A sad day for humanity or at least the public image of these women.

[Vault Girl]

Oh don't worry guys, I'm sure they're being ironic.
After all, that's what we always say whenever an Australian critic starts calling rape by men against women as 'a natural thing', or whenever a game like Duke Nukem Forever depicts graphic depictions of rape and forced impregnation while encouraging us to laugh at it.
Yes sir, whenever WE do something sexist, it's not a bad thing. It's ironic, but when women do it, it's obviously due to them being evil and hateful witches of the west... right?

Haha, I love it when people say stuff like this. You must have been gone during the time that people complained their asses off about that DNF level or whenever people RIGHTFULLY complain about men throwing out sexist or just downright disgusting comments. I love it how people just ignore everything that goes against their argument and still claim that their comments aren't filled with delusional dribble. Sexist comments in basically every media is always discussed and complained about to hell and back, regardless of the gender of the culprit. It has always been this way and I honestly don't understand why people just keep ignoring this fact.

Another thing, does DNF have to do with anything here? While basically everyone and their moms believe that DNF is an unfunny, disgusting, unwitty piece of shit and is not the place to look for political correctness (Seeing as the Duke is supposed to be a sexist douchebag), this is about women cracking jokes about male mutilation on a popular TV show. It's like complaining that one of the awful scary movie films makes a joke about rape or murder or is plain sexist.

That said, I don't think that is what the majority of this thread has been about up until now.

Uh, wait what? I honestly don't get you people. You do realize that the sentence above just completely contradicts what Zefi was talking about, right? You do get that, while what she says isn't completely flawed (See section of my comment above to see why), her entire post was about ESCAPISTS HERE ON THIS THREAD!? There is barely any sexism in this thread and out of the hundreds of people, only three or so have blamed feminism (one of them being a girl) and most have been shot down immediately. Is such sexism not present in general? Of course it is in high numbers. Both genders are filled with tons of sexist people who say tons of sexist stuff, but.not.fucking.here.

I'm going to repeat this once more, though, since people can't seem to get this through their thick skulls: Sexist comments of both sides are often discussed and complained about. This isn't only happening on one side as you and Zefi are claiming for some reason. NONE OF THE GENDERS ARE DELIBERATELY IGNORED WHEN SHOUTING SEXIST COMMENTS.


NOTE: I do agree with you when you say that people should stop blaming feminism as a whole, seeing as feminism was and should be about equal rights for women, I also agree that many feminists should stop ignoring the vocal, radical psycho people within their movement and try to fight any kind of inequality, instead of ignoring the ones that are beneficial to women, because it's really harming the word and the movement.

Snip.

I commend the women second on the left (and to an extent the one on the far left) for saying that it is sexist and it is wrong to laugh at. in general and in passing it may be somewhat funny (i find some sexist jokes against women funny) specifically because they are not backed up by the opinion of the speaker. But to be so careless about a real, specific attack on a guy is not really funny at all.

Yeah, I pretty much agree with everything you said there and I completely understand. The main reason I commented on your post was because at first I thought you were lumping every single feminist into the same group.
I did notice one certain sentence that piqued my curiousity however...Are you saying you find some general, harmless, sexist jokes against women funny, but not jokes against men? Or did you mean in general?

I have a male friend and he enjoys telling sexist jokes (against women) and most of them are really funny. I meant in general terms. This friend also receives sexist jokes against men, which are also quite funny. Most are just outdated generalizations, and i KNOW my friend isn't sexist, and i like to think i'm not, but harmless jokes that are mutually understood to be acknowledged as outdated etc can in most cases be funny against BOTH sex'.


I understand why Duke Nukem can be understood to be sexist (because he's suppose to be) However the writing staff obviously haven't evolved to the times.

The difference is that in this case it wasn't just a joke between friends, it was a discussion that occurred in reality, in a very violent and visceral way.

Comedians have a different way of approaching these subjects, but like i said, that's for another topic. I have to say it's very rare that i can say there is a good female comedienne, because when i watch them most of their topics are around mundane subjects. Ask yourself, is there any female comediennes you know that haven't told a joke about men?

I agree with most of your points there

 

[SpaceBat]

Most are just outdated generalizations, and i KNOW my friend isn't sexist, and i like to think i'm not, but harmless jokes that are mutually understood to be acknowledged as outdated etc can in most cases be funny against BOTH sex'.

No need to be so careful about what you say and you're not sexist. I'm pretty sure that anyone who read your comments knows that you're not sexist. Nothing wrong with laughing about some outdated generalizations as long as they're in good taste. And judging from your attitude, I'm pretty damn sure the ones you mention are.

I understand why Duke Nukem can be understood to be sexist (because he's suppose to be) However the writing staff obviously haven't evolved to the times.

