is not the case. Don't pretend that you're not biased in this matter either, that you can transcend gender socialization and view this objectively, because you can't. I make statements about the very real lack of any substantive equality, and you assume automatically that I'm out to get you and every other man.

Have I not repeatedly said this is what you come across as? I don't know why you are repeating me, using different words. You determine yourself the former, yet to me come across the latter. Notice how quickly you turn defensive, though. I am not be perfect in my understanding and bias, but I fully accept this. You on the other hand come across as if you're are championing perfect, ideal equality but you don't.

That and I've never really thought about you being out to 'get' men specifically as much as you think men are just naturally wired to be out to get you and yours. This is what blows my mind.

Anytime a male gives something not even fact, but viably logical, your first response is to do what? Point out how that 'logic' is a masculine led point of view, drop facts about something else that is vaguely related to the topic at hand, maybe make a jab at the poster or men in general, then...after all that you start discussing the issue or dropping science.

[HugeGuy]

If a woman is wearing sexy clothes, I'd hit her(pun intended). :sag

[Suzumebachi]

why hit them?

So they know their place.

[Agmaster]

If she's drunk just restrain her.
Time passes, she sobers up but is still pissed as I've restrained her. That's violence btw, forcing her to remain still against her will. Calls cops, enjoy explaining the cuts and bruises on you, and any bruising on the arm or shoulder (grabbing the forearm vs pressing against a flat surface until she calms) annnnd...aside from her mercy how am I not proper fucked?

[Sama'el]

Have I not repeatedly said this is what you come across as? I don't know why you are repeating me, using different words. You determine yourself the former, yet to me come across the latter. Notice how quickly you turn defensive, though. I am not be perfect in my understanding and bias, but I fully accept this. You on the other hand come across as if you're are championing perfect, ideal equality but you don't.

That and I've never really thought about you being out to 'get' men specifically as much as you think men are just naturally wired to be out to get you and yours. This is what blows my mind.

Anytime a male gives something not even fact, but viably logical, your first response is to do what? Point out how that 'logic' is a masculine led point of view, drop facts about something else that is vaguely related to the topic at hand, maybe make a jab at the poster or men in general, then...after all that you start discussing the issue or dropping science.

You could always ask, rather than be abrasive, you know. I get defensive about this because I have spent the last 8 years watching the government try to roll back our cultural standards to the 1950s, and quite frankly I have the right to be defensive about this. This sort of affects half of the human population, you know. Am I self-righteous? Certainly. But I assure you I have no delusions of my perfection.

Several times in this thread I have specifically argued against any sort of biological essentialism that makes men inherent abusers of women. I have argued several times in this thread that this is all cultural and institutional. I don't know how you're getting the impression that I think men are wired to be this way.

I also never said logic was a masculine point of view. Not once have I ever even entertained such stupidity. On one occasion, I pointed out a very obvious and egregious error in someone's logic.

What, pray tell, are these facts that I have dismissed outright? What irrelevant facts have I injected into this conversation? Just because I'm not willing to give someone who buys into "Men's Right's Activist's" bullshit the time of day doesn't mean I'm an idiot. Why would I do anything less, these people who accuse anyone of being part of the women's movement as being some part of matriarchal conspiracy to trample men's rights.

[Agmaster]

I'm naturally abrasive, thanks for playing along long enough past that.
A; Wired can also mean socially. As you so often say.

B; If I sprinkled every post of mines with mysoginistic (spell that right for me?) undertones, would you ask if I were a woman hater or why or just assume such?

C; Ok, so long as you are aware of your self-righteousness we are pretty much good on a debating standpoint. I was under the impression you thought even higher of yourself.

D; I miswrote. When I said you call 'logic', I meant specifically that point. But if you bring a note to cite your response to this, then it's dropped as well.

E; Usless facts interjected by you? Your personal experiences when weighed against the world. Your hometown is no good sampling of most societies. The only reason you brought it up was to negate anything that hinanaru person said by showing off 'first hand knowledge'. It sucks, it ain't right, but in that context it was extranneous and not needed.

F; Because of the whole, you ignore specifics (mens rights activists bullshit as you put it), but there were annotations of violence against men. However on the whole, the problem is more for women than men. That's understandable. But if you're going for a global view...well, can you really use such specific examples as your hometown?

G; I I reign my words over you ignoring facts. So drop that as well

[Sama'el]

I'm naturally abrasive, thanks for playing along long enough past that.
A; Wired can also mean socially. As you so often say.

Well, the usual connotation of being "wired" a certain way implies a level of biological determinism. It seems that's not what you meant.

B; If I sprinkled every post of mines with misogynistic (spell that right for me?) undertones, would you ask if I were a woman hater or why or just assume such?

Depends on how blatant you were.

C; Ok, so long as you are aware of your self-righteousness we are pretty much good on a debating standpoint. I was under the impression you thought even higher of yourself.

Nope, I am fully aware of how insufferable I can be at times.

D; I miswrote. When I said you call 'logic', I meant specifically that point. But if you bring a note to cite your response to this, then it's dropped as well.

