London SlutWalk - now *11th*June, 1pm Trafalgar Square

[revol68]

ok I have the no sleeping bug...way to dismiss me as a person fucko!

cute and person are not mutually exclusive.

i was also playing up to ymu's stereotype.

but you still are cute, dork.

 

[ymu]

There is a bit of a stereotype of women being easy to wind up, that's what I meant by counter productive last night. A little humour can go a long way I reckon. Hope you get some sleep tonight! (me too grr)

Out of interest, do you think that stereotype is justified?

Cos racists say that kind of thing when we make a public fuss about the whispered:"Coon!" or the monkey-chanting they took care to do in his sight only. "He's paranoid!" they say. Gutless bigots do that. It's a pattern of behaviour. It's part of the manipulation.

Bit like the kind of men that claim not to be sexist, but collapse straight into sexist abuse when they decide some uppity feisty woman needs putting in her place. If she dares complain, another sexist stereotype just gets chucked out - we're over-sensitive, you see. It's hilarious sport. And so socially acceptable, they don't even need to bother to check who's listening. But woe betide any woman that doesn't see the funny side. Blokes for miles around will turn up to stick the boot in for that.

I was in my twenties when it became illegal for a man to rape his wife in the UK (1991). Three currently living generations of men had the legal right to rape their wives. Shocked me to the core when the law changed - finding out it had ever been legal. Sexual history is still considered relevant to a rape defence. Two recent serial rapists were free for years because the police just decided that the women were lying and didn't bother to check out the suspects properly. Tribal sexist banter eh. So very harmless. Get a sense of humour.

I'm not going to ignore it when some cunt tells me how to dress and not to go out alone, just because they're too gutless to challenge sexism directly. Some might try to claim that that characterisation is unfair, but when they follow that up with exactly the kind of sexist abuse that facilitates the violence they claim to want to prevent, I'm pretty sure no reasonable person would believe them. Would they?

I'm not going to be put off my some sneering comment about needing to have a sense of humour about men who think it's OK to demean women. Why the fuck would I?

 

[Badgers]

Shame about this rain, women will be wearing more

 

[ymu]

So will blokes.

 

[teahead]

Though possibility of some nice nipple showings

 

[ymu]

And some blokes thinking it's OK to grab them in the street. Thanks, I'd forgotten that joy of summer.

 

[xes]

And women who grope your arse in busy hot bars. The filthy sexpests.

We're all victims, we're all rapists and we're all cunts.

Can we get the fuck over it now please?

 

[Badgers]

And some blokes thinking it's OK to grab them in the street. Thanks, I'd forgotten that joy of summer.

What % of blokes?

 

[temper_tantrum]

Still going, I see. Nice work. That 50-page prediction of mine is looking very achievable.

 

[ymu]

You want me to get over it so that men can get on with enjoying dehumanising women for a laugh?

Nah.

 

[teahead]

And some blokes thinking it's OK to grab them in the street. Thanks, I'd forgotten that joy of summer.

Yep that's certainly antisocial. Can men decry that kind of behaviour too, or is every man accountable for the behaviours of all people who share their gender?

 

[ymu]

What % of blokes?

I have no idea, why do you ask? Would it be OK to promote these attitudes if it was less than 1% but not if it was more than 5%?

 

[Badgers]

I have no idea, why do you ask? Would it be OK to promote these attitudes if it was less than 1% but not if it was more than 5%?

No, I just like statistics.

 

[Badgers]

You want me to get over it so that men can get on with enjoying dehumanising women for a laugh?

Anyone told you that you are cute when you get mad?

x

 

[ymu]

Yep that's certainly antisocial. Can men decry that kind of behaviour too, or is every man accountable for the behaviours of all people who share their gender?

Maybe the people attacking me on this thread also argue that "gay" is an acceptable term of abuse, and call black people nigger for a laugh, but it's the kind of thing I speak out about.

If people who don't indulge in these behaviours are nevertheless happy to tolerate or ignore them, they are helping give the impression that it is socialy acceptable. I would say that applies equally to men and women, as would be pretty bloody obvious to anyone reading this thread and not just looking for an excuse to take a shot.

 

[xes]

The only thing which is obvious to anyone reading the thread, is that you hate men. You enjoy demonizing them, and playing the innocent victim whilst giving out just as much stick as you're getting. You're quite happy to lay the blame on anyone who you think is sticking up for lecherous behaviour, when they're just playing up to the stereotypes which YOU are laying out before them.

 

[ymu]

Anyone told you that you are cute when you get mad?

x

The boy wuld say scary. But the make-up sex is good.

 

[Badgers]

The boy wuld say scary. But the make-up sex is good.

And happens very, very, very often I would wager?

 

[ymu]

The only thing which is obvious to anyone reading the thread, is that you hate men. You enjoy demonizing them, and playing the innocent victim whilst giving out just as much stick as you're getting. You're quite happy to lay the blame on anyone who you think is sticking up for lecherous behaviour, when they're just playing up to the stereotypes which YOU are laying out before them.

Then you haven't read the thread.

And I'd appreciate it if you could research your facts a litle more carefully before coming out with such unwarranted and unfounded abuse. Because that is pretty disgusting, coming from you, to me.

 

[mentalchik]

The only thing which is obvious to anyone reading the thread, is that you hate men.

Really ? don't think that's obvious at all

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

The only thing which is obvious to anyone reading the thread, is that you hate men. .

While I disagree with much of ymu's argument in this thread that's a daft thing to say.

