Follow, retweet @dailypinster




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 361 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 ... 25  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Burning-men 2017, Witch hunts and beyond.
PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 12:29 pm 
Offline
Speculator

Joined: Oct 23, 2011
Posts: 490
Open Window wrote:
cyrusir wrote:
at least Pat Kenny has the balls to stand up for a colleague

eugh, look at this nonsense, his apology is deconstructed and made offensive to women as well

http://www.irishexaminer.com/lifestyle/ ... 58829.html


As I indicated there is no respect in the hysterical mob and it seems nothing will satisfy them but total and utter destruction of the target.


From the Examiner article:

Quote:
Initially, only one of Hook’s Newstalk FM colleagues condemned his comments —political editor Chris Donohue called them “disgusting”. As online reaction escalated, by Monday the station’s managing editor Patricia Monahan had issued a statement saying that what Hook had said was “totally wrong and inappropriate and should never have been made.”


For anyone interested in how online mobs seek to destroy an individual due to a misplaced comment or deed So You've Been Publicly Shamed by Jon Ronson is worth a read.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Burning-men 2017, Witch hunts and beyond.
PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 12:45 pm 
Offline
Nationalised
User avatar

Joined: Jan 1, 1970
Posts: 22414
Barmiest Loon wrote:
Open Window wrote:
cyrusir wrote:
at least Pat Kenny has the balls to stand up for a colleague

eugh, look at this nonsense, his apology is deconstructed and made offensive to women as well

http://www.irishexaminer.com/lifestyle/ ... 58829.html


As I indicated there is no respect in the hysterical mob and it seems nothing will satisfy them but total and utter destruction of the target.


From the Examiner article:

Quote:
Initially, only one of Hook’s Newstalk FM colleagues condemned his comments —political editor Chris Donohue called them “disgusting”. As online reaction escalated, by Monday the station’s managing editor Patricia Monahan had issued a statement saying that what Hook had said was “totally wrong and inappropriate and should never have been made.”


For anyone interested in how online mobs seek to destroy an individual due to a misplaced comment or deed So You've Been Publicly Shamed by Jon Ronson is worth a read.


TO save time can you confirm does it go like this?

Image

_________________
Follow The Pin - https://twitter.com/dailypinster

"Politicians are always realistically maneuvering for the next election. They are obsolete as fundamental problem-solvers." - Buckminster Fuller

"I was comfortable with a couple of banks being married today, instead i wake up and find I'm married to the banks." - Catbear

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Burning-men 2017, Witch hunts and beyond.
PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 12:47 pm 
Offline
Too Big to Fail
User avatar

Joined: May 6, 2008
Posts: 4189
Location: the nearest faraway place
Barmiest Loon wrote:

For anyone interested in how online mobs seek to destroy an individual due to a misplaced comment or deed So You've Been Publicly Shamed by Jon Ronson is worth a read.

Misplaced?

Hook spoke his mind that woman bare responsibility for being raped.

He clearly put victims on trial.

_________________
Fear of losing out drives the bubble, fear of losing everything drives the bust.

Those who don't study history are doomed to repeat it. Those who do study history are doomed to watch everyone else repeating it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Burning-men 2017, Witch hunts and beyond.
PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 1:51 pm 
Offline
Holiday Home Owner

Joined: Mar 30, 2016
Posts: 323
catbear wrote:
Barmiest Loon wrote:

For anyone interested in how online mobs seek to destroy an individual due to a misplaced comment or deed So You've Been Publicly Shamed by Jon Ronson is worth a read.

Misplaced?

Hook spoke his mind that woman bare responsibility for being raped.

He clearly put victims on trial.


he really didnt


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Burning-men 2017, Witch hunts and beyond.
PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 1:53 pm 
Offline
Of Systemic Importance

Joined: Nov 4, 2011
Posts: 5424
Location: SthDub
catbear wrote:
Barmiest Loon wrote:
Hook spoke his mind that woman bare responsibility for being raped.

He clearly put victims on trial.

He did'nt say that :roll:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Burning-men 2017, Witch hunts and beyond.
PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 3:54 pm 
Offline
Nationalised

Joined: May 13, 2008
Posts: 11322
Location: Somewhere up in the hills
cyrusir wrote:
GameBlame wrote:
Coles2 wrote:
A question for the men here; did your parents ever discuss consent with you? Was it a concept that you had to figure out for yourselves? Will you be discussing it with you sons?