Okay then
Second paragraph (http://forums.narutofan.com/showpost.php?p=22108892&postcount=106)
Couple paragraphs down (http://forums.narutofan.com/showpost.php?p=22124475&postcount=139)

E; Usless facts interjected by you? Your personal experiences when weighed against the world. Your hometown is no good sampling of most societies. The only reason you brought it up was to negate anything that hinanaru person said by showing off 'first hand knowledge'. It sucks, it ain't right, but in that context it was extranneous and not needed.

I was unaware that citing counterexamples to someone's generalizations was no longer a permissible argument. /sarcasm

I also brought statistical evidence into the debate, so it's not like I rested my argument solely on counter examples.

F; Because of the whole, you ignore specifics (mens rights activists bullshit as you put it), but there were annotations of violence against men. However on the whole, the problem is more for women than men. That's understandable. But if you're going for a global view...well, can you really use such specific examples as your hometown?

I never doubted men were victims of domestic violence. What I take issue with are sophists attempting to make it appear as though men are the victimized group in society. I know perfectly well that patriarchy, like any form of hierarchy, ultimately chains both master and slave in a mutually dehumanizing relationship. But the master still reaps great material benefits from his position.

[Agmaster]

Depends on how blatant you were.
Let's say as admittedly self righteous as you are.
I never doubted men were victims of domestic violence. What I take issue with are sophists attempting to make it appear as though men are the victimized group in society. I know perfectly well that patriarchy, like any form of hierarchy, ultimately chains both master and slave in a mutually dehumanizing relationship. But the master still reaps great material benefits from his position.
Everyones' lives sucks, mens' lives just suck less? Not to call global outlook on gender roles perfect, but you said it yourself. Progress has been attempted to be stifled and reversed. Unless you mean developing nations. However, for developed nations there is notable sustained progress. You sound as if we have not moved at all.

Just for edification. Define material benefit for me?

[Mike Hunt]

Women should be fucking hit for wearing sexy clothing...

Fucking their just showing off thier shit making me get a boner.

And while their just flashing their shit, I have to hide a boner or else people be looking at me as if I have 3 legs.

[Tokoyami]

Women should be fucking hit for wearing sexy clothing...

Fucking their just showing off thier shit making me get a boner.

And while their just flashing their shit, I have to hide a boner or else people be looking at me as if I have 3 legs.Just because we can't control ourself doesn't mean women deserve to be hit for wearing revealing things. That is equivalent to saying that all people who t-shirts with "funny" quotations on them deserve to be hit because you don't find them funny and look stupid for not laughing. You can have an opinion on something but the instant you take that opinion and physically hurt somone because of it YOU are in the wrong.

Not to mention that that way of thinking is utterly narrowminded and stupid.

[mystictrunks]

What are women doing outside anyway?

[Tokoyami]

What are women doing outside anyway?Having lives and going about there business?

[Surreal]

Having lives and going about there business?

Who gave them permission? If they are outside without explicitly being so allowed by their man/owner they deserve to be a testing ground for his pimp hand and are thus valid targets.

[Sama'el]

Let's say as admittedly self righteous as you are.

If we consider to two positions to be equal in value, then yes. But I'd hardly consider a feminist position to be as egregious as misogyny.

Everyones' lives sucks, mens' lives just suck less? Not to call global outlook on gender roles perfect, but you said it yourself. Progress has been attempted to be stifled and reversed. Unless you mean developing nations. However, for developed nations there is notable sustained progress. You sound as if we have not moved at all.

Just for edification. Define material benefit for me?

In the past 8 years, we really haven't in the United States. In many ways, we've backslid a bit. Bush's "Healthy Families" initiative was nothing more than a thinly veiled attempt at getting women back in the kitchen, subservient to their husbands.

Material benefit, in this case would be a benefit that has monetary value. Power and prestige fall into this as well.

[Toby]

lol the reactions of Café-goers in this thread.

Ok, for fuck's sake, the question wasn't "is it ever acceptable to hit women?" it was about whether wearing revealing clothing could ever warrant a slight beating, and whatever you put into that, and what constitutes revealing clothing, would determine your answer.

I am not too pleased when I get accosted with the "SIGN THE PETITION TO BAN ALL VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMENZ NAO", but it's in response to statistics as these, and since people in general lie about a lot of things, this is a necessary reality-check. You want to be allowed to hit women when they insult you? Ah, you want respect, and the legal right to retain integrity. This questionnaire was about the same thing, only for women who clearly aren't getting it, even though it is theirs by right. Since when the fuck could you hit a woman for being revealed in public? This is not about nudity.

In order to end this on a good note, hail the invention of the teaspoon. Some people have so much rage that we had to make a smaller spoon than average just so that they could eat like civilised people. Also, the "teaspoon" could come in handy in a less literal sense, if you take my drift.

[Grrblt]

Of course they do. That doesn't change the fact that this still is a patriarchal society, albeit one in its death throes. The patriarchal family is still alive, and men at all levels of society tend to have power over the women in their lives.
I've never met a man who had any more power over a woman in his life than she had over him, except in the cases of a father/custodian and daughter, or a work relation where he was her boss.