Which is why outdated gameplay and graphics weren't the only things that got criticized. Nearly every professional review mentions how ridiculously stupid and unfunny every single word that comes out of Duke's mouth is. So yes, you're right about the writing staff, seeing as stuff like this is thankfully no longer seen as good or funny.

The difference is that in this case it wasn't just a joke between friends, it was a discussion that occurred in reality, in a very violent and visceral way.

Yes, we've already discussed this a few times. You don't need to waste your energy repeating it. We've agreed on this from the very beginning.

I have to say it's very rare that i can say there is a good female comedienne, because when i watch them most of their topics are around mundane subjects.

I take it you've never seen Seinfeld's comedy act. All of his acts rely on discussing mundane subjects to ridiculous extents and he used to be an unbelievably popular comedian. Anyway, I've seen a lot of male comedians do that as well, but I'll take your word on this one.

Ask yourself, is there any female comediennes you know that haven't told a joke about men?

No, but I also haven't seen a single male comedian that hasn't told a joke about women. I have also yet to see a single female comedienne I actually like, but that's probably because I'm incredibly picky when it comes to stand-up comedy and don't really spend a lot of time on the subject. Hell, I only know of a single male comedian that I really enjoy listening to (George Carlin), so there isn't a huge difference.

So seeing as I don't really know a lot of comedians and comediennes, my answer to your question above wouldn't really mean much.

I agree with most of your points there

likewise in general.

 

[Vrex360]

Here are the bullet points then:

I would like to point out that it's considered poor form to continue arguing against someone after they've already said 'okay, you win'. But whatever, a good debate is a good debate nonetheless.

- Your examples stated were either incorrect or blown out of proportion to the point that I have to assume you got them from a game of telephone rather than reading them yourself.

Fair enough, I admit that the Dilbert writer thing I only got second hand from others who had read it. That said I do have counter arguments for you in regards to the whole 'violence against women' accusations I've been given to certain actors.

Namely, you say that Charlie Sheen was fired from Two and a Half Men for being an unpleasant person, and I admit that's certainly true. But all the most recent mess that happened came after the whole mess with the drugs.
Given that the show started in 2003 and his contract officially ended in 2011, I feel it's worth noting that despite having a long history of abuse against women in relationships, the notable one being shooting his first wife in the arm all the way back in 1990 and getting worse over the years... that means we have at least ten years of him being abusive to his partners and at least six years of him being on the show.
To me it just seems like if they really had a problem with his attitude, they would have done something sooner. The fact is, due to his face being in the news for being a druggy and his general anger and antics outside of the show, it made him unmarketable.

He was always a crazy and aggressive man, they just always tolerated that until that point because he was still a sellable face in hollywood, they tolerated that. They tolerated that for at least six years of solid Two and a Half Men programming. That they finally put their foot down after Charlie Sheen went maximum crazy, only proves that an actor has to put a lot of work into it to become less popular.

This isn't just the case with Charlie Sheen either, Mel Gibson was always crazy. I mean for god's sake, his father was a holocaust denier. Eventually though, he got older and got less deals and then his craziness just became much more noteworthy and now he's a laughing stock. That's the way it works.

Meanwhile, if an actress even gains weight, she loses her reputation and popularity and becomes the media's favorite punching bag.

Also I feel I need to point out that neither Roman Polanski or Mike Tyson were ever fully punished for their personal crimes against women. Tyson was meant to serve ten years but in the end served only three and got out with a comeback tour and lots of money coming his way, even though there was considerable evidence to support the testimony from the girl in question that he had, in fact, raped her.

And Roman Polanski just got away, had to be crafty about it but he's still got lots of people defending him and justfifying what he did. There was even a hugep petition to clear him of charges and as a result, he's once again a successful film director. Scott free.

- You are complaining that the people of this forum are blaming feminism for the actions of individual girls saying hatefull things yet you are ignoring that only a small portion of people said it while stating that radical feminists make up only a handfull of the population and therefore should be ignored.

And you're ignoring that I did acknowledge in my reply to Zeifgeif (or whatever) that while I agree that I hate it when people do that, I don't think that the majority of people on the thread were doing it.
Besides, even if a minority of people brought it up, that still means that it was brought up. It always gets brought up.

-You said men never get blamed en masse for the actions of a single man and I pointed to the arguments against the Patriarchy.

You probably shouldn't use words like 'patriarchy' in this instance. I never said, or at least never meant to say that men get judged as a whole. I apologize if I came off that way.

Anyway as it stands, on this forum I've seen many people on this forum blame feminism for everything bad women and girls do. Even when feminism did not cause it.
For example, the girls who stripped that eleven year old boy down, the fact that they weren't in far greater trouble then they were was NOT because feminists were cackling over their cauldrons and manipulating people to let the girls get away with their evil deeds.
It was because the mother of the boy chose not to press charges.