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

The boy wuld say scary. But the make-up sex is good.

For a minute there I thought you meant you made him wear make-up during the act.

 

[xes]

Then you haven't read the thread.

And I'd appreciate it if you could research your facts a litle more carefully before coming out with such unwarranted and unfounded abuse. Because that is pretty disgusting, coming from you, to me.

I've read a page or 10 here and there, to be honest I've got better things to do with my time than read yet another fucking bunfight on here. It's embarrasing, and you think that I'm giving you unwarrented and disgusting abuse? I'm just saying what I'm seeing. It's a shame too, becasue this thread started off well. It was highlighting the problems which many women face from arsehole men who think they have a right to make sexual advances on women based on what they're dressed in. But all of that has been lost.

 

[teahead]

Maybe the people attacking me on this thread also argue that "gay" is an acceptable term of abuse, and call black people nigger for a laugh, but it's the kind of thing I speak out about.

If people who don't indulge in these behaviours are nevertheless happy to tolerate or ignore them, they are helping give the impression that it is socialy acceptable. I would say that applies equally to men and women, as would be pretty bloody obvious to anyone reading this thread and not just looking for an excuse to take a shot.

It's a long thread... In principle I agree with you - making use of prejudice as an attempt at being witty is pretty pathetic. And of course just turning a blind eye has its own (prejudiced) phrase - the 'good german' just trying to fit in so not raising a fuss about the Nazis (...60 years ago).

On the other hand it's not so simple is it. Gay seems to bear some reference to defunct meanings - carefree, feckless etc. Intergroup prejudice is rife too - to point a finger at men, or at people with white skins, or at wealthy people, is to take up a prejudiced position and to contribute to the kind of oppositional dynamics that do the actual damange. Name calling can be dismissed (unless there a gang after you - sounds like that's what you're experiencing here, and maybe you've got plenty of evidence for it) but the problem is the intent isn't it?

A simple way of checking intent is maybe asking whether someone is intending to make you feel bad by what they're saying? If they're prepared to acknowledge that, or at least to acknowledge that you're hurt by what's said, then you can get down to establishing whether someone actually means you harm (and maybe why they mean you harm) or whether they've got issues of their own that encourage them to lash out in a way that's causing problems.

Hiding in the chanting crowd though is of course just bullshit.

 

[teahead]

...you think that I'm giving you unwarrented and disgusting abuse?

Well if that's the meaning being taken from it, what are you prepared to do about it?

I'm just saying what I'm seeing.

OK but what's stopping you from acknowledging that for others, what they're seeing might seem different, or carry different meanings for them?

But all of that has been lost.

What's been lost? Step back, take a deep breath and maybe acknowledge that feelings have taken control of the way that some people are thinking. The thing about communicating is you need to maintain some common ground in terms of sentiment - if you're precipitating confrontation, that's all you're going to get unless you dominate someone so completely they fall into silence.

 

[ymu]

And happens very, very, very often I would wager?

Why would you wager that, Badgers?

This is yet another weak attempt from you, isn't it? I'm being stereotyped as a ball-breaking harridan again. Oh, yay.

He gets more upset about misogyny than I do. Told you, I only do quality men.

My disability is innate. His was caused by violent racists, and the crowds that passed by without intervening. I get a lot more upset about any and every form of casual bigotry these days, and especially upset when people who should know better trivialise it.

But you know, don't let a chance for a cheap one-liner pass you by.

 

[teahead]

And happens very, very, very often I would wager?

Instead of wagering rolleyes why not just ask? Seems you want to make a point but you're looking stupid in making assumptions about someone else's life when you don't have all the information required to make an informed statement. That's known as... prejudice. And there seems to be some malice in your perspective too.

How come you're so pissied off you come out making accusations that way. You could always just make a mental note of your view. You know: do you have to say everything you think?

 

[Badgers]

You could always just make a mental note of your view. You know: do you have to say everything you think?

If I did that I would not use the medium of an internet discussion forum.

 

[Badgers]

This is yet another weak attempt from you, isn't it? I'm being stereotyped as a ball-breaking harridan again. Oh, yay.

I know this shit is nasty ymu.
Perhaps I am being too casual about it? Perhaps you are on a soapbox you can't get off and everyone is out to get you?

Maybe we should both count to ten

 

[ymu]

It's a long thread... In principle I agree with you - making use of prejudice as an attempt at being witty is pretty pathetic. And of course just turning a blind eye has its own (prejudiced) phrase - the 'good german' just trying to fit in so not raising a fuss about the Nazis (...60 years ago).

On the other hand it's not so simple is it. Gay seems to bear some reference to defunct meanings - carefree, feckless etc. Intergroup prejudice is rife too - to point a finger at men, or at people with white skins, or at wealthy people, is to take up a prejudiced position and to contribute to the kind of oppositional dynamics that do the actual damange. Name calling can be dismissed (unless there a gang after you - sounds like that's what you're experiencing here, and maybe you've got plenty of evidence for it) but the problem is the intent isn't it?

A simple way of checking intent is maybe asking whether someone is intending to make you feel bad by what they're saying? If they're prepared to acknowledge that, or at least to acknowledge that you're hurt by what's said, then you can get down to establishing whether someone actually means you harm (and maybe why they mean you harm) or whether they've got issues of their own that encourage them to lash out in a way that's causing problems.

Hiding in the chanting crowd though is of course just bullshit.

Appreciate the thoughtful post, but revol, past caring and grit have all said they were being deliberately offensive. I don't need to wonder if I'm imagining it.