A Conversation for The Montreal Massacre

threadjacking

Post 61

clzoomer- a bit woobly

*no


rest in peace

Post 62

Researcher 524695

" And I am sick and tired of hearing men whine about how women get "all the breaks"."

You haven't heard me say that, nor are you likely to. In fact, the *rich* - men AND women - get all the breaks, just like they always did.

"We are still treated as inferiors, thanks much in part to people like you."

Thanks. A question was asked, I answered it. Who's treating you as inferior? Of course, your irrational reaction to a few facts about the law speaks volumes about how I probably *should* treat you, but I refuse to be drawn...

"I pray that your daughters will never have to endure a marriage to an abusive husband (yes, I know, you'll find a way to deem me deserving of that)"

Well, since you ask - there is no advantage that I can see in the modern world for any person to prefer marriage over simple cohabitation, at least at first. Said cohabitation indeed offers many advantages - not least one is able to discover, while still financially and legally separate from one's presumed chosen future spouse, whether said partner is an abusive b*****d.

Finding out *after* marriage that one's partner is abusive (by which I assume you mean violent) is surely, in today's world, evidence of wilful carelessness or ignorance. Isn't it?

"or a rapist (yes, I know, I was "asking for it"),"

Were you?

Do you therefore accept that there is the *possibility* that a woman could be "asking for it"?

Or at the very least, do you accept that in *some* cases of rape, the woman bears *some* of the responsibility for the outcome of a situation she finds herself in?

Or do you subscribe to the dangerous feminist fantasy that a woman should be able to walk into a nightclub naked and not be molested?

Because if you do, you're just as guilty as the previous person of infantilising women, of seeking to absolve them of *any* responsibility for anything that happens to them.

God forbid I should suggest that any of the women killed in Montreal bore ANY responsibility for what happened to them. They emphatically did not, as is blindingly obvious.

But God forbid you should suggest that no woman who has ever been raped was not responsible, in part, for creating that situation in the first place. Children learn early that if you play with fire, you get burned.

And so onto the headlines:

"*Woman Rapes Man, Leaves For Dead*"

How about:

"Woman accuses man of rape, causes him months of stress, costs him his marriage and job, then admits she made the whole thing up and gets away scot free".

*'I Lost My Job Because I Wouldn't Sleep With The Boss'* Declares Man.*

How about:

"I *got* my job by sleeping with the boss", woman *doesn't* declare.

"*Study To Review Serious Lack of Males In Politics*"

Study to review serious lack of women in science... oh hang on, most undergrads ARE women. Engineering then... no, again, most undergrads women. Teaching... oops, mostly women again. Law... rats, again, right now, most of those coming through the system are women. Sure, the OLD people in the system right now are mainly men, but you can't just snap your fingers and create a slew of women with the education AND experience to be in those positions. The education is happening NOW, the experience will come with time, as experience tends to.

*The Fortune 500 And The Women CEOs Who Are In Charge.*

See above. Plus, in my experience, there is a significant minority of women who view CEO as more stress than its worth, and see WIFE of CEO as the position to be in - all of the money, none of the responsibility.

*The Gender Gap- Why Unfair Laws Have Put Women in Charge Everywhere*

How about:

"The Gender Gap - Why *Fair* Laws Just Aren't Enough for some women"

*Bullying In The Schoolyard- We Talk To The Girls Who Beat Up The Boys*

How about:

"Politics and manipulation in the schoolyard - we talk to girls who get boys to beat each other up for their entertainment"

*'Why Should The Rules Be Reversed?' says Researcher, 'What Was Wrong With The Old Way?'*

How about:

"The old way was wrong, let's legislate EQUALITY"?

I repeat, since it seems to have been ignored, I just answered the question about how the law favours women.

I'd appreciate it if just one of the people lambasting me here could come up with one, single example of a LAW - legal statute, please, not just accepted social convention or something similar - a LAW, which favours men over women. Just to balance things up here, since I've come up with several examples of the opposite.

Thank you.


rest in peace

Post 63

anhaga

I've mentioned it before, I believe. you've one the "online debate", Member.