We live in a very different world today where young males are given very conflicting messages about relationships, sex, violence etc, and it is not sufficient to leave it to children to figure it out for themselves. This ground rule needs to be laid down. It needs to be a Golden Rule. No consent, no sex. No grey areas.

This term 'taken advantage of'. It suggests that someone was a bit foolish; was deceived or tricked; and "ah well, no harm, lesson learned". It's a bullshit term. It's offensive. It plants the idea that it's a game being played.


You're at the nub of George's point here. You've highlighted some ground rules for men. I think George might even agree with them. I think everyone here would.

But the big big question....and don't be tempted to invent scenarios here...are there any "ground rules" for women on this matter in your view ?

Because this whole area seems to remove any authorship for what happens in a woman's life away from her. What happens in her work life and home life she can influence. But on this one thing you cannot expect any authorship.


you are assuming that the poster is really concerned about the issue,

i would suggest not rather he is using it as a convenient screen to cover his true motives which are more around giving Hook, Newstalk and, by extension, Denis O' Brien, a kicking.
No, I can assure you that I do care about the issue. I have a track record on this forum to prove it. You, not so much.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Burning-men 2017, Witch hunts and beyond.
PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 3:58 pm 
Offline
Nationalised

Joined: May 13, 2008
Posts: 11322
Location: Somewhere up in the hills
GameBlame wrote:
Coles2 wrote:
A question for the men here; did your parents ever discuss consent with you? Was it a concept that you had to figure out for yourselves? Will you be discussing it with you sons?

We live in a very different world today where young males are given very conflicting messages about relationships, sex, violence etc, and it is not sufficient to leave it to children to figure it out for themselves. This ground rule needs to be laid down. It needs to be a Golden Rule. No consent, no sex. No grey areas.

This term 'taken advantage of'. It suggests that someone was a bit foolish; was deceived or tricked; and "ah well, no harm, lesson learned". It's a bullshit term. It's offensive. It plants the idea that it's a game being played.


You're at the nub of George's point here. You've highlighted some ground rules for men. I think George might even agree with them. I think everyone here would.

But the big big question....and don't be tempted to invent scenarios here...are there any "ground rules" for women on this matter in your view ?
Yes, the same rule applies to women. No consent, no sex. It's a unisex sex rule which makes it easy for everyone to remember.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Burning-men 2017, Witch hunts and beyond.
PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 4:43 pm 
Offline
Under CAB Investigation

Joined: Jan 30, 2009
Posts: 2099
Open Window wrote:
cyrusir wrote:
at least Pat Kenny has the balls to stand up for a colleague

eugh, look at this nonsense, his apology is deconstructed and made offensive to women as well

http://www.irishexaminer.com/lifestyle/ ... 58829.html


As I indicated there is no respect in the hysterical mob and it seems nothing will satisfy them but total and utter destruction of the target. Also another poster suggested this would be used to introduce the "rape culture" concept.

If anyone has a good resource to get to grips with the "rape culture" concept please post, as I think I'm having a touch of the George Hooks about it all. :sick:

Sure why not have a thread on the specific term/subject matter.


That's pure bollocks in the examiner.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Burning-men 2017, Witch hunts and beyond.
PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 4:44 pm 
Offline
Holiday Home Owner

Joined: Mar 30, 2016
Posts: 323
Coles2 wrote:
cyrusir wrote:
GameBlame wrote:
Coles2 wrote:
A question for the men here; did your parents ever discuss consent with you? Was it a concept that you had to figure out for yourselves? Will you be discussing it with you sons?

We live in a very different world today where young males are given very conflicting messages about relationships, sex, violence etc, and it is not sufficient to leave it to children to figure it out for themselves. This ground rule needs to be laid down. It needs to be a Golden Rule. No consent, no sex. No grey areas.

This term 'taken advantage of'. It suggests that someone was a bit foolish; was deceived or tricked; and "ah well, no harm, lesson learned". It's a bullshit term. It's offensive. It plants the idea that it's a game being played.


You're at the nub of George's point here. You've highlighted some ground rules for men. I think George might even agree with them. I think everyone here would.

But the big big question....and don't be tempted to invent scenarios here...are there any "ground rules" for women on this matter in your view ?