A question never really answered by feminism is: how do I, as an average man, benefit from this patriarchal society in ways that an average woman does not?

Men haven't been forced to do military service since Viet Nam.
Number of countries who force women to do military service: 9
Number of countries who force men to do military service: couldn't find a list, but I count more than 50 on this map (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ea/Conscription_map_of_the_world.svg) (red and yellow).

They are still entitled to visitation rights unless there is a compelling reason to revoke them.
Yeah... as soon as they can get their fathership recognized by the law. Which isn't the easiest thing to do. By Swedish law, if a mother is married, her husband is automatically assumed to be the father. If she's not married, she gets write a name on a piece of paper after giving birth and if she doesn't, you can say goodbye to any legal rights to your kid until you convince the court to grant you a dna test, and that takes many months. One guy had his kid taken away from him for over a year when the mother died in childbirth and was unable to sign the damn paper.

Far from being convicted by public opinion, most people will start blaming the victim for being raped.
No. This is a fantasy feminists live in. The only time someone tries to cast the blame for a rape on a woman is in the court room, and if you have a problem with that I need to ask you if you truly believe everyone has a right to a legal defense.

As for men being on the recieiving end of more violence, they also commit a whole lot more of it. And there is a large overlap between the two categories. Violent men are often the victims of other violent men.

The difference is that your studies have been widely discredited for improper methodology.
You keep saying that and you keep offering no evidence for it.

Let me diagram it for you.
Premise: Women are disproportionately the victims of violence by intimates.
Conclusion: "Women get beat on considerably less by strangers than men do. These stats are good for the women." (your words)
You forgot (or, more likely, left out) the important parts that were the "this represents x% of all violence to men/women". If women suffer a hundred bla bla bla from domestic violence every year, would you rather that was 100% of all bla bla bla done to women or 1%? That's right; 100% is better, because it decreases the total amount of bla bla bla. I don't see how women can complain over getting murdered less than a third as often as men.

If you can't see how the conclusion doesn't follow from the premise, you need to take a course in logic. Either way, I'd consider violence by intimate partners far more heinous than violence by strangers.
I have taken a course in logic (though it wasn't only about logic) and I aced that part of the exam.

Violence is violence. You don't feel better by getting crippled by a stranger than someone you know.

There is a whole lot more to social power than just law, hon.
There are a few things, I outlined some of them in my previous post. But mostly, it's about law.

Things are more even, but they are far from egalitarian, especially in the United States, where I live. I live around knuckle-dragging troglodytes who still think that it is acceptable for a man to beat his wife, and people who blame a rape victim for being raped.
Let me guess. You also live around knuckle-dragging troglodytes who think that it is acceptable for a woman to slap a man, but you never bothered to find out the prevalence of that. Whenever a man beats his wife, there is a great outrage. Whenever a woman slaps a man, most people think that he probably deserved it. Sometimes they cheer her on for not accepting "the oppression of women". You can try this with a friendly man next time you're in a public place if you wish.

The laws might have changed, but the culture and social institutions have yet to completely redress these problems.
What's interesting is that you acknowledge women are now favored by the law, but refuse to consider anything that isn't a problem for women to be worthy of notice. This is, sadly, the typical feminist stance from my experience.

[Saufsoldat]

Did I miss all the femfascism? :(

[Talon.]

This just in, one in seven people have completely forgotten the concept of chivalry and honor. :pek

Maelstrom, you fucking genius you. :awesome

what gives men insensitive assfaces the right to hurt a woman?
certainly not their wardrobe choices. My girlfriend wears some clothes like that sometimes, and i personally dont mind, beause thats how she feels comfortable. take a hint, you 1/7 douchebags. its called "mutual respect"
learn it :quite:gun

[The Space Cowboy]

Dear Women

Keep wearing sexy clothing in public.

It makes everyone's day better

Sincerely,

The Universe

[-MBS-]

If a woman wears revealing clothes bordering on the slutty out in public, I totally agree it warrants a slap or other means of physical contact. A woman who dresses like that is a disgrace to her boyfriend, to the people around her, and herself. :D:

The findings of the poll, conducted for the Home Office, also disclosed about a quarter of people believe that wearing sexy or revealing clothing should lead to a woman being held partly responsible for being raped or sexually assaulted.

Right.... and this is the same home office that continuously publishes false statistics regarding knife crime and burglaries. I won't believe it until I get a reliable source. :C

[Cel3stial]

If a woman hits you, hit her back. She shouldn't start something she doesn't want to finish.

[Jagon Fox]

wow what dark ages country is this in? :notrust its not really any of their business what a chick wants to wear

[Agmaster]

Grrblt;
You forgot (or, more likely, left out) the important parts that were the "this represents x% of all violence to men/women". If women suffer a hundred bla bla bla from domestic violence every year, would you rather that was 100% of all bla bla bla done to women or 1%? That's right; 100% is better, because it decreases the total amount of bla bla bla. I don't see how women can complain over getting murdered less than a third as often as men.

