Outrage over "Don't be that girl" Posters in Edmonton.

[Lolretadin]

Wow just read that article and it's really something else. I don't care if you are a petite woman or a fat male, I wouldn't be as comfortable with firefighters knowing they could not properly lift things by themselves or save people properly. Minority hiring is insulting to me as a woman frankly, I would feel uncomfortable ever thinking that I got the position based on gender and not my abilities. I want to be proud of what I have achieved and know that I have earned my spot. If you want to be a super PC company than at least hire someone that is qualified over another that is qualified, not people who cannot even carry someone from a burning building, I mean firefightings pretty serious.

Look, I'd be the happiest guy ever if there was a ton of fit fire-women that could carry me out of a burning building in their arms, I think it would be hot (OHOHO, THE FIRE PUNS). Shit, I'm all excited to do another post now, damn.

I've digressed, I am all for equal pay and equal rights in the work place as long as standards are static for everyone and don't need to be lowered because someone feels entitled. Shit, if I was looking for a job I would feel a little disheartened if I was given preference over someone else that met the full qualifications and had to have standards lowered for me just to meet a quota.

[Vargur]

What about guys that are passed out and raped by women? You've never heard of that? Well you never will, men will never come forward for something like that, for a multitude of reasons.

[Xenofreak]

See what I mean? Takes the time to read those articles, continuing to reply to most posts, but still can't seem to actually comment on the link and content of the extremist feminist post that comes from someone who appears to be a representative of a feminist group at Cambridge University. People tend to be afraid to confront the extremists on their side of the isle, but it gets a little ridiculous when they clearly completely and utterly ignore them even when someone is pointing them out and asking for a comment. Christ.

[Lolretadin]

Oh hey, look what I found don'cha know. A topic on another forum not dissimilar to ours, analyzing a well known little picture, aye.
I 'tink it be gettin' pretty bad for dat dere darenyon.

Infracted

[starlord]

Darenyon your first article is march 2007, 6 years ago.
Second article the latest reference is 2005. 8 years ago.

I have no idea personally of the exact percentages and such, all I'm saying is you aren't helping yourself, a lot happens in so many years, sometimes better, sometimes worse.

it doesnt vary much at all, and those were the most recent a casual search found. older ones are fairly consistent.

[vickvinegar]

What about guys that are passed out and raped by women? You've never heard of that? Well you never will, men will never come forward for something like that, for a multitude of reasons.

lol, and obvious reasons

[starlord]

They were fishing for a response. Their tactic worked pretty well since a lot of people are talking about it. They managed to infuriate a lot of people who are supposed to campaign for equal rights, by making posters that generalize as much as the "Don't be that guy" posters. Both poster campaigns could been seen as offensive, but the reaction they received shows the double standards and generalizations perpetuated by modern feminism.

In short: People are laughing with Men's rights groups and at Modern Feminist groups.

they're not, hence "outrage". and it doesnt highlight a double standard at all. if it actually did that im sure no one would have a problem with it. all it does is say "women deserve to be raped if they get drunk". so they got people talking about how mens rights think women deserve to be raped.

which as i said, is an example of why they arent taken seriously because they focus so much on "retaliating" instead of helping.

[vickvinegar]

they're not, hence "outrage". and it doesnt highlight a double standard at all. if it actually did that im sure no one would have a problem with it. all it does is say "women deserve to be raped if they get drunk". so they got people talking about how mens rights think women deserve to be raped.

which as i said, is an example of why they arent taken seriously because they focus so much on "retaliating" instead of helping.

and that's your interpretation, and very sad to see that

[starlord]

Oh hey, look what I found don'cha know. A topic on another forum not dissimilar to ours, analyzing a well known little picture, aye.
I 'tink it be gettin' pretty bad for dat dere darenyon.

you're not really doing your cause any favors by acting juvenile.

[Frenegade42]

Dat victim blaming attitude.



Then they've got themselves to blame if they get reported for rape.