It's clear we're not on the same page (see my Lubicon post). I didn't ask for examples of statutes; I'm not going to offer statutes. You offered a made up rule, BTW.smiley - laugh

What's your point, simply? Some statutes in some jurisdictions favour men? Is there a possibility such statutes are an attempt to level a social playing field, a playing field made up of conventions, etc.? Do you think that levelling the playing field is a bad thing? Do social conventions which limit people count for nothing? Is it "tough luck" for those born at the back of the line?

Is your point that these unfortunate women were the tragic victims of a madman and the event has no relation to society at large? That Canadian society has been silly to bother with the soul-searching it has gone through? That whatever Canadians have done to improve their society in response to the tragedy, however well intentioned was founded on a false premise (that the killing of these women was a political act)? Are you suggesting that the killing was not a political act.

The entry doesn't talk about statutes. The entry doesn't talk about abortion. The entry talks about a society that didn't give a red light to a misguided individual. The entry talks about women who paid the price of that societal failure. The entry talks about the society trying to reform itself so that it would not fail people again in the same way.

Is anyone here suggesting that society actually did give a red light to him? Is anyone here suggesting that society didn't fail these women? Is anyone suggesting that Canadians have shrugged it off and nothing has changed?

Is the point of the entry unclear, even after all my explanations?

What the hell is the point of this thread?


rest in peace

Post 64

anhaga

"Some statutes in some jurisdictions favour men?" -> "Some statutes in some jurisdictions favour men?" smiley - blush


(' you've one the "online debate",' was intentional.)


rest in peace

Post 65

anhaga

smiley - star"Some statutes in some jurisdictions favour men?" -> "Some statutes in some jurisdictions favour men?"smiley - star -> smiley - star"Some statutes in some jurisdictions favour men?" -> "Some statutes in some jurisdictions favour women?"smiley - star





smiley - rofl


rest in peace

Post 66

anhaga

I was just thinking (about stopping using cut and paste):

If the rule of the game (the statute) says that the first one across the finish line wins the race, then the rule (the statute) favours the one who by convention starts closest to the finish line.

I know I said I wasn't going to give examples of statutes that favour men, but now I will: If social conventions in general favour men, then virtually all statutes favour men. Men start closer to the finish line. This is something hard to recognize for those closer to the finish line.

maybe that's the point of this thread: it was started by someone born close to the finish line whose scared because society is trying to even out the starting positions. Scary prospect for some.


rest in peace

Post 67

anhaga

"Or do you subscribe to the dangerous feminist fantasy that a woman should be able to walk into a nightclub naked and not be molested?"


This is perhaps the most asinine statement I've ever heard! What the hell planet are you on, Member? You really have a problem with men, don't you? Why are you throughing this hatred at us?

As a man I am inconceivably insulted by this suggestion that I am some sort of automaton controlled by my gonads, with no brain, with no humanity. You obviously subscribe to the dangerous fantasy that men can do whatever they want to a woman because men are just beasts that can't control themselves. That's some pretty terrifying hatred you're expressing. And I'm getting it twice over: I'm a feminist and a man. I must really seem like inhuman filth to you.

Think about it.

Yes, a woman should be able to walk into a nightclub naked and not be molested. In fact, women are expected - yes, expected - to walk into a nightclub virtually naked and, in fact, the vast majority walk right back out without being molested.

(what a sad, lonely bugger)


rest in peace

Post 68

clzoomer- a bit woobly

Member, you seem to have gone from supposed *facts* to out and out suposition.

*Do you therefore accept that there is the *possibility* that a woman could be "asking for it"?*

No, because then it isn't rape, is it? If a woman claims it is then she's breaking the existing law, just like a man who says a woman was *asking for it* when she wasn't.

As to-"Or do you subscribe to the dangerous feminist fantasy that a woman should be able to walk into a nightclub naked and not be molested?" I fully believe that if you walked naked into any nightclub I know about, YOU'D be molested before they took you away. What misogynist fantasys do you read? What feminist would suggest such a thing? How long have you been stuck in the 50's??


"Woman accuses man of rape, causes him months of stress, costs him his marriage and job, then admits she made the whole thing up and gets away scot free".

So this is personal experience, is it? Or is it a ridiculous example just like the *quote* it is suppose to rebut?


"I *got* my job by sleeping with the boss", woman *doesn't* declare."

"Why not *I came on to my boss and then threatened to sue him as a homophobe unless he hired me* says gay man." Are you seriously pulling out that chestnut? A woman who would pull that stunt in this day and age deserves not only that kind of boss but the job she would have to subsequently endure.


