Lauren Southern speaks to Feminists at "SlutWalk".
- Thread starter The Lunatic
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Which still means that Poe's law applies.BloatedGuppy said:
It is hard to see whether this bullshit was posted by a raving lunatic who really believes this, or by someone trolling.
I support the slutwalk because I like to look at them. I laugh at their views because rape culture is an absurd idea.
Considering the way the judicial and police systems demonize men accused of rape in a way the do not do to women who are accused of rape shows us that the only accept encephalitis of rape in our culture is the rape done by women.
They confuse the issue of rape by bringing the idea of a slut into it. It is two different things. Yes they are related, but they do not talk about them as related issues. They talk about them as if they are the same issue. Sure it is often said against female victims as a former of defense. That is more of a date rape specific issue. Violent rapes happen against all types of women. Even the elderly. It is a psychological problem and more related to ideas of power than just wanting sex from a hot girl who seems easy anyway.
There is no accept encephalitis of men accused of rape. The police harass them during the years that the trial often takes. They are scorned by those around them. They often lose their jobs. All before the trial is complete. Which is true with those accused of horrific crimes.
I also find it funny that the same people demand we must accept things from other people's cultures while trying to say our own culture has these strange horrific properties that must be changed. It makes me wonder if they think changes to culture should only be allowed to come from within that culture. Why would it be wrong for one culture to influence another to change?
Considering the way the judicial and police systems demonize men accused of rape in a way the do not do to women who are accused of rape shows us that the only accept encephalitis of rape in our culture is the rape done by women.
They confuse the issue of rape by bringing the idea of a slut into it. It is two different things. Yes they are related, but they do not talk about them as related issues. They talk about them as if they are the same issue. Sure it is often said against female victims as a former of defense. That is more of a date rape specific issue. Violent rapes happen against all types of women. Even the elderly. It is a psychological problem and more related to ideas of power than just wanting sex from a hot girl who seems easy anyway.
There is no accept encephalitis of men accused of rape. The police harass them during the years that the trial often takes. They are scorned by those around them. They often lose their jobs. All before the trial is complete. Which is true with those accused of horrific crimes.
I also find it funny that the same people demand we must accept things from other people's cultures while trying to say our own culture has these strange horrific properties that must be changed. It makes me wonder if they think changes to culture should only be allowed to come from within that culture. Why would it be wrong for one culture to influence another to change?
Exactly. You can quote someone without it automatically being a rebuttal. Which is what I'm doing here, as well.MrFalconfly said:
Given the username was scrubbed and all responses before and after are nowhere to be seen, I'd lean towards the "probably a troll" side, but you can never be sure.
To be honest, over the last year or so of watching various online slap fights from the sidelines, it's become increasingly apparent that a rather astonishing percentage of the "outrageous" commentary on either side appears to be Poes.
Well personally I've "burned" my fingers enough time to suspend judgement.BloatedGuppy said:
I simply don't know, so I refuse to even try and conclude whether it's a troll or not.
All I can do with certainty is conclude that at least someone on the planet (if not the quoted person) believes this bullshit, and this serves greatly as a showcase of some of the stupidity one might encounter.
EDIT:
In any case, the poster itself rarely effects the comments credibility. This could've been said by President bloody Obama from the USA and I wouldn't rank it higher or lower on the bullshit scale.
You can find someone who believes just about anything. I don't think it's productive to engage in fanciful hyperbole about what they might sound like though. Critical thinking is in short supply on the internet, and a lot of people take everything they see at face value (presuming it confirms their bias).MrFalconfly said:
The last thing we need is more Don Quixotes tilting at phantasms, we're up to our eyebrows in them already.
Do you have a link to that? I searched for it but couldn't find itBiH-Kira said:You don't understand. Logic is a social construct made by European thinkers in order to put down women.Adam Jensen said:
Sorry for the image, but it fits too perfectly to miss the chance of posting it.
Of cause.BloatedGuppy said:
I am however glad that we could agree this above quote about "logic being a eurocentric ploy to hold down women" is bullshit(personally I hold the opinion that thanks to sexual dimorphism, human females tend to be the more logical, because they aren't affected as much by the male sexual hormone as me and my peers are. I'd like to see myself as perfectly logical, but I must admit that sometimes I want to take the aggressive option rather than the logical, but hey, that's just the genetic cards we were dealt).