Counterpoint is she is discussing relationship abuse specifically, but don't mind me.


Violence is violence. You don't feel better by getting crippled by a stranger than someone you know.

Debatable. There is a degree of trust and safety that is lost when it is with someone you know. I assume, atleast.

[TatsuBon]

Well if there's sex toys involved

[Sama'el]

I've never met a man who had any more power over a woman in his life than she had over him, except in the cases of a father/custodian and daughter, or a work relation where he was her boss.

A question never really answered by feminism is: how do I, as an average man, benefit from this patriarchal society in ways that an average woman does not?

You have not been looking very closely, or Scandanavia is a light-year ahead of the rest of the world.

Social power is it's own benefit. It leads to material rewards, and as the expression of one's ego, a greater feeling of self-worth. As opposed to being the subject, which is a degrading affair.

Number of countries who force women to do military service: 9
Number of countries who force men to do military service: couldn't find a list, but I count more than 50 on this map (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ea/Conscription_map_of_the_world.svg) (red and yellow).

How many of those countries are in any sort of major war? The last major war that a Western nation with a conscript army was involved in was the Vietnam war.

Yeah... as soon as they can get their fathership recognized by the law. Which isn't the easiest thing to do. By Swedish law, if a mother is married, her husband is automatically assumed to be the father. If she's not married, she gets write a name on a piece of paper after giving birth and if she doesn't, you can say goodbye to any legal rights to your kid until you convince the court to grant you a dna test, and that takes many months. One guy had his kid taken away from him for over a year when the mother died in childbirth and was unable to sign the damn paper.

Well, then Swedish law is considerably different than American. Even so, making it harder for fathers to get custody of their children is hardly indicative of a society that disadvantages men.

No. This is a fantasy feminists live in. The only time someone tries to cast the blame for a rape on a woman is in the court room, and if you have a problem with that I need to ask you if you truly believe everyone has a right to a legal defense.

This is not a fantasy. I've gone through this myself. The biggest rape case in recent history, the Duke University rape case, the media coverage was absolutely horrible. The victim's entire sexual history was dragged through the public mud. They discussed in detail what she was wearing at the time of the alleged crime. The entire media slant was that this was a woman trying to defame these poor upper class white boys.

This is a well documented phenomena. Only a mere decade and a half ago did courts stop admitting a woman's past sexual history as evidence. And what the woman was wearing that night and her demeanor are still considered admissable because defense attorneys know there are still plenty of people who will blame the victim enough to establish reasonable doubt. Hell, up until the mid 90s, by legal definition a man couldn't rape his wife. He could beat her up and forcibly have sexual intercourse with her, but by most state's definitions of rape, (defined as a man forcibly having sex with a woman that was not his wife) he was perfectly within his right.

Let's also not forget that rape is the most underreported crime in the world. Only 30 percent of rapes are even reported to the police, and of those, less than half even make it to trial. And that's just rapes. When you factor in unreported rape attempts, unreported sexual assaults and the like, you'll start to get a picture of what's going on for women.

In the United States, it's conservatively estimated that 1/3 of all women will face a rape attempt in their lifetime, and not less than 1/5 of all women will be raped at least once in their lifetime. I doubt the picture is that much rosier in Sweden.

You forgot (or, more likely, left out) the important parts that were the "this represents x% of all violence to men/women". If women suffer a hundred bla bla bla from domestic violence every year, would you rather that was 100% of all bla bla bla done to women or 1%? That's right; 100% is better, because it decreases the total amount of bla bla bla. I don't see how women can complain over getting murdered less than a third as often as men.

You think that somehow makes up for us being subject to routine abuse by our domestic partners? Or for the fact that not less than 1/5th of us will be raped in our lifetime? Honestly? Quit throwing your "I'm a picked on man" pity party. Men aren't murdered because they're men. Women are dominated and abused because we are women.

I have taken a course in logic (though it wasn't only about logic) and I aced that part of the exam.

Violence is violence. You don't feel better by getting crippled by a stranger than someone you know.

Then why would you commit such an egregious error of logic?

You feel a whole hell of a lot worse when you're harmed by someone you trusted, perhaps even loved.

There are a few things, I outlined some of them in my previous post. But mostly, it's about law.

Women have had legal equality before the law since the 1920s in my country. Things did not get better overnight. And women still are not equal, 90 years later. There's a whole hell of a lot more to social power than law. Law is a very small portion of it.

Let me guess. You also live around knuckle-dragging troglodytes who think that it is acceptable for a woman to slap a man, but you never bothered to find out the prevalence of that. Whenever a man beats his wife, there is a great outrage. Whenever a woman slaps a man, most people think that he probably deserved it. Sometimes they cheer her on for not accepting "the oppression of women". You can try this with a friendly man next time you're in a public place if you wish.

I've never slapped a man. Hell, most women rarely if ever will. But a slap on the cheek is a whole hell of lot different than being beaten, and I am offended that you'd even presume to find the two equivalent.