*most undergrads ARE women*- False, at least here, so back it up with hard facts or shut your pie hole.

"there is a significant minority of women who view CEO as more stress than its worth.." Sanctimonious, self-serving rubbish, presented as "fact" to bolster a weak argument.

"Politics and manipulation in the schoolyard - we talk to girls who get boys to beat each other up for their entertainment"- Good God man, what kind of nightmare childhood did you have and why isn't there a scrap of evidence to back up a statement like that?

"The old way was wrong, let's legislate EQUALITY"?- Again, your interpretation is obviously bent, I would like your facts, not opinions. Explain in cold, hard facts with quotes, web links, and scholastic studies how you think this fantasy of yours is reality. No, no, not *I know that you know that these things are true so you can't argue against them*. That's the last refuge of a bigot.

*a LAW, which favours men over women* That's the whole point, you blithering idiot! The laws that are attempting to equalise males and females are being created because they are not opposing other laws, they are opposing entrenched societal values! Naturally when they stand alone they seem unfair to an individual who still lives in the 19th century!!!







rest in peace

Post 69

psychocandy - Moderation Team Leader

I'm sorry, but Member's words are too hateful for me to respond to, and I'm unsubscribing, for the sake of my own health. Sorry for all the good bits I might miss.


rest in peace

Post 70

psychocandy - Moderation Team Leader

>or a rapist (yes, I know, I was "asking for it"),"

Were you?

Do you therefore accept that there is the *possibility* that a woman could be "asking for it"?

Or at the very least, do you accept that in *some* cases of rape, the woman bears *some* of the responsibility for the outcome of a situation she finds herself in?<

I have a metal plate in the roof of my mouth, thnks to a sexual assault involving a handgun. No. I was *not* asking for it, I was 15, and minding my own business, But I'm sure, in your world, I am at fault. Thank you.


rest in peace

Post 71

clzoomer- a bit woobly

Personally I'll miss you Psychocandy but don't worry. Member will just come back with a series of *I heard that....*, *Everyone knows that....*, and *I have a friend who...*.

Not much to miss.

Take care.

smiley - smiley


rest in peace

Post 72

anhaga

Member:

Just a polite little note. Rule number one of civil society is "don't suggest that your interlocutor is somehow not fully human."


It is interesting that the first actual sweeping insult on this thread directed at all men everywhere came from you. And it was an old and particularly stupid one.

Yep, I broke your meaningless first rule of "online debate" a while ago.

You, however, have called all men gonad driven automatons after first denying a holocaust. Great record.

smiley - rofl


rest in peace

Post 73

blaue Augen

Member: "5. Women are entitled to maternity leave lasting months, during which their employer is legally required to hold open their job. Men are supposed to think themselves lucky to get two weeks paternity leave - and the vast majority of men do not take that because most employers simply ignore the law, and do so with impunity because no women are affected. Still think you *want* kids? Think about it...:

In the US the Family Medical Leave Act entitles BOTH the mother and the father to 12 weeks of leave after the birth, adoption, or foster care of a child.


rest in peace

Post 74

clzoomer- a bit woobly

Member:

http://www.womenenews.org/article.cfm/dyn/aid/1488/context/archive

http://www.bayswan.org/male.html

http://my.execpc.com/~buyright/articles/judgingjudges.html

http://www.certifiedmale.org/issue8/fiction.htm

The first one is a very old, very bad law that is unfair and is thus being rightly changed. The next two are gender bias, not law, that are being examined or legislated against. The last is the backlash from the backlash against male gender bias. See? The world is unfolding as it should despite your paranoid ravings.


rest in peace

Post 75

rev. paperboy (god is an iron)

I've just read all the backlog and honestly member, if this were a conversation in a pub, I'd have punched you in the nose by now. Probably about the time you said that there are situations in which a woman can ask to be raped.
To use your extreme example of women walking into niteclubs naked, consider the professional exotic dancer. Do they 'deserve' to be raped, are they asking for it? Is raping a hooker or porn actress okay or should it be prosecuted as theft instead of rape?
Give your head a shake, man. Rape is not about sex, it is about power. Any man who can't understand the word 'no' - whether it comes from a hooker or a nun - isn't a sentient member of civilized society. Provocation is a red herring.
Leaving a box of diamonds lying around unwatched on a shop counter doesn't mean it isn't theft if you steal them.
"He was asking for it" has never been a defense for murder or assault, how is it that some simians think 'She was asking for it' is a defense for rape or domestic violence?


rest in peace

Post 76

azahar

psychocandy, smiley - cuddle

Member, shame on you! smiley - cross


az





rest in peace

Post 77

Kaz

member, I know the circumstances of what psychocandy has mentioned, she was not asking for it, and she is still suffering the long term affects from it.