Suhi89 said:
No, I found the image and it made my laugh. I should have put a disclaimer saying I don't know whether it's real or not.Pluvia said:
But now after searching a bit, I found this.
archive [http://archive.is/V07mt]
reddit [http://www.reddit.com/r/SRSDiscussion/comments/1ptcdq/the_use_of_logic_as_a_eurocentric_silencing_tactic/]
All my years of learning how to find the manga from just a part of a page paid of! Kneel before me, I mastered google.
EDIT:
That said, I'm glad that reddit didn't just agree with it or simply dismiss it. There are some interesting replies.
FogHornG36 said:
1. That was a weird cut at the end. One that looked as though the black woman was going to continue to talk.Adam Jensen said:
2.You do realize what that black woman could have meant, right? Withdrawing consent from sex while having it? Or even just withdrawing consent prior to the act while initially saying "yes"?
I'd say this is the overwhelming likelihood given available evidence.Pluvia said:
This is what I'm saying when I reference how easy it is to troll/capture people's imaginations with Poes.
Good sleuthing though, BiH-Kara. Thank you for finding a source. Not that any of this is remotely on-topic, but it was a good exercise in debunking.
Skatologist said:
that doesnt work either. You cant not retroactively remove consent. Let us take the sex example. Lets say you gave consent but then halfway through the act you say no. Okay, at the point you say no, legally he can not go any farther. However, the time period before you say no but after you consent is legal and is not rape. You can remove consent at any time, but it only applies at the moment you removed it.
The same applies to the interview. Say i gave consent to be interviewed but after 10 minutes, i didnt want to do it anymore. The interviewer can not force me to continue the interview after the point i removed consent, however the 10 minutes of interview i gave is fair game. Which is essentially what happened here.
Hell, it even applies to laws. If i bought a bottle of mustard today, and tomorrow they pass a law saying that the purchase of mustard is now illegal, they can not throw me in jail for buying mustard the day earlier (although if it was the purchase and USE of mustard is now illegal, and i used the mustard, then i might be screwed).
Either way, she was wrong as she was trying to remove consent retroactively.
Great, now I'm being misrepresented. Yes, I agree with everything you said, but the withdrawing of consent was most likely just women being interviewed not wanting it to be published. They may have also found out what kind of people interviewed them and found out the kind of journalists they are and the audience they get and wished that their interviews would not be shown.Ryotknife said:
We have no idea what that woman actually meant by that statement and that cut certainly doesn't help and this happens to be my interpretation. And if someone I had interviewed fully had decided after said interview for me not to publish it, I'd like to think I'd be able to do that in most situations, especially if they aren't dire.
Isn't that just victim blaming though?MarsAtlas said:
Nobody ever deservers to get abused, assaulted and compared to a rapist, regardless of what opinion they hold, nor where they hold it.
I'd like to see more than the tiny snippet that we saw to establish what was actually happening.The Lunatic said:
The footage is...how shall we say..."engineered" to a very deliberate effect. It does rather raise issues of trust.
For sure, it's certainly not the most reputable source. But, it just seems very disrespectful to say "What'd you think would happen" when referring to acts of abuse and harassment from people.BloatedGuppy said:
I don't personally have any more footage from the situation though.
Nor do I think we're likely to see any.The Lunatic said:
That was actually in Vancouver, not far from where I work. Part of me was like "I could give her a better debate than this", and then I thought "If I did, she probably wouldn't air it. Doesn't fit the narrative." When you're interrupting people mid sentence with non sequiturs and then abruptly cutting away, your intentions are less than honest.
And given the source, I'm hardly surprised.
Not really by doing a counter protest she created an adversarial relationship with the slutwalkers. Hence why they were defensive and/or hostile to her interviews. If she had not done the counter protest first she might have had more productive interviews.The Lunatic said:
Another issue is that the editing creates a narrative that is strongly in her favor. It is hard to say for sure if the women who got angry and hostile were not provoked first and that the provocation was edited out.