These chivalrous notions you keep talking about hardly compensate for institutionalized patriarchy. They are a function of a very real social inequality that culture has attempted to compensate for in some small way.

It's like the old rituals in feudal Europe, in which for one day lord and vassal changed positions. But, at the end of the day, the lord was still the lord, and the vassal was still the vassal.

What's interesting is that you acknowledge women are now favored by the law, but refuse to consider anything that isn't a problem for women to be worthy of notice. This is, sadly, the typical feminist stance from my experience.

I never made such acknowledgment. Saying that patriarchal laws have changed in no way equates with the law now favoring women. Women have equality before the law in Western countries. But they still remain very much unequals in society.

Feminism is only one component of me. There is no such thing as someone who is a feminist to the exclusion of all other ideologies.

[ButtholeSurfer]

More feminazism from Jello_Biafra, I love it she's the woman jew incarnation of myself. Though to actually contribute:
Women have equality before the law in Western countries. But they still remain very much unequals in society.

Depends on the society, I don't think the western world has one uniform society for which every nation or individual follows. I feel Europe and the US to be on 2 completely different systems in terms of how women are viewed, and then if I want to really in depth on Europe I'd say there is a difference in how women are viewed or treated in various countries. Point being please present some statistics or share personal experiences and I'll gladly listen, and put in my own input.

[Grrblt]

You have not been looking very closely, or Scandanavia is a light-year ahead of the rest of the world.

Social power is it's own benefit. It leads to material rewards, and as the expression of one's ego, a greater feeling of self-worth. As opposed to being the subject, which is a degrading affair.
Again: what social power? I simply don't possess any social power that the next woman doesn't.

How many of those countries are in any sort of major war? The last major war that a Western nation with a conscript army was involved in was the Vietnam war.
So we're being forced to do military service even though there's no need for it? Yeah, that didn't really help your case there.

Well, then Swedish law is considerably different than American. Even so, making it harder for fathers to get custody of their children is hardly indicative of a society that disadvantages men.
Oh you're right. It's indicative of a society that advantages men. How silly of me.

This is not a fantasy. I've gone through this myself. The biggest rape case in recent history, the Duke University rape case, the media coverage was absolutely horrible. The victim's entire sexual history was dragged through the public mud. They discussed in detail what she was wearing at the time of the alleged crime. The entire media slant was that this was a woman trying to defame these poor upper class white boys.
I haven't heard of the case before, but from what I can read about it on wikipedia, that's exactly what she was trying to do.

And really, dragging sexual history through the mud does not mean they blame her for the rape. It means they want to illustrate how no rape took place. No one blames the victim for getting raped after it has been established that she actually was raped.

This is a well documented phenomena. Only a mere decade and a half ago did courts stop admitting a woman's past sexual history as evidence.
Then you should have stopped complaining about it a decade and a half ago.

And what the woman was wearing that night and her demeanor are still considered admissable because defense attorneys know there are still plenty of people who will blame the victim enough to establish reasonable doubt.
In a rape trial, usually there is no contention that they had sex. What is contended is whether the accuser wanted to have sex or not. No one has any possibility of knowing what went through the mind of the accuser at the time, which means you have to look for other signs that she did in fact want to have sex. Wearing sexy clothes is indicative of wanting to have sex. I'm not saying it is by any means solid evidence, but it is something in a situation where there's very little of anything.

So discussing what the woman was wearing has to stay. At least until they start using lie detectors.

Hell, up until the mid 90s, by legal definition a man couldn't rape his wife. He could beat her up and forcibly have sexual intercourse with her, but by most state's definitions of rape, (defined as a man forcibly having sex with a woman that was not his wife) he was perfectly within his right.
So by law, men could not even be even be raped. Damn, women had it so rough because there was 1 person they couldn't be raped by.

Let's also not forget that rape is the most underreported crime in the world. Only 30 percent of rapes are even reported to the police, and of those, less than half even make it to trial. And that's just rapes. When you factor in unreported rape attempts, unreported sexual assaults and the like, you'll start to get a picture of what's going on for women.
When you factor unreported rapes, unreported rape attempts, unreported sexual assaults and the like, you'll start to get a picture of what's going on for men too. Sadly, you seem unwilling to.

In the United States, it's conservatively estimated that 1/3 of all women will face a rape attempt in their lifetime, and not less than 1/5 of all women will be raped at least once in their lifetime. I doubt the picture is that much rosier in Sweden.
Conservatively? Yeah, if you're expecting 2/3. Go to an old people's home and check if 1 in 3 women there has faced a rape attempt.

The reality is that it is very impossible to know how under-reported a crime is (they are estimations on their own), and therefore any estimations built on them are the equivalent of a monkey throwing darts on pieces of paper.

You think that somehow makes up for us being subject to routine abuse by our domestic partners? Or for the fact that not less than 1/5th of us will be raped in our lifetime? Honestly? Quit throwing your "I'm a picked on man" pity party. Men aren't murdered because they're men. Women are dominated and abused because we are women.
... :huh

When women are abused, it's because you're women. However, when men are abused, it's not because we're men. I guess all women are saints, huh? Because you just said that men do stuff that gets us murdered and women don't do the same things. Perhaps you should take that logic course.