Because this whole area seems to remove any authorship for what happens in a woman's life away from her. What happens in her work life and home life she can influence. But on this one thing you cannot expect any authorship.


you are assuming that the poster is really concerned about the issue,

i would suggest not rather he is using it as a convenient screen to cover his true motives which are more around giving Hook, Newstalk and, by extension, Denis O' Brien, a kicking.
No, I can assure you that I do care about the issue. I have a track record on this forum to prove it. You, not so much.


you are right, your track record is there for all to see


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Burning-men 2017, Witch hunts and beyond.
PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 5:31 pm 
Offline
Under CAB Investigation

Joined: Dec 2, 2013
Posts: 2215
Coles2 wrote:
GameBlame wrote:
Coles2 wrote:
A question for the men here; did your parents ever discuss consent with you? Was it a concept that you had to figure out for yourselves? Will you be discussing it with you sons?

We live in a very different world today where young males are given very conflicting messages about relationships, sex, violence etc, and it is not sufficient to leave it to children to figure it out for themselves. This ground rule needs to be laid down. It needs to be a Golden Rule. No consent, no sex. No grey areas.

This term 'taken advantage of'. It suggests that someone was a bit foolish; was deceived or tricked; and "ah well, no harm, lesson learned". It's a bullshit term. It's offensive. It plants the idea that it's a game being played.


You're at the nub of George's point here. You've highlighted some ground rules for men. I think George might even agree with them. I think everyone here would.

But the big big question....and don't be tempted to invent scenarios here...are there any "ground rules" for women on this matter in your view ?
Yes, the same rule applies to women. No consent, no sex. It's a unisex sex rule which makes it easy for everyone to remember.


To get this straight. You think the primary framework within which women should ensure their own safety is to make sure they've obtained the man's consent for sex ?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Burning-men 2017, Witch hunts and beyond.
PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 7:16 pm 
Offline
Nationalised

Joined: May 13, 2008
Posts: 11322
Location: Somewhere up in the hills
GameBlame wrote:
Coles2 wrote:
GameBlame wrote:
Coles2 wrote:
A question for the men here; did your parents ever discuss consent with you? Was it a concept that you had to figure out for yourselves? Will you be discussing it with you sons?

We live in a very different world today where young males are given very conflicting messages about relationships, sex, violence etc, and it is not sufficient to leave it to children to figure it out for themselves. This ground rule needs to be laid down. It needs to be a Golden Rule. No consent, no sex. No grey areas.

This term 'taken advantage of'. It suggests that someone was a bit foolish; was deceived or tricked; and "ah well, no harm, lesson learned". It's a bullshit term. It's offensive. It plants the idea that it's a game being played.


You're at the nub of George's point here. You've highlighted some ground rules for men. I think George might even agree with them. I think everyone here would.

But the big big question....and don't be tempted to invent scenarios here...are there any "ground rules" for women on this matter in your view ?
Yes, the same rule applies to women. No consent, no sex. It's a unisex sex rule which makes it easy for everyone to remember.


To get this straight. You think the primary framework within which women should ensure their own safety is to make sure they've obtained the man's consent for sex ?
:?

How are women meant to ensure their safety when there's a culture of blaming them for being raped? That attitude undermines the reporting of the crime and feeds the problem. It creates a culture that tolerates rape by excusing the perpetrator's actions.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Burning-men 2017, Witch hunts and beyond.
PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 7:35 pm 
Offline
Nationalised

Joined: May 13, 2008
Posts: 11322
Location: Somewhere up in the hills
Barry take a bow.

Via Twitter, Barry Flanagan @BarryFlanagan1 wrote:
Unbelievably, there are some still trying to justify @ghook comments, even after he himself withdrew them and rightly apologised.

Most fall into 2 camps. “Callous Analogists” who use utterly false equivalences + “Free Speech Defenders” with no idea what free speech is.

Callous analogists focus on “personal responsibility”, using ridiculous comparisons which trivialise how horrendous a crime rape is.

Typical analogy "If you left your wallet on a pub table and went to the bathroom, are you not partly to blame when it’s nicked?"

Extremely depressing that people could draw any comparison between minor property theft + the most egregious violation of bodily integrity.

If you believe that they are analogous, there is something seriously wrong with you.

Here's a more appropriate analogy. Imagine a bloke gets dressed up and goes out to a club with some mates "on the pull".

Meets a girl. Has a few drinks with her, gets drunk and ends up going back to her place, they sleep together.

At some point during the night, he goes to the bathroom, where he passes out.

He wakes up to find that she had left the room and sent in her 6 foot 6 inch male flatmate, who is now raping him.