When another guy talked about how he'd punched a girl after she'd hit him after an argument in a bar, what began as a simple and immature scrapple in a bar parking lot where everyone involved was being immature and stupid, it turned into a heroic tale of this brave young man rising up against with evil she devil who lashed out at him with her demonic claws, poised to rip off his man salad.
And once again, feminism was blamed for that.
It was not FEMINISM that made that woman angry and aggressive, it was a combination of the guy in question being rude and alchohol and while I don't condone the woman for trying to hit him, I don't cheer him on for hitting back either.
But it seemed like everyone else on that forums decided that it was a good enough excuse to once again hate on feminists.

-You accused me of quoting radical feminists, but i pointed out that i had only quoted large feminist groups who receve federal funding and could still point out extreme examples of hate speech.

There's a Christian school in Australia that recieved federal funding. They want to make it a rule that gay teachers, gay parents and gay students would not be allowed to attend. They are recieving government funding and yet they are trying to actively encourage their students to hate gay people.

Like I said before, feminism is a huge and largely headless movement. With hundreds of organizations, magazines, movements and specific groups. Yes, there are crazy ones. Yes, some of those crazy ones are being federally funded.

But a lot of things that are crazy, hate filled and hysterical are being federally funded. They are still radical groups, also radical groups who usually don't get taken seriously anyway.

-I pointed out fearmongering in the rhetoric that virtually all feminist organizations use and how it is used to launch hatefull campaigns against men.

'Virtually all'.
That's bold. Care to show me how almost every feminist organization is responsible for doing stuff like this? Considering there are hundreds of them, all over the world?

Also, in regards to that whole 'castrate 100 innocent men' thing you mentioned earlier, do you really think they would actually do it?
I'm pretty sure that was just talk, I think they realize that they wouldn't get very far if they actually started trying to do it. Hence, empty threats like that are hardly rationale to call them 'fear mongering'.

Plus I'd like to point out that everything you've said about feminist fear mongering can be turned back to you as well. I.e I can accuse you of being a fear monger against women's rights groups by accusing them of all being responsible for hate speech.

I can equally argue against groups like 'the False Rape society' for overstating the risk of being charged falsley of rape and essentially helping create the myth that women use accusations of rape as a way to get what they want.
Given that it's already pretty hard to get people convicted of rape (that Tyson managed to walk away with a fraction of his actual sentence despite at least three solid testimonies against him baffles me), the idea of actually making rape and domestic abuse be considered some form of social control just kind of sickens me.

I mean when cases like this:
http://www.newsweek.com/2003/12/21/my-turn-i-trust-juries-and-americans-like-you.html
Happen, I really can sort of see the feminists point.

To reiterate, the reason I hate these kinds of justifications and websites is because they seem to be either intentionally or unintentionally advocating a hatred of women.

My problem isnt that one gender "has it better" than the other its more that one gender has virtually all the support.

While the other gender has the great influence on global politics, entertainment industries, mutli million dollar corporations and opinion based television.

Men are 5 times as likely to commit suicide yet there are more programs to support depressed women than men.

Then what the hell is stopping men in power from making some? Or better yet, why even make them gender specific at all? Depression is depression and emotions are genderless. Just make institutions to tend to depressed people in general.
Problem solved.

And once again, feminists aren't causing this. A lot of the supposed gender double standards happen as a result of insitutions set up by men.

Men are more likely to live in poverty but there are more programs to support women when it happens to them.

I hear it's because it's generally accepted that there's a higher chance of women being mothers, or perhaps one day being mothers. As such people work to cater towards the group that has the potential to need it more.

Men are less likely to go to university yet there are more scolarships and support programs for women.

I guess it could have something to do with us wanting to give women the opportunities denied to them in the past. But I admit that is still kind of unfair.
So maybe with that in mind, again, lots of rich men in the world. If they cared enough about this, why not MAKE some more scholarships for males?

Seriously, us males need to get over it. Even if they protest or vocalize plans to sever our genitals, you know as well as I do that it's all talk. If we want to make these things for men, we can make them.
These things are all a result of our own problem and they are also our own solution. But instead, we'd rather blame the feminists again.

Yet women in power are usually quick to dismiss this while proudly displaying the male privilage checklist.

Possibly because they are only expected to talk about the privelleges men get? Of which there are still quite a few?

 

[Vrex360]

Haha, I love it when people say stuff like this. You must have been gone during the time that people complained their asses off about that DNF level or whenever people RIGHTFULLY complain about men throwing out sexist or just downright disgusting comments.