Then why would you commit such an egregious error of logic?
I did no such thing.

You feel a whole hell of a lot worse when you're harmed by someone you trusted, perhaps even loved.
Who came up with this idea? How do you measure hurt between people? Or do you poll people who have been beaten first by a stranger and then by a partner?

Women have had legal equality before the law since the 1920s in my country. Things did not get better overnight. And women still are not equal, 90 years later. There's a whole hell of a lot more to social power than law. Law is a very small portion of it.
Law is the largest portion of it.

I've never slapped a man. Hell, most women rarely if ever will. But a slap on the cheek is a whole hell of lot different than being beaten, and I am offended that you'd even presume to find the two equivalent.
It's conservatively estimated that 100% of women will slap a man in their lifetime.

Don't think slaps on the cheek counts? Why am I not surprised :omg it isn't hard to see why the part of western culture that says slapping men is OK still exists.

How about a knee to the groin then? Any man should be able to tell you that is very comparable to getting beaten on. People will still assume he deserved it.

These chivalrous notions you keep talking about hardly compensate for institutionalized patriarchy. They are a function of a very real social inequality that culture has attempted to compensate for in some small way.
There's no such thing as institutionalized patriarchy in western countries. There used to be though. Feminism has failed to see its abolishment.

I never made such acknowledgment. Saying that patriarchal laws have changed in no way equates with the law now favoring women. Women have equality before the law in Western countries.
Did you just forget reading about how men are forced to do military service, how we get no right to see our kids, and how we couldn't be raped according to the law? How is that equality before the law?

But they still remain very much unequals in society.
Very much? No. Some. And both sides have their disadvantages. I wouldn't say that either gender is better off when all factors are considered.

Feminism is only one component of me. There is no such thing as someone who is a feminist to the exclusion of all other ideologies.
I never said there was.

[saprobe]

Originally Posted by Grrblt http://forums.narutofan.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://forums.narutofan.com/showthread.php?p=22137461#post22137461)
Yeah... as soon as they can get their fathership recognized by the law. Which isn't the easiest thing to do. By Swedish law, if a mother is married, her husband is automatically assumed to be the father. If she's not married, she gets write a name on a piece of paper after giving birth and if she doesn't, you can say goodbye to any legal rights to your kid until you convince the court to grant you a dna test, and that takes many months. One guy had his kid taken away from him for over a year when the mother died in childbirth and was unable to sign the damn paper.



Well, then Swedish law is considerably different than American. Even so, making it harder for fathers to get custody of their children is hardly indicative of a society that disadvantages men.


Actually, it varies by state but that is pretty much the way it works in America. Only the birth mother is guaranteed paternity. When a couple is married her husband is assumed to be the father. If she's not married she and the reputed father have to file an affidavit of parentage. If she does not sign the affidavit the father has no legal rights to the child.

Of course, if she denies him rights he can then sue to establish paternity. He can do the same thing in Sweden but sometimes it takes a long time. In one case it has taken over 14 years for the father to establish paternity. Last I heard he still hadn't won his case.

[Aokiji]

Feminism is pointless. How the fuck can you make and ideology of something so basic? "I think everyone should be treated equal." Congrats, that's what we call equalism. Wanting equality for only one group is retarded. If you don't want equality for only one group, why do you call yourself feminist then?

[ButtholeSurfer]

Feminism is pointless. How the fuck can you make and ideology of something so basic? "I think everyone should be treated equal." Congrats, that's what we call equalism. Wanting equality for only one group is retarded. If you don't want equality for only one group, why do you call yourself feminist then?

They want to advance the rights of women and how they are perceived in the world, and while you may make your claim of equalism things are very different for women in terms of experiences, for example if a woman gets an abortion she's looked down upon or if she cheated she'd be shunned more than her male counterpart if he were to do the same, it's just how society is, while things may be "equal" there still are some things that need to be changed before it's ever truly equal.

[Uzumaki Lee]

no they shouldnt..

[Aokiji]

They want to advance the rights of women and how they are perceived in the world, and while you may make your claim of equalism things are very different for women in terms of experiences, for example if a woman gets an abortion she's looked down upon or if she cheated she'd be shunned more than her male counterpart if he were to do the same, it's just how society is, while things may be "equal" there still are some things that need to be changed before it's ever truly equal.

Not only does what I said not conflict with your statements, but your examples are ineffective.

A man isn't looked down upon for abortions cuz well, they can't get pregnant. (unless there is some science bastadization in play)

And I too disapprove of the hypocrisy of thinking of unfaithful women as the worst and of men as studs. Am I a feminist? Fuck feminism. Fuck people who think of non virgins as whores but date 3 girls and get some by hookers.

See?

Also, it's partially justified. Men and women cannot be measured with the same scale. But not to that level that people do.

[ButtholeSurfer]

Not only does what I said not conflict with your statements, but your examples are ineffective.