You are an extremely nasty piece of work, you need to remember that not all circumstances are hypothetical.

I could spout pages of vile abuse, which would not come close to what I think of you at this moment. I am holding myself back for the sake of others. You may come back with a clever comment to every situation, but you have no compassion or empathy or kindness within you.


rest in peace

Post 78

Researcher U197087

(Trigger warning for rape victims)

That you could in all seriousness suggest that a woman is even *remotely* responsible for a man's inability to control his urge to have sex with her against her will is the most hideous abrogation of personal responsibility I've encountered on here. That you could venture such an opinion directly to a victim of such an assault is beyond contempt.

I wonder how many of the elderly victims (in one instance locally, she was 92) you'd call to account for what happened to them.


I hate to say this....

Post 79

Severa

Discrimination is discrimination. People treated differently can never be equals, no matter who gets the short end of the stick.

Giving people benefits in politics means you get more "fairness", but you loose the point of democracy. If I went into politics, I want to be elected for my skills, not my boobs.

Judge people by their skills, regardles of gender, colour, sexual orientation, and family relation. That is the only way to accieve equality and fairness.

And quit whining.


rest in peace

Post 80

Researcher 524695

Gosh, so many people, so little willingness to see the world as it really is rather than how they'd like it to be.

I'll answer where I can, in order of posting.

63: " I didn't ask for examples of statutes;"

I know. Vestboy did. That's what I was answering. *I* asked for examples of statutes to at least try to keep the conversation in some way focussed.

"I'm not going to offer statutes"

smiley - shrug OK.

"Do you think that levelling the playing field is a bad thing?"

Definitely not. But tilting the playing field in the opposite direction is.

"Is it "tough luck" for those born at the back of the line?"

Yes. Welcome to the real world. Some of us are born poor, some are born disabled, some are born ugly. Some are born rich, fit and good looking. The best we can do is treat everyone as equal under the law, and try to educate our children to do the same, despite their instincts to the contrary.

"The entry doesn't talk about statutes."

For the love of God, man, read what I wrote. Vestboy asked a straightforward question. I gave the answer. What part of this are you people having difficulty with? When I gave that answer, I hadn't even read the entry to which this thread is attached.

"Is anyone here suggesting that society actually did give a red light to him?"

Well, I know relatively little about Canadian society, but are you seriously telling me it's one in which there are or were no societal taboos regarding mass murder??? smiley - huh

I mean, yes, it was as the feminists say, a "political act", but if he'd just wanted to make a political statement he could have run for office on an "all women are bitches" ticket and seen how far he got. Is anyone here suggesting that Canadian society actually *didn't* give a red light to mowing down people in cold blood, regardless of motives?

"What the hell is the point of this thread?"

If you can't tell by reading it, I don't think I can help you. However, here's a clue: the point of this thread is NOT the same as the point of the entry to which it is attached. Does that help?

Post 66: " If social conventions in general favour men, then virtually all statutes favour men. Men start closer to the finish line. This is something hard to recognize for those closer to the finish line."

That is a very good point. Which leads on to the question - which is it better to do? Move the *finish* line, so men and women effectively run on *completely* different tracks, and give up any pretence of a level playing field? Or try to move the *start* line - because that's what EQUALITY would mean, and I'm all in favour.

Post 67: "Yes, a woman should be able to walk into a nightclub naked and not be molested."

I agree - in an ideal world, she should. Meanwhile, back in the really real world, where SOME men are, believe it or not, beasts controlled by their gonads, do you expect this woman to have to take NO responsibility for her actions? More on this below.

"what a sad, lonely bugger"

Ah. Abuse.