Actually, I was referring to the way people were responding in the months before Duke Nukem was actuall released. Before people knew it was going to be a festering turd.
Whenever the sexist nature of the game was brought into question, no matter how obnoxious and gratuitous it was, people would rationalize it by saying 'it's ironic' or 'it's satire'.
Look up the thread 'why are people so against feminism in gaming' and the thread 'was Duke Nukem ever sexist' to see what I'm talking about.
The primary argument was always:
"it's not sexist, it's ironic."
Subsequently after the game dropped, die hard fans continued to use that logic. See the thread 'Duke Nukem and 'rape''. Arguing that it was a spoof or a parody or any other number of words that they never actually backed up with justification.

My point is, often we defend sexist imagery or sexist jokes or attitudes from media or comedians or other media personalities as being 'ironic'. To give an idea of what I mean, google 'retro sexism', as that can be applied here too.

Sexist comments in basically every media is always discussed and complained about to hell and back, regardless of the gender of the culprit. It has always been this way and I honestly don't understand why people just keep ignoring this fact.

It always does, true. And yet it keeps showing up.
Hence it's hard to really pay much attention to the constant complaining about sexist stuff in media, because it's not actually changing anything.

Another thing, does DNF have to do with anything here?

Nothing much, I admit. I was just pulling an example out from the top of my head. For what it's worth though, that opening bit was sarcasm. Though I suppose that's not really an excuse.

While basically everyone and their moms believe that DNF is an unfunny, disgusting, unwitty piece of shit and is not the place to look for political correctness (Seeing as the Duke is supposed to be a sexist douchebag),

True, but like I said, people had justified it with the phrase 'it's ironic'.

this is about women cracking jokes about male mutilation on a popular TV show.

I know, look for god's sake don't think I'm not disgusted by that. I think it was in very poor taste and had a shameless attitude towards a subject matter that deserved more severity.

But all the same, I've seen plenty of TV shows and comedians ridicule the plight of people in war torn areas in Africa, or of whom make jokes centered on the holocaust and center around people who died very recently.
I've seen all this and I've seen it justified with 'it's ironic'. I was pointing out that, most of the time, when people make insensitive jokes like this... we are more ready to rationalize and call it 'irony' then we are to actually take offence.
I had just noted that it didn't play out that way this time and I was confused, so I made a sarcastic remark. Badly thought out I admit, I was tired, but nonetheless just a sarcastic remark.

Uh, wait what? I honestly don't get you people. You do realize that the sentence above just completely contradicts what Zefi was talking about, right?

I can actually rationalize that part. See, prior to Zefi's post I had opened up on a page where there were several posts blaming feminism for being responsible for this. As a result I made the assumption that this was a recurring thing on this thread (as it had been with many similar threads before it) and when I saw the post, I agreed.

Later, I then looked through the thread with more detail and realized that for the most part this wasn't the main focal point of the conversation, so I went back and edited in that extra tidbit.

I openly admit, looking back, I should have read the whole thread before I responded. I apologize.

I'm going to repeat this once more, though, since people can't seem to get this through their thick skulls: Sexist comments of both sides are often discussed and complained about.

Of course it does, I never said it didn't. I merely pointed out that whenever it's a woman culprit in something like this, there's always at least a few people who dwell on the fact that she's a woman and accuse the feminist movement for somehow being responsible. That's what pisses me off.

This isn't only happening on one side as you and Zefi are claiming for some reason.

Again, I didn't say it's only happening on one side. Or at least I didn't intend to. What I said was that whenever it's women doing or saying something wrong. We on the Escapist usually accuse feminism and in some cases talk about it like it's some kind of evil organization.

I've just never seen the reverse happen. Maybe it has, but in my own personal experience I've never seen it.

NOTE: I do agree with you when you say that people should stop blaming feminism as a whole, seeing as feminism was and should be about equal rights for women, I also agree that many feminists should stop ignoring the vocal, radical psycho people within their movement and try to fight any kind of inequality, instead of ignoring the ones that are beneficial to women, because it's really harming the word and the movement.

Thank you.

 

[LokiArchetype]

The obsession women have with removing penises makes me think Freud was completely and utterly right about penis envy.

 

[Rule Britannia]

Ozzy Osbourne's wife is an arse hole :O. Cutting off a dude's dick is no bloody laughing matter, That poor guy has lost his diginity.

 

[Vrex360]

Ozzy Osbourne's wife is an arse hole :O. Cutting off a dude's dick is no bloody laughing matter, That poor guy has lost his diginity.

Not even that, he could have died. I just feel that this isn't a joking matter.

 

[Deleted]

I don't see a problem...? They were women, women are allowed to joke about men's misfortunes. Its just the way of life, women are incapable of evil so it was obviously the man's fault he lost his willy. He drove the women to do such an act.
If anything, he should be charged with forcing her to perform mutilation, she must be going though a lot of trauma. I agree with what the women said in the show as well, maybe men will learn to respect women andpffff hahahaha

I'm sorry I can't do it. I tried but this is just too fucking ridiculous. Laughing about something like this should be met with nearly having to go through the same thing, so they can understand the pain the man is going though. Some people just don't have compassion.