Fine. I am perfectly ok with being called a "Victim Blamer" for thinking that a rapist is a piece of shit that deserves the full force of the Law, and depending on the circumstances of the rape the victim may be found somewhat culpable.

50 lashes for the thief and 5 for the man fool enough to leave his locker unlocked.

[starlord]

and that's your interpretation, and very sad to see that

"well thats just your interpretation" goes both ways.

[vickvinegar]

"well thats just your interpretation" goes both ways.

sure does, see that more often please

[Deleted]

you're not really doing your cause any favors by acting juvenile.

Totally avoiding Lolret's pic he posted just for you... Nice
Told you numbers are BS.
So easy to fabricate to fit ones agenda.

Numbers are usually worthless in these threads.

[Arganis]

"Rape culture" indeed. I fail to see how "don't get drunk to the point you black out and can't remember what happened" is a bad message.

Cause apparently woman should be able to behave as irresponsibly as they want and never deal with any possible consequences.

[Cybran]

it doesnt vary much at all, and those were the most recent a casual search found. older ones are fairly consistent.

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-st...o-1767688.html

In fact, during the course of my research for this article, all I could find – under the direction of several Government press officers, from the Ministry of Justice to the Home Office – was a figure relating to the number of women who have been convicted of sexual offences in the UK. This figure derives from a report released in 2006, and suggests that women form just 0.5 per cent of all sex offenders in prison, and around 1 per cent of convicted sex offenders in England and Wales.

Yet this is not entirely helpful – as conviction rates in cases involving sexual offences across the board are hardly indicative of the true state of affairs. Indeed, the 0.5 per cent statistic might be more useful in highlighting the shortcomings of the British justice system than painting a true picture of female sexual abuse. Prosecutions in cases of sexually motivated crimes in the UK are generally few and far between, and rarely reflect the true story. Take the proportion of reports of rape cases that result in prosecution in Britain, for instance. This is the lowest in Europe, according to a study released earlier this year, which claimed that the rate in England and Wales is just 6.5 per cent, and an even more pitiful 2.9 per cent in Scotland.

Furthermore, conviction rates only tell us about cases that actually make it to court, and according to one expert, Hilary Aldridge, the large majority of all cases of sexual abuse aren't even reported – as many as 90 per cent, she says – let alone put before a judge. In the unlikely event that a case of sexual abuse is reported, there is still a long and arduous process to go through in order to get it to court.

Aldridge is the chief executive of the Lucy Faithfull foundation, one of the few organisations in the UK which works solely with female abusers. She works on a daily basis with offenders in cases referred to her organisation by the family and criminal courts. She explains how tricky it can be to get a case of child abuse to court. "In the first instance, a child has to first come forward and tell someone what is happening, which is often extremely difficult for them to do," she explains. "Or someone else needs to notice that something is wrong, and then pick up on what that is. They then have to make the police take the allegation seriously and if they are able to do that, which is often difficult, then the child protection services will become involved and someone there has to take it seriously, too."

All things considered, we might do better to look somewhere other than the Government data for an idea of the prevalence of cases of child abuse involving female offenders in the UK – and the most widely respected sources for this are the independent studies from ChildLine and the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, which are believed to provide a much more accurate picture. Suddenly, the issue of female sexual abuse doesn't look quite as uncommon as we might otherwise have believed.

In 2004, childline asked each of those callers who were ringing their helpline about sexual abuse to tell them the gender of their abuser. It revealed that over the period of one year, 11 per cent of callers said they were being abused by a woman: a total of 8,637 children, of whom 6,538 were girls and 2,099 boys. The NSPCC also conducted its own research in 2005, the results of which suggest that around 5 per cent of children who suffer sexual abuse in Britain do so at the hands of a woman, which is the number regularly cited by other experts in the field. But as Zoe Hilton, the charity's policy advisor for child protection, suggests: "The true extent of female sexual abuse is still a hidden picture." Furthermore, it is not a picture that many seem in any hurry to clarify.

One of the biggest problems, of course, is that the idea that women can and do sexually abuse children is highly provocative in itself – a fact confirmed by a spokeswoman for the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Services (CEOP