i suffered from alot of bullying and i know what its like to be bullied by groups or just a person its horrible!
i dont understand why you would want to make a person hurt who had done nothing wrong and ive seen things were it would say they said something offencive or mean and now everyone hates him and says mean things to them behind back etc....
You do not know what effect bullying can have and most people who bully dont think they do
i dont understand why you would want to make a person hurt who had done nothing wrong and ive seen things were it would say they said something offencive or mean and now everyone hates him and says mean things to them behind back etc....
You do not know what effect bullying can have and most people who bully dont think they do
:D
Originally Posted by ImmortalPig
If you think I am merely a 'contrarian driven by patriarchy and oppressive impulses' then I think it's sad that you can't offer a counter argument strong enough to dissuade people from agreeing with me.
I'll give it a go, mate.
Originally Posted by ImmortalPig
Don't think I ever mentioned jim crows laws...
Yes. He said you ignored them.
Originally Posted by ImmortalPig
All problems that 3rd wave feminism tackles are non-gendered (no significant gender bias), eg rape, domestic violence. And yet they are treated as gendered issues. I think it's definitely a problem to see things like "no violence against women!" when actually all domestic violence is bad, regardless of the gender!
You're purposely ignoring the hugely disproportionate rates at which these crimes are committed against women. That's the reason they're talking about it.
Originally Posted by ImmortalPig
Similarly we have racial special interest groups pursuing special benefits for their own race. For example in Australia we have special scholarships given to minorities who have achieved scores good enough to enter university but don't have the money. Isn't the real problem here that people - of any race - are getting good scores but can't afford university? Why is this issue being painted in a racial light? You may say that "oh minorities should always get priority" but I think it's absurd, giving benefits to one race over another is not equality!!!
You should read your own posts sometimes. Specifically, these ones (pulled from the equality thread), paying even closer attention to the text in bold.
Originally Posted by ImmortalPig
In Australia the majority of our minority indigenous population lives in poverty. Many are unemployed, have serious alcohol and drug addiction problems, and they commit more crimes proportionally than other groups. It's a big problem and a lot of money is pumped into the problem.
Unfortunately many live away from major cities and towns, and it's hard to get education and supplies to them. Integration isn't something that seems to be happening - most of the time if you ever see an aboriginal they are most likely homeless or being a nuisance.
Originally Posted by ImmortalPig
it's very hard to be given a chance... It's a very very tough situation.
You understand all of this and yet, in this thread, you're arguing against yourself.
Aboriginals receive these scholarships because our government recognises the need for them to be given a chance. "Giving benefits to one race over another is not equality" - what about when the playing field isn't even equal to start with?
i despise racisim. its for degenerates who crawl from the firey pits of hell were they belong. racisim is such a bad thing to do. a horrible trait. ive never understood racisim and the fact people dont understand that its darkened skin.
that skin color meens nothing.
me being white ive witnessed racisim.
and i always intervene in situations like that i recall being attacked by 2 racist boys when i was 7 for saying it was wrong i had only started Aikido and Krav-maga then so i had no knowledge over how to defend correctly now being 15 i have a much better idea on how and i would if i saw racisim
its despicable and wrong
that skin color meens nothing.
me being white ive witnessed racisim.
and i always intervene in situations like that i recall being attacked by 2 racist boys when i was 7 for saying it was wrong i had only started Aikido and Krav-maga then so i had no knowledge over how to defend correctly now being 15 i have a much better idea on how and i would if i saw racisim
its despicable and wrong
:D
Originally Posted by ImmortalPig
If no one brought them up it's because no one thought they were relevant.
He obviously thought it was important to the topic or else he wouldn't have stressed your omission.
Originally Posted by ImmortalPig
Sadly expectations placed on males prevent them from reporting domestic violence and rape. In reality both domestic violence and rape are nearly 50/50 splits in both victims and perpetrators.
Earlier this semester my tutorial class had a discussion on this issue. One of the girls said something along the lines of 80-90% of women have been sexually harassed/assaulted. Other girls also said they knew of this statistic. This is how it's been almost forever. In terms of equality, this isn't a level playing field.
Originally Posted by ImmortalPig
Rape and domestic violence remain a place where males are powerless (look at the number of pro-female adverts or shelters), and yet somehow it is considered a 3rd wave feminism issue?
I think you need to look at it from a different perspective. 3rd wave feminists see this sort of thing as a political struggle, certainly. But beyond that, there's this widespread, overarching effort to change how people respond to female harassment and abuse. I'd call it a sort of morale effort. That's why it's such a major issue - in sexual harassment and abuse against men you don't see this urgency to change perspectives.
Originally Posted by ImmortalPig
Cross thread quoting is against the rules of the game, but I'll play anyway -_-
What's up with that, anyway? Does any mods actually believe constraining, pedantic rules like that allow for substantive debate? They shut down discussion..
Originally Posted by ImmortalPig
There's no contradiction and the arguments are cohesive so I don't feel a need to reitterate...
It's not so much a contradiction. It just seems to me like with all your knowledge of the sufferings of minority groups, I expected you to have a more informed view.
Originally Posted by ImmortalPig
Not important enough to talk about, but important enough to mention that no one talked about it? Ok.
The fact that he mentioned you ignored it means that it's important to the discussion.
Originally Posted by ImmortalPig
Ask them if they also know the '77c to the $' statistic. It's just propaganda dude, are you really using 'some girls in my class said' to overrule wiki?
It doesn't matter. My point still stands. The reality is there's an urgency for change that isn't present with mens rights.
Originally Posted by ImmortalPig
I'm sure you are aware that most people think domestic violence and rape against men is a joke at best, where as against women it is unacceptable.
Yes, and feminists use this as an example of a one of the cultural/moral stereotypes they're trying to break. It's not just a 3rd wave feminism thing either. 2nd wave was all about breaking stereotypes too - 'how women ought to be'.
Originally Posted by ImmortalPig
It's a major issue, but it's not a feminist issue, and it's not a gendered issue.
It's nothing if not a feminist issue. It's a part of the moral effort I talked about earlier that's been present in 2nd and 3rd wave feminism. Before that, in the 1880-90s, it was purely socio-political.
Originally Posted by ImmortalPig
Is violence against men more acceptable than violence against women? Is rape against men more acceptable than rape against women?
It's not a gendered issue, as you said earlier. Questions like that are misdirections. It's a cultural issue (feminism pushes for cultural change) that deals with cultural morals.
Originally Posted by ImmortalPig
I am informed... That's quite a subtle ad hominem m8.
Sorry. Wasn't my intention.
Originally Posted by Arglax
Pig is just saying that belonging to a minority does not necessarily mean you should receive priorities. He means that anyone in a difficult situation should receive extra help, regardless of race.
I know that. i'm arguing that the reason they're receiving extra help is because of an urgency that isn't present in others. Whether the justified is legitimate or not is another heavily disputed question.
Last edited by Ele; Jun 22, 2014 at 03:02 AM.