A man isn't looked down upon for abortions cuz well, they can't get pregnant. (unless there is some science bastadization in play)

Also, it's partially justified. Men and women cannot be measured with the same scale. But not to that level that people do.

I'm sorry but that's why i mentioned why equalism would fail because a man would not be judged on such a matter even if he encouraged it.

[Aokiji]

I'm sorry but that's why i mentioned why equalism would fail because a man would not be judged on such a matter even if he encouraged it.

So, you don't want equality.

[Sama'el]

Again: what social power? I simply don't possess any social power that the next woman doesn't.

You'll make more money on average than a woman with the same qualifications will. You'll rise further and quicker in any business hierarchy. You won't have to worry about not getting hired because an employer thinks you might get pregnant in the near future.

Oh you're right. It's indicative of a society that advantages men. How silly of me.

It's not indicative of anything. Who get's the children is a very small component of society. Just because it isn't a shut out game for males doesn't mean they're not winning in the end.

I haven't heard of the case before, but from what I can read about it on wikipedia, that's exactly what she was trying to do.

And really, dragging sexual history through the mud does not mean they blame her for the rape. It means they want to illustrate how no rape took place. No one blames the victim for getting raped after it has been established that she actually was raped.

That was the presumption in the media the moment the case began, before there was any evidence to it. The same thing happened in a local rape case where I live. When the local news covered it, they seemed to think it was relevant to discuss what the woman was wearing when the rape occurred.

Women have and will be blamed for their own victim status. These ideas are still all to prevalent in society,both in the US and Europe.

Then you should have stopped complaining about it a decade and a half ago.

The law changed, but the culture did not.

In a rape trial, usually there is no contention that they had sex. What is contended is whether the accuser wanted to have sex or not. No one has any possibility of knowing what went through the mind of the accuser at the time, which means you have to look for other signs that she did in fact want to have sex. Wearing sexy clothes is indicative of wanting to have sex. I'm not saying it is by any means solid evidence, but it is something in a situation where there's very little of anything.

So discussing what the woman was wearing has to stay. At least until they start using lie detectors.

Jesus Fucking Christ. Wearing sexy clothes is not an indication that someone wants to have sex. There is absolutely no correlation between the two. The only thing that matters is what whether there is consent. And what clothes I'm wearing doesn't change that fact.

So by law, men could not even be even be raped. Damn, women had it so rough because there was 1 person they couldn't be raped by.

But men could be sodomized. And sodomy was punished as harshly as rape, consensual or not. Also, how many times must I bring this up: women are most often raped by their intimates. Their husbands or their boyfriends are the people who are most likely to rape them. Less than 20 percent of rapes are stranger rapes.

When you factor unreported rapes, unreported rape attempts, unreported sexual assaults and the like, you'll start to get a picture of what's going on for men too. Sadly, you seem unwilling to.

I never said that men being raped or sexually assaulted wasn't a problem. Why I did say was that anonymous survey data, which is much more reliable than police reports, indicate that men do not face rape or sexual assault at anywhere near the same incidence as women do.

Conservatively? Yeah, if you're expecting 2/3. Go to an old people's home and check if 1 in 3 women there has faced a rape attempt.

The reality is that it is very impossible to know how under-reported a crime is (they are estimations on their own), and therefore any estimations built on them are the equivalent of a monkey throwing darts on pieces of paper.

My mother works in a nursing home. She has discussed this with the patients as well as her coworkers. Nearly all of her coworkers had been sexually assaulted at least once in their lifetime, and quite a few of them had been sexually abused by family members. My mother went through this as well. And the women in the nursing home, when they were willing to talk about it, tended to confess that those things happened. Often by their husbands. This is no small problem.

Reporting a crime is filing a police report. It's an affirmative action. Anonymous surveys get a much better picture of the actual incidence of crimes. And they all uphold the general trend: women are overwhelmingly the victims of sexual assault.


... :huh

When women are abused, it's because you're women. However, when men are abused, it's not because we're men. I guess all women are saints, huh? Because you just said that men do stuff that gets us murdered and women don't do the same things. Perhaps you should take that logic course.

You really don't understand what I'm saying. Women are victimized for reasons relating to them being a woman. That's the general pattern of male-on-female violence, whether sexual or not. She didn't have dinner ready when I got home, or she was obviously asking for sex. Shit like that. Male on male violence doesn't occur that way. Drunken brawls, schoolyard fights and the like aren't the same types of violence as domestic partner abuse.

Who came up with this idea? How do you measure hurt between people? Or do you poll people who have been beaten first by a stranger and then by a partner?

Do you know what betrayal means? When you expect someone to care about you and be nice to you, and then they hurt you physically is a whole lot worse than being beaten up by some stranger. I'm sure you know what this means. Ever gotten into a fight with a best friend? An actual, physical fight? I can guarantee you it affected you a whole lot more than a fight with some random stranger.

It's conservatively estimated that 100% of women will slap a man in their lifetime.

Don't think slaps on the cheek counts? Why am I not surprised :omg it isn't hard to see why the part of western culture that says slapping men is OK still exists.