 

[AndyFromMonday]

You're not going to keep your job if you curse out your boss

Yes you probably will because instead of expressing your opinion of that person respectfully and refraining from using curse words you're going to all out insult him. I'm fairly sure people react more understandingly when you criticize them without using curse words to emphasize your opinion and that persons faults.

If you troll on a forum, you will be modhammered.

Trolls have absolutely nothing to do with free speech and the reason why should be painfully obvious.

If you tactlessly offend and demonize half of the fucking world population whilst condoning a psycho, your talk show will be protested and boycotted because it's unfair, cruel, unprofessional, and only makes cross-gender relations worse than they already are.

And you can do that. You can respectfully tell her she's a complete and total fucktard for all I care. What I DO care about is her getting fired for expressing an opinion. Be it fucked up or sick, it is her opinion and she has the right to express it whether it's offensive or not. You can't censor people for having an offensive opinion. You don't change that opinion by trying to get her fired, you change it by having a reasonable discussion with her. People shouldn't be afraid of getting fired for expressing an opinion.

Freedom of Speech allows us to criticize our government.

As a human right, freedom of speech entails that you are able to express any opinion without the fear of censorship.

It doesn't give us license to behave like assholes when we please.

How do you define "asshole" behavior? From what I've read anyone who has an opinion that offends you seems to be an asshole.

And since citizens have the right to protest and boycott companies and organizations, including media outlets, you are the one who is imposing upon the rights of others.

The original discussion dealt with a person encouraging people to send messages to CBS urging to get the talk show host fired. What I said is that if you want to criticize her opinion you should do so directly, by contacting her.

You can protest, for all I care get a thousand people and march through the streets of New York. What I care about is her getting fired for expressing an opinion. Protesting is one thing, inflicting consequences upon another person for offending you is a completely different problem.

 

[Findlebob]

I wish the death penalty was more common, she totaly deserves it.

 

[Insideout Ink Demon]

mutilation, is not acceptable regardless of how much you hate your ex, or soon to be ex.
regardless of gender, genitalia mutilation should be treated with disgust

EDIT
i think an apology should be issued by those involved with the broadcast

 

[Cyrus Hanley]

What the fuck is The Talk? An even shittier version of The View?

Krazie316 was right. After watching the clip of those women joke about Mister Becker's severed penis going down the garbage disposal, I felt physically ill.

 

[BRex21]

I would like to point out that it's considered poor form to continue arguing against someone after they've already said 'okay, you win'. But whatever, a good debate is a good debate nonetheless.

I would also point out its impolite to leave a debate by complaining your opponent is too wordy.

Fair enough, I admit that the Dilbert writer thing I only got second hand from others who had read it. That said I do have counter arguments for you in regards to the whole 'violence against women' accusations I've been given to certain actors.

Namely, you say that Charlie Sheen was fired from Two and a Half Men for being an unpleasant person, and I admit that's certainly true. But all the most recent mess that happened came after the whole mess with the drugs.

So what you are saying is that once it was all brought to the public attention he became unmarketable. Interesting, although as i pointed out in my past wall of text he is not someone payed for his opinion there is a big difference. I also wish people like you could do your own research. Everyone who witnessed the shooting of Kelley preston says it was an accident, that ballistics confirmed it was not a deliberate shooting and that oh... Kelley Preson says the gun fell out of Charlie Sheens pocket and went off. Yes i can see how you would confuse that for attempted murder.

Mel Gibson was always crazy. I mean for god's sake, his father was a holocaust denier.

Is a completely irrelevent point, again once he became outspoken he was ridiculed out of hollywood.

I can see where you are trying to go with these arguments, but i think its valid to say we love them because people love to watch celebrities crash and burn. The same reason we enjoy Paris Hilton or Snooki.

Also I feel I need to point out that neither Roman Polanski or Mike Tyson were ever fully punished for their personal crimes against women. Tyson was meant to serve ten years but in the end served only three and got out with a comeback tour and lots of money coming his way, even though there was considerable evidence to support the testimony from the girl in question that he had, in fact, raped her.

And Roman Polanski just got away, had to be crafty about it but he's still got lots of people defending him and justfifying what he did. There was even a hugep petition to clear him of charges and as a result, he's once again a successful film director. Scott free.

Mike Tyson went to jail and was released early, happens to criminals everywhere. My personal bet for the case that started this all is 2 years by the way.
By "considerable evidence" im assuming you mean "Prosecutorial misconduct" I had to look this up, but apparently the trial hit a snag when the prosecution were worried that a heavily rehearsed and coached testimony from the victim came across as heavily coached and offered a plea deal. They enticed a confession out of him with a plea bargain and then the court tried to use the confession to enact more penalties. For this reason people INCLUDING THE VICTIM are saying he has been mistreated.