Post 68: "*Do you therefore accept that there is the *possibility* that a woman could be "asking for it"?*
No, because then it isn't rape, is it? "

WHAT?

" If a woman claims it is then she's breaking the existing law"

EXACTLY MY F**KING POINT. And this sort of thing happens ALL THE TIME, yet there is still the gender bias in the law which guarantees the complainant - I don't say "victim" because by definition in the cases I'm talking about the victim is MALE - anonymity, while guaranteeing the defendant none. So EVEN IF she breaks the law, she is
(a) guaranteed anonymity
(b) hardly ever punished.

"What feminist would suggest such a thing?"

You'd be surprised. The kind of feminist who runs self-defence classes, is one answer. One of my colleagues was told this in all seriousness by her instructor. She didn't argue. Would you?

"How long have you been stuck in the 50's?"

I think a fairer question would be how long has your view of feminism been stuck in the 70s?

"Or is it a ridiculous example just like the *quote* it is suppose to rebut?"

Ooh, you supplied a quote. I tremble. Except I can't check it, because you didn't supply a source. I tire of these arguments quickly because we can all play "highest up the wall" with examples, and in my case at least I can supply links to news stories to back them up. But who has that kind of time? You know what? I give in. You're right. No woman ever made a malicious charge of rape. No man's life was ever ruined because a woman accused him falsely. How harsh and unfair of me to suggest such a thing could possibly happen.

"*most undergrads ARE women*- False, at least here, so back it up with hard facts or shut your pie hole."

Now, the interesting thing here is that I do have hard facts to back it up, and can in fact supply links to reputable statistics. However, in view of the rather immature tone you've adopted, I believe I shall allow you to do the research necessary to discover that you are wrong.

" Good God man, what kind of nightmare childhood did you have and why isn't there a scrap of evidence to back up a statement like that?"

I respectfully suggest you read a book entitled "Games People Play" by Dr. Eric Berne, specifically the first page or two of chapter 9. You will find a description of the game "Let's you and him fight". I suggest that if this behaviour is so prevalent and entrenched in society that one of the most popular psychology texts in the world has it as the FIRST example of sexual interaction, that this constitutes evidence that the behaviour exists and is common.

If you think it is NOT common - and your rather excessive rejection of it suggests that you believe it is not only uncommon but actually something I made up - I can only wonder what kind of bizarre, non-human childhood *you* had.

"Explain in cold, hard facts with quotes, web links, and scholastic studies how you think this fantasy of yours is reality."

First of all, I'm not sure what you mean by "this fantasy".

Second, you have steadfastly failed to produce any material to support YOUR case, so I see now reason why I should make the extra effort on your account. You people have a real problem understanding what "equality" actually means, don't you? Can you see how that is your problem, right there?

Post 70:

">do you accept that in *some* cases of rape, the woman bears *some* of the responsibility<
I have a metal plate in the roof of my mouth, thnks to a sexual assault involving a handgun. No. I was *not* asking for it, I was 15, and minding my own business, But I'm sure, in your world, I am at fault."

Then you are a moron.

I'm sorry, but you are.

I very carefully, very specifically, emphasised the word SOME, twice.

You chose to read that word as ALL. Twice. If you're that determined to misinterpret what I say so that you can punish yourself, then you're definitely better off unsubscribing. You probably shouldn't go out alone either.

Post 72: "Rule number one of civil society is "don't suggest that your interlocutor is somehow not fully human."

Not sure where I did. I wasn't the one who suggested that women are not fit to take responsibility for themselves, was I? I'm all for responsibility. I should like nothing more than for women AND men to take full responsibility for their own actions. However, in the modern world, blame culture and ambulance chasing litigators seem to be making it less likely every day.

"You, however, have called all men gonad driven automatons after first denying a holocaust."

I have done neither of those things.

First of all, I have never called "all men" anything. I have suggested that in certain circumstances, one should not be surprised if certain men behave in a certain way. I'm surprised you dispute this. For instance - if you walked into a bar in Govan and shouted "right, where are all the queers in skirts", you might reasonably expect not to walk out uninjured. This is not to suggest that the Scots working class are automatons - merely to suggest that if you behave in a certain way towards them, you should not be surprised if their response is predictable.

And I have emphatically not denied the Holocaust, and I'm truly baffled why you would suggest I have. smiley - huh I'm also slightly baffled at the phrase "a holocaust". Was there more than one?