How about a knee to the groin then? Any man should be able to tell you that is very comparable to getting beaten on. People will still assume he deserved it.

Such chivalrous notions exist because of historically patriarchal relationships. When patriarchy disappears, those norms will die off soon afterwards.

There's no such thing as institutionalized patriarchy in western countries. There used to be though. Feminism has failed to see its abolishment.

Yes there is. So long as their are proscribed gender roles, feminism will remain relevant. So long as there are people telling women that there duty is to take care of children and forget about their own careers, feminism will have a place in this world. So long as a man who stays at home to take care of his kids is called a pansy or a fag, feminism will have a place in this world.

Did you just forget reading about how men are forced to do military service, how we get no right to see our kids, and how we couldn't be raped according to the law? How is that equality before the law?

Listen, you're talking to someone who willingly registered for the Selective Service in the US even though she didn't have to. Men still have rights to see their kids, they just have to prove that they are in fact theirs. Should that process be made a bit easier? Yes. But don't make it like there's some institutional conspiracy to deny men their rights.

Guess what, the laws changed. Most rape laws in the US and other Western countries are gender neutral now. And guess what? It was feminists who first recognized that men could be raped just like women. And it was feminists who campaigned to change the laws to recognize this. We are only your enemy if you insist on making us your enemy.

Very much? No. Some. And both sides have their disadvantages. I wouldn't say that either gender is better off when all factors are considered.

Pay disparity, lack of advancement. Being underrepresented in both higher education and government. And, at least in the US, being penalized for being mothers. What do we get in return? It's harder to take our kids away and we can slap men in public if we feel like it. Some compensation.

I never said there was.

You said rather explicitly that feminists ignore anything that doesn't fit within the umbrella of feminism.

[ButtholeSurfer]

So, you don't want equality.

Perhaps it's your inability to interpret or my inability to express thing effectively that's causing this communication breakdown. Anyways that's not what I'm saying, equality would be great but there are factors which make it hard to this day.

[64palms]

Women should be left alone. Men should wear more sexy clothing.:LOS

[Aokiji]

Perhaps it's your inability to interpret or my inability to express thing effectively that's causing this communication breakdown. Anyways that's not what I'm saying equality would be great but there are factors which make it hard to this day.

GOOD .

[64palms]

lol, like black civil rights equality groups never used terms other than equality.
The gender civil rights movement started off with the name feminism, because it was a fight for women, who were subject to extreme sexism. It was THEIR movement against oppression. It was a fight for gender equality by women, against patriarchy.

And through association, and connecting to early gender rights and equality, we tend to call fighting for gender equality feminism, by history of the movement for gender equality. I like the term feminism because I like honoring that rich history, and, more simply, because I just find one word easier than two, and "equalism" could mean all sorts of thing, it's not specific enough for when talking about gender and sex.

[Aokiji]

How a male can call himself feminist, I will never understand.

[Cardboard Tube Knight]

How a male can call himself feminist, I will never understand.

How can someone who is white call for black civil rights?

[64palms]

I'm sorry, what's so confusing?

Edit: Beaten to it.

[ButtholeSurfer]

lol, like black civil rights equality groups never used terms other than equality.
The gender civil rights movement started off with the name feminism, because it was a fight for women, who were subject to extreme sexism. It was THEIR movement against oppression. It was a fight for gender equality by women, against patriarchy.

And through association, and connecting to early gender rights and equality, we tend to call fighting for gender equality feminism, by history of the movement for gender equality. I like the term feminism because I like honoring that rich history, and, more simply, because I just find one word easier than two, and "equalism" could mean all sorts of thing, it's not specific enough for when talking about gender and sex.
Why not make an acronym that could then Identify with it? Point being is the term nowadays is perverted to some people's specific agenda, in terms of equality between the genders I feel not much more can be done through politics, present changes would have to be made through culture and society, this would then mean we have to wait for a few more generations of people who are stuck on the old ideals and passed them down to die off, and for women who were in a position where they gain mass attention to be more positive role models and generally put out a different output for more girls to follow. So this equality will be reached when both sides change the culture.

[64palms]

in terms of equality between the genders I feel not much more can be done through politics
True, feminism is more of a social movement nowadays. And a lot of the actual legal rights fought for, are not women's but of genderbending and gays. Challenging patriarchy through heterosexism.

[Sama'el]

Why not make an acronym that could then Identify with it? Point being is the term nowadays is perverted to some people's specific agenda, in terms of equality between the genders I feel not much more can be done through politics, present changes would have to be made through culture and society, this would then mean we have to wait for a few more generations of people who are stuck on the old ideals and passed them down to die off, and for women who were in a position where they gain mass attention to be more positive role models and generally put out a different output for more girls to follow. So this equality will be reached when both sides change the culture.

The problem is that egalitarianism is just too generic. That's why it's always been subdivided into different groups. Movements for racial equality were called "civil rights movements" for convenience, even though their concerns went beyond just civil rights. For women, it's historically been feminism. There have been plenty of male feminists over the years, and certainly a lot of fellow travelers to the movement.