- You are complaining that the people of this forum are blaming feminism for the actions of individual girls saying hatefull things yet you are ignoring that only a small portion of people said it while stating that radical feminists make up only a handfull of the population and therefore should be ignored.

And you're ignoring that I did acknowledge in my reply to Zeifgeif (or whatever) that while I agree that I hate it when people do that, I don't think that the majority of people on the thread were doing it.
Besides, even if a minority of people brought it up, that still means that it was brought up. It always gets brought up.

Yes I am ignoring that you said that. largely because you are here condemning people who say Feminisim is wholely or partially responsible, while constantly arguing that the behaviors that are responsible are only carried by a select few feminists and stating that they should be ignored. Its sort of like saying something like: I don't hate men i just think they deserve to get there dicks cut off, and expecting people to fully listen to the I don't hate men part.

-You said men never get blamed en masse for the actions of a single man and I pointed to the arguments against the Patriarchy.

You probably shouldn't use words like 'patriarchy' in this instance. I never said, or at least never meant to say that men get judged as a whole. I apologize if I came off that way.

The problem being that you have outright said a few times that men simply arent blamed en masse like this, This is why i brought up the word Patriarchy as an example of feminists doing exactly this.

Anyway as it stands, on this forum I've seen many people on this forum blame feminism for everything bad women and girls do. Even when feminism did not cause it.
For example, the girls who stripped that eleven year old boy down, the fact that they weren't in far greater trouble then they were was NOT because feminists were cackling over their cauldrons and manipulating people to let the girls get away with their evil deeds.
It was because the mother of the boy chose not to press charges.

The fact that you dont see blatant sexism in this is staggering. If boys had done this to girls the state wouldnt have waited to press charges. You see because if a boy does this to a girl it becomes a "sex crime" this gives the state the right to charge without needing the mothers say. If a boy did this to a girl it would also be making child pornography something that gets you tried as an adult and put on the national sex offender registry. Why do i think its right to blame feminists for this? Because feminist organizations pushed for these laws and always make sure to word these laws so that they blame men and avoid gender neutrality.

When another guy talked about how he'd punched a girl after she'd hit him after an argument in a bar, what began as a simple and immature scrapple in a bar parking lot where everyone involved was being immature and stupid, it turned into a heroic tale of this brave young man rising up against with evil she devil who lashed out at him with her demonic claws, poised to rip off his man salad.
And once again, feminism was blamed for that.
It was not FEMINISM that made that woman angry and aggressive, it was a combination of the guy in question being rude and alchohol and while I don't condone the woman for trying to hit him, I don't cheer him on for hitting back either.
But it seemed like everyone else on that forums decided that it was a good enough excuse to once again hate on feminists.

HAvent seen this post, so I cant comment but im willing to bet there were a good number of "your a boy you cant hit a girl"s in there too.

-You accused me of quoting radical feminists, but i pointed out that i had only quoted large feminist groups who receve federal funding and could still point out extreme examples of hate speech.

There's a Christian school in Australia that recieved federal funding. They want to make it a rule that gay teachers, gay parents and gay students would not be allowed to attend. They are recieving government funding and yet they are trying to actively encourage their students to hate gay people.

Like I said before, feminism is a huge and largely headless movement. With hundreds of organizations, magazines, movements and specific groups. Yes, there are crazy ones. Yes, some of those crazy ones are being federally funded.

But a lot of things that are crazy, hate filled and hysterical are being federally funded. They are still radical groups, also radical groups who usually don't get taken seriously anyway.

While i think that your example is wrong, schools that discriminate should not get federal funds. You have again missed my point. I am refering to a group that recieves billions of dollars to spreak hate and lies, you are refering to a single school. Yet you are the one constantly saying that feminist ideology like this are in a minorty.

-I pointed out fearmongering in the rhetoric that virtually all feminist organizations use and how it is used to launch hatefull campaigns against men.

'Virtually all'.
That's bold. Care to show me how almost every feminist organization is responsible for doing stuff like this? Considering there are hundreds of them, all over the world?

Yes, I preveously stated how feminist organisations have spread provably false information to virtually every major college and university in America and used it to launch programs that call male students "potential rapists" and trivialize male sex crime victims.

Also, in regards to that whole 'castrate 100 innocent men' thing you mentioned earlier, do you really think they would actually do it?
I'm pretty sure that was just talk, I think they realize that they wouldn't get very far if they actually started trying to do it. Hence, empty threats like that are hardly rationale to call them 'fear mongering'.

Why do we take any threats seriously? I mean the chance of someone getting away with murder is fairly small, particulairly after leaving a death threat are slim! But enough of that... I was stating that brutal violence towards men is a largely celebrated theme within the feminist movement. The fact that they didnt castrate 100 men is irrelevent, its the fact that when it happened once the largest response was akin to "you go girl" and a popular response to her being punished for her crime was to threaten violence against innocents. The problem isnt that all feminist are violent, they arent, its that the vast majority speak out against violence towards one gender while turning a blind eye to the other and even call the ones saying it friends and heroes.

Plus I'd like to point out that everything you've said about feminist fear mongering can be turned back to you as well. I.e I can accuse you of being a fear monger against women's rights groups by accusing them of all being responsible for hate speech.

I can equally argue against groups like 'the False Rape society' for overstating the risk of being charged falsley of rape and essentially helping create the myth that women use accusations of rape as a way to get what they want.
Given that it's already pretty hard to get people convicted of rape (that Tyson managed to walk away with a fraction of his actual sentence despite at least three solid testimonies against him baffles me), the idea of actually making rape and domestic abuse be considered some form of social control just kind of sickens me.

You really CANT say the same thing because after checking out 'the False Rape society' i found that it was a blog written by like 3 dudes, You are constantly whining that my use of massive, federally funded organizations is an unfair depiction of feminism and then go on to compare my example of a massive, national, hundred million dollar organisation using a provably false claim, which by the way in the document I pointed to it contained a lovely explanation about how this was removing help for actual rape victims, to spread fear on campus to a blog written by three guys. Although since I have actually heard of Angry Harry, a major writer this blog probably WOULD amount to a similar portion of "male rights activists" because are a movement with virtually no media impact virtually and no funding. So basically you are comparing this: http://users.livejournal.com/_allecto_/34718.html , to an organization with real political power.
The problem is that I think it SHOULD be hard to convict someone of ANY crime. Justice around the free world has been based on innocent until proven guilty, and the problem with rape cases is that it can often be hard to prove and comes down to the reliability of the victims statement. This is why womens rights groups are pushing for universities to lower the requirements, like stanford http://www.stanforddaily.com/2011/04/12/stanford-lowers-standard-of-proof-for-sexual-assault/. who, by the way in there support for male victims of sexual abuse page ( http://www.stanford.edu/group/svab/male.shtml ), kinda just go off tangent and take up half the page talking about how to stop men from raping and even have the balls to say men are not only perpotrators but also "empowered bystanders" and that men need to stand up and protect women from sexual abuse.
There are false rape claims, and making it easyer for women to get away with them helps no one.

I mean when cases like this:
http://www.newsweek.com/2003/12/21/my-turn-i-trust-juries-and-americans-like-you.html
Happen, I really can sort of see the feminists point.

To reiterate, the reason I hate these kinds of justifications and websites is because they seem to be either intentionally or unintentionally advocating a hatred of women.

I have no idea why you brought this up, its an article in which i woman with a legitimate reason to sue is offended by a different article that complains about the difficulties of getting things done when frivilous lawsuits are seen as an easy way to make some cash. http://www.yuricareport.com/Law%20&%20Legal/NewsweekHell.html This, the article that offends, contains very real, very serious problems with forcing Doctors, companies and governments to pay for expensive defences from frivilous lawsuits. The woman in your article was not mentioned nothing close to her situation was mentioned she simply read an article that made her feel bad. This appears to be a debate between jury established trials or less costly industry regulated settlements. I see no connection between this and what we are currently talking about.

My problem isnt that one gender "has it better" than the other its more that one gender has virtually all the support.

While the other gender has the great influence on global politics, entertainment industries, mutli million dollar corporations and opinion based television.

I wouldnt say great(est) influence in world polotics, most first world countries have more female elegable voters than male, and since women have a better organised more focused presence in the political arena womens issues often take a front seat. Same goes for entertainment, in most markets women have more spending power and are therefore a better soure of revenue for the entertainment industry, and most daytime opinion television is aimed at either women or a political faction anything that men "controll" has much more of an ideology behind the support of men.

Men are 5 times as likely to commit suicide yet there are more programs to support depressed women than men.

Then what the hell is stopping men in power from making some? Or better yet, why even make them gender specific at all? Depression is depression and emotions are genderless. Just make institutions to tend to depressed people in general.
Problem solved.

And once again, feminists aren't causing this. A lot of the supposed gender double standards happen as a result of insitutions set up by men.

why even make them gender specific at all?

This, a thousand times this. but on many more issues than simply depression, Domestic violence, rape, verbal psycologial and physical abuse of spouses, child abuse on and on and on, most of our issues are infact universal across sexes. But stop violence against women is much more common a slogan than stop domestic violence, there are no federally funded programs in the US that dont refer to women as the victim and men as the abuser. but back a little bit more on our topic the reason most of these institutions were pushed for and won by womens rights lobby groups, most are required to support men and women by law, however most dont and the government is simply not willing to deny funding to a group that protects women, most likely because they would be voted out of office, the institutions was set up by men, but its feminists and womens rights lobbyists that are gaming the system.

I would like to point out that the violence against women act was passed into law by a man whose wife is on record for having thrown things at him hit him with blunt objects and scratching him. She is also a US senator who says there is no excuse for domestic violence.

Men are more likely to live in poverty but there are more programs to support women when it happens to them.

I hear it's because it's generally accepted that there's a higher chance of women being mothers, or perhaps one day being mothers. As such people work to cater towards the group that has the potential to need it more.

So then perhaps mothers should have easyer access to welfare than the general population, or single parents? But no, most countries classify poverty as a womens issue and feel men should simply get off there asses and find a job.

Men are less likely to go to university yet there are more scolarships and support programs for women.

I guess it could have something to do with us wanting to give women the opportunities denied to them in the past. But I admit that is still kind of unfair.
So maybe with that in mind, again, lots of rich men in the world. If they cared enough about this, why not MAKE some more scholarships for males?

Yknow what? thats a great idea! Except someone tried that in Texas and they got sued! they did manage to put $1000.00 in the hands of 5 needy people though.

Seriously, us males need to get over it. Even if they protest or vocalize plans to sever our genitals, you know as well as I do that it's all talk. If we want to make these things for men, we can make them.
These things are all a result of our own problem and they are also our own solution. But instead, we'd rather blame the feminists again.

NO! WE SHOULDNT! Human beings should stand up and speak out against violence regardless of who it is happening to who doing it or who is speaking about it. While you are willing to stand up and say its our own fault women threaten us are you willing to go so far as to say if a woman follows through on these threats that they are still our fault? If not what is the difference between verbal and physical assault? and why is it acceptable to try to influence polotics through threats of violence.

Yet women in power are usually quick to dismiss this while proudly displaying the male privilage checklist.

Possibly because they are only expected to talk about the privelleges men get? Of which there are still quite a few?

Are they also being payed to shoot down the concerns? I previously mentioned Hillary Clinton who is on record as physically assaulting her husband, yet sees fit to say we need to stop violence against women.
Or in Britain where there is specifically a minister for women, who has outright rejected even looking into Poorer access to healthcare, support for depressed men, sentencing differences between men and women and just FYI in a case like this the "womens justice task force" would say no jail. In fact if a woman murdered her husband drowned her children and went on a shooting rampage, they would say no jail. ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13666066 ) you see, according to them, when a man commits a crime its because he is a bad person who need to be punished but when a women does it she is just misunderstood and disadvantaged, so they, a government supported womens rights organization, firmly believe that women should not be held liable for there actions, yet men should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.
Feminist by and large make things gender issues, yet most simply aren't when they do this tehy do a disservice to everyone involved and work to make brutal double standards, what we need are PEOPLE willing to sit down and discuss PEOPLE issues, but modern Feminists (and yes the same could be said for MRAs) by and large are more interested in crying "oh poor me" and looking for someone to blame to have any real value in society.

I do strongly suggest if you want to continue this debate that we move it to a seperate forum topic, as we both appear to be long winded and somewhat off topic.

 

[luckybreak]

I am relatively sure that is illegal.

 

[madster11]

So is the ***** under police guard yet?

Because if i was the guy, i would have already purchased a gun and i would kill her by multiple shots to non-vital areas, ensuring a slow death.
And the best part is the male cops would understand.

You do NOT cut off a mans fucking dick. You don't not make a joke out it, or call it right.

 

[Yureina]

This girl feels sorry for that guy, and disgusted by those who would think such an act would be in any way defendable or funny.

 

[asmidir]

That has to be one of the most disgracefull, disrespectful things I have ever seen. There is nothing funy about a man being tied down and tortured loosing any chances of having children (if he didn't have any). That man could have died and they laugh at him. I've seen this show a few times in the morning and I specifically rember one of them quoting the famous generalization "All men are pigs." Well honey you best look in the mirror. I have a pretty dark sense of humour but that is just going too far.

 

[Lem0nade Inlay]

Crazy feminists.

Insane batshit women who have a shitty love life.

HOWEVER:

The guy that actually had his penis cut off made an appearance on the Letterman Late Show and seemed in pretty good spirits.

But honestly I couldn't tell if it was the actual guy or if it was a joke...I'm Australian and don't watch the show a lot so I don't know what stuff Letterman pulls, haha.

But if it wasn't a joke, then the guy seems to be fairly happy so...

 

[Winterfel]

After reading about this, I had to check if my... manhood was still in place.

It seems I was not the only one.
I would probably prefer death over having my... "manhood" cut off.
All joking aside though there's never an exuse for doing something like that, never. No matter the reasons, it's just so wrong on so many levels. :s