How many people defending @gHook’s comments would say this bloke is partly to blame for his being raped?

Would anyone say "Well, he was clearly looking for it"? Would anyone say "Well, maybe he shouldn’t have got drunk"?

Would anyone say "What a silly boy, does he not realise this is what happens when you abandon personal responsibility"?

If your reaction to hearing about a man getting raped is different to hearing about a woman getting raped, you need to ask yourself why.

In both instances the rapist is a man. In both instances the rapist is solely to blame.

Teach people about personal safety of course, but when you are attacked, it’s the attacker that is 100% to blame.

“Free Speech Defenders” are almost worse. Free speech is not “chilled” by challenging someone’s ignorant, callous rant.

At best, right to Free Speech aspires to protect people from arrest/sanction for expressing political views.

"Right to Free Speech" is not and never has been absolute. No right to threaten. No right to defame, plagiarise or infringe copyright.

For those screaming “censorship” – of course there is censorship. We have a censor. They censor things. Rightly.

A certain level of censorship is not only necessary, it’s good. It’s why child pornography isn’t freely available.

Sponsors of shows also have right to free speech. They have a right to criticise damaging and divisive “commentary”.

Audience have a right to demand presenters who reflect their views. They may not get them, but at very least have a right to demand it.

And when you believe that a powerful platform is being abused, then you have every right to call for removal of speaker.

Having a platform brings responsibility to use correctly. This limitation is explicitly stated in Universal Declaration on Human Rights.

"Personal Responsibility" and "Free Speech" do not mean you get to blame the victim of a crime who at no point did anything illegal.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Burning-men 2017, Witch hunts and beyond.
PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 7:39 pm 
Offline
Under CAB Investigation

Joined: Dec 2, 2013
Posts: 2215
@coles - too many quotes
Seems contradictory. Just to get it straight. For as long attitudes anywhere in society of victim blaming persist...women cannot be expected to follow any framework to ensure their safety. Other than ensuring they obtain consent from the man.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Burning-men 2017, Witch hunts and beyond.
PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 7:44 pm 
Offline
Nationalised

Joined: May 13, 2008
Posts: 11322
Location: Somewhere up in the hills
Barry said it best.

Quote:
Here's a more appropriate analogy. Imagine a bloke gets dressed up and goes out to a club with some mates "on the pull".

Meets a girl. Has a few drinks with her, gets drunk and ends up going back to her place, they sleep together.

At some point during the night, he goes to the bathroom, where he passes out.

He wakes up to find that she had left the room and sent in her 6 foot 6 inch male flatmate, who is now raping him.

How many people defending @gHook’s comments would say this bloke is partly to blame for his being raped?

Would anyone say "Well, he was clearly looking for it"? Would anyone say "Well, maybe he shouldn’t have got drunk"?

Would anyone say "What a silly boy, does he not realise this is what happens when you abandon personal responsibility"?

If your reaction to hearing about a man getting raped is different to hearing about a woman getting raped, you need to ask yourself why.

In both instances the rapist is a man. In both instances the rapist is solely to blame.

Teach people about personal safety of course, but when you are attacked, it’s the attacker that is 100% to blame.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Burning-men 2017, Witch hunts and beyond.
PostPosted: Wed Sep 13, 2017 7:59 pm 
Offline
Under CAB Investigation

Joined: Jan 25, 2007
Posts: 1752
Coles2 wrote:
Barry said it best.

Quote:
Here's a more appropriate analogy. Imagine a bloke gets dressed up and goes out to a club with some mates "on the pull".

Meets a girl. Has a few drinks with her, gets drunk and ends up going back to her place, they sleep together.

At some point during the night, he goes to the bathroom, where he passes out.

He wakes up to find that she had left the room and sent in her 6 foot 6 inch male flatmate, who is now raping him.
...
Would anyone say "What a silly boy, does he not realise this is what happens when you abandon personal responsibility"?

Except for the slight exaggeration on the expression - I would.

In this example, the guy became involved in a situation beyond his control through his own negligence. Not quite as bad as the guy who wears a KKK outfit in the projects with an "all X must die" sign perhaps but certainly not recommended behaviour.

Personal responsibility does not care if you are male or female.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 361 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 ... 25  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 7 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  

Follow, Retweet @dailypinster



Pyramid Built, Is Better Built! - Latest Property Discussions www.thepropertypin.com