Post 73: I was referring, I'm afraid, to the law in the UK. I have no knowledge of US law, but it seems you actually have equality there! Congratulations! smiley - ok

Post 75: Rev Paperboy wrote: " if this were a conversation in a pub, I'd have punched you in the nose by now"

Don't tell me you're a violent, gonad driven automaton! smiley - laugh It's OK, I forgive you your tendency to violence. Civilisation is spreading, slowly, and will, I am sure, one day reach you.

"Leaving a box of diamonds lying around unwatched on a shop counter doesn't mean it isn't theft if you steal them."

If you leave your car on a petrol station forecourt with the keys in the ignition and someone steals it, your insurance company will NOT pay up, even though you're covered for theft. Why not? Because YOU WERE PARTLY RESPONSIBLE. Yes, the thief was still a thief. But everyone accepts that you have a responsibility, in your contract with your insurance company, to take reasonable care not to get your car stolen. We accept this, because if we didn't the cost of insurance would be prohibitive, because you and I would be paying out to replace the cars of morons who can't be bothered to take care of their stuff.

And women (and men) have a contract with society, which says that if we take reasonable care to look after ourselves, society will punish those who attack us. So why should we take equal care of people who DON'T take reasonable care, who deliberately put themselves in harm's way, again and again? The cost is prohibitive. They choose high risk behaviours. They suffer the consequences. Why should we have to insure these risks?

""He was asking for it" has never been a defense for murder or assault, how is it that some simians think 'She was asking for it' is a defense for rape or domestic violence?"

It pains me to have to explain this to what appears to be an adult, but since you ask:

First of all, you're wrong. A murderer in Germany who was convicted recently of killing and eating a young man he met via the internet used in his defence the fact that he (the victim) had volunteered to be killed and eaten, as it was a fantasy of his. He was, quite literally, asking for it. The defence argument was not accepted - but it WAS a defence. So you're wrong. But leaving that rather odd case aside...

MURDER is not an activity which in other contexts is a pleasurable experience for both participants. Murder is not something that the victim can have gone out looking for, courted assiduously, then decided after the fact that they did not, in fact, want it, at least not from this person at this time.

Oddly, your mention of assault is interesting. A number of years ago there were prosecutions for assault in what was known as the "Spanner" case. A number of men who were indulging in sado-masochistic activities were prosecuted, even though all activities were consensual. In that case, "he was asking for it" literally was the defence. And it worked. So, you're wrong. Again. Where does that leave your argument?

How is it that feminists such as yourself cannot accept that in some cases "she was asking for it" is the literal truth, and that *sometimes* - please, note this qualification - SOMETIMES, the decision to withhold consent comes AFTER the completion of the act. This is an uncomfortable and inconvenient fact, but pretending it doesn't happen does a disservice to the women who have been raped who really were NOT asking for it.

One thing I don't understand is why making false allegations of rape is not punished as severely as rape itself. Surely a woman who wastes police and court time, destroys a man's life, and does so based on a malicious fantasy is causing AT LEAST as much damage to women's status in society as a man who attacks women? She is, by her actions, devaluing the experience of women whose attacks were real. She is playing into the hands of the simians of whom you speak. And yet such women are not castigated and held up to public revulsion in the way that rapists are. Odd.

Post 77: "You are an extremely nasty piece of work, you need to remember that not all circumstances are hypothetical."

And some circumstances are. And if you deliberately choose to pretend that a hypothetical, qualified example applies directly to you when it demonstrably doesn't, I can't help it if you are hurt.

I appeal to anyone else - please, read what I write here carefully, and respond to what I say. If you respond to something I *didn't* write - like psychocandy did - then this isn't a conversation.

In fact, it doesn't seem to me to be a conversation in any case. Everyone here seems to be self-righteously furious that the world does not conform to how they think it should be. I've pointed out how it actually IS, and am roundly condemned, and even accused of lying. smiley - huh Well, if you'd all like to live together in your little fantasy world, please don't let me intrude. The real world is obviously far too painful for you.




















Key: Complain about this post

Write an Entry

"The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is a wholly remarkable book. It has been compiled and recompiled many times and under many different editorships. It contains contributions from countless numbers of travellers and researchers."

Write an entry
Read more