Go on... rape her... she won't report it... [UniLad magazine article]

[Blagsta]

Why insult me instead of considering the slightest possibility I might be right? I'm not insulting you, I'm trying to help you.

Classic line

 

[Blagsta]

And the cunt shines through. Again.

Oh look, the whole gang is here

 

[kabbes]

If I can break in to all the maths and misery:

Edie, do you have any further thoughts on the institutional and systemic oppression of women now that you have seen the various responses to you on the subject?

 

[5t3IIa]

Classic line

You're a dumb thug. Hope it works out for you

 

[Jeff Robinson]

Alotta beef up in huuuur.

 

[Citizen66]

I cant get my head round this at all. If you mention prostitution (in the context of this thread) then youre pulling gender rank on a woman and putting her in her place. So that then leaves some topics off bounds. If some topics are off bounds to have with women then surely that in itself is also sexist as it creates an unequal playing field regarding discussion. The mind boggles.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Problem is, we get those 'debates' on a daily basis elsewhere in our lives be it at work or through family or whatever. Or at least I do, can't speak for anyone else I suppose. I actually find it pretty frustrating that left wing views, especially the more radical ones, can be seen as almost a niche subject at times. But I don't share the view that like everybody outside of urban75 is on the political right and that somehow validates that right wing thinking is the 'correct' view. Yes, lots of people are right of centre. I'd say most of my RL mates aren't though, they range from centre left to hard left. None of them post here. And it isn't difficult to see why they're to the left. You grow up in the NE of England and be shat on continually. The Tories will always be wankers for the bankers. The Far right are a little bit weird and fancy themselves as nutters. So what are you left with? Labour. New Labour let you down and then what? You move further left or you don't bother your brain with what's going on and blame immigrants instead. Which is precisely what the Tories want you to do.

IMO part of the reason why "leftism" of any sort appears niche "out there" is because a form of centrist rightism has been normalised over the last 30 years so that many people have grown up not only in a political environment that has indoctrinated them about values vis a vis "right" and "left", but also hasn't really exposed them to the same depth of "leftism" as it has to centrist rightism, and this does seem to have had an effect on how people who may not consider themselves "political" choose to describe themselves in public and see themselves in private. It's not "brainwashing" by any means, but the narrowing of choice mixed with the feeling of helplessness our current party politics has instilled in many who still be believe in parliamentary democracy, has had the effect of making leftists feel isolated from "normal" politics, as if there's something wrong or sordid about not being on the right, not toeing the majority line, so to speak.

 

[5t3IIa]

I cant get my head round this at all. If you mention prostitution then youre pulling gender rank on a woman and putting her in her place. So that then leaves some topics off bounds. If some topics are off bounds to have with women then surely that in itself is also sexist as it creates an unequal playing field regarding discussion. The mind boggles.

It doesn't leave a topic out of bounds. It leaves bringing it up to shut someone up out of bounds.

 

[Citizen66]

It doesn't leave a topic out of bounds. It leaves bringing it up to shut someone up out of bounds.

For the record i dont think he was doing that. But it was the worst example he could have chosen to make his point, as the aftermath demonstrates.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I told you - I thought about this a lot and my conclusion is that you're the type of person who thinks nothing of shutting a woman down by reminding her that she's a woman. That she's done stereotypically female things; been a whore, been spiteful, been a bitch.

I don't understand why you can't see it.

Being a whore is "stereotypically female"?

 

[5t3IIa]

Being a whore is "stereotypically female"?

In this precise context, yes that's what I meant.

 

[frogwoman]

Problem is, we get those 'debates' on a daily basis elsewhere in our lives be it at work or through family or whatever. Or at least I do, can't speak for anyone else I suppose. I actually find it pretty frustrating that left wing views, especially the more radical ones, can be seen as almost a niche subject at times. But I don't share the view that like everybody outside of urban75 is on the political right and that somehow validates that right wing thinking is the 'correct' view. Yes, lots of people are right of centre. I'd say most of my RL mates aren't though, they range from centre left to hard left. None of them post here. And it isn't difficult to see why they're to the left. You grow up in the NE of England and be shat on continually. The Tories will always be wankers for the bankers. The Far right are a little bit weird and fancy themselves as nutters. So what are you left with? Labour. New Labour let you down and then what? You move further left or you don't bother your brain with what's going on and blame immigrants instead. Which is precisely what the Tories want you to do.

good post

 

[Citizen66]

Being a whore is "stereotypically female"?

I think she means from the pov of a misogynist.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I wish everyone thought that. I was reading the other day about various economic theories that were in use right up to 2008 that assumed normal distribution of risk on financial instruments. Mandlebrot back in the 1960s warned that this was not the case, and that extreme events were in fact more likely than in a normal distribution. He was largely ignored.

You're confusing acceptance of Mandelbrot's very well-reasoned formulae (widely accepted fairly quickly in the academic community) with the imperatives of capitalism to keep on keeping on with the same old ideas in order to justify keeping the money rolling in. The former was/is entirely disconnected from the latter.

 

[frogwoman]

In this precise context, yes that's what I meant.

yep, gotta say i agree with you here although i don't think blagsta was intentionally doing that.

 

[ViolentPanda]

In this precise context, yes that's what I meant.

Right. It comes across as generalising, which is why I asked.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I think she means from the pov of a misogynist.

Don't oppress Stella with your masculine interpretations of what she meant, you bounder!

 

[5t3IIa]

yep, gotta say i agree with you here although i don't think blagsta was intentionally doing that.

He does it a lot and it's been noted.

 

[Citizen66]

I dont think blagsta is sexist. He doesnt like being disagreed with by either gender.

 

[ElizabethofYork]

He does it a lot and it's been noted.

Where? On your facebook page?

 

[Blagsta]

yep, gotta say i agree with you here although i don't think blagsta was intentionally doing that.

The only person who has done that is Stella. I made a comment on what someone perceives as "normal", not on what they may or may not have done. It was others than then brought the rest of it into it. The only one calling someone else a whore here is Stella. Then they blame me.

 

[5t3IIa]

The only person who has done that is Stella. I made a comment on what someone perceives as "normal", not on what they may or may not have done. It was others than then brought the rest of it. Then they blame me.

It was exactly what 'they' may or may not have done. You reminded them of it in order to stop them disagreeing with you. Oppressor.

 

[frogwoman]

i reckon you could just have apologised.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

i reckon you could just have apologised.

He could have, but never does, just slinks off.

 

[Teaboy]

Blimey, this thread went well.

 

[Blagsta]

i reckon you could just have apologised.

Who, me? Me and Edie have sorted things out via PM.

 

[5t3IIa]

Who, me? Me and Edie have sorted things out via PM.

As mentioned above, she's a very gracious woman. So you've got away with it again and learnt nothing.

 

[ymu]

I cant get my head round this at all. If you mention prostitution (in the context of this thread) then youre pulling gender rank on a woman and putting her in her place. So that then leaves some topics off bounds. If some topics are off bounds to have with women then surely that in itself is also sexist as it creates an unequal playing field regarding discussion. The mind boggles.

It was not the mention of prostitution, it was the way it was mentioned.

Context, innit. Blags is trying to make out that it was a perfectly reasonable point to make in the context it was made. I see nothing but a snidey comment aimed at an individual which added nothing to the thread.

If I missed the context and meaning of his original "my normality is normal, yours isn't" comment, he's welcome to explain the context and thought processes behind that post instead of slinging out more snidey self-justification.

 

[Blagsta]

I already did explain it, you chose to ignore that in favour of slinging abuse. The fact that me and Edie are fine while you and stella continue to conduct a witch hunt speaks volumes about your attitude. Instead of seeing Edie as someone who can sort their own disagreements out, you continue to see her as a helpless victim of male oppression, after lecturing her about why she is oppressed! Hypocrites.

 

[ymu]

I already did explain it, you chose to ignore that in favour of slinging abuse. The fact that me and Edie are fine while you and stella continue to conduct a witch hunt speaks volumes about your attitude. Instead of seeing Edie as someone who can sort their own disagreements out, you continue to see her as a helpless victim of male oppression, after lecturing her about why she is oppressed! Hypocrites.

You have not explained.

You made your peace with Edie after I called you a cunt. I wouldn't have posted again after your post about that if you weren't still self-justifying something that I still have seen no credible justification for.

There was no post quoted in this post of yours, and it does not follow on from the one above it or the one that Edie made shortly before it:

Edie - you think its normal for men to use prostitutes. Just goes to show how "normal" can vary eh.

Can you point us to the post which provided the context for this comment, and how you thought you were moving the discussion on with it? Show your working please, because I can't follow your abstract hand-waving. Parse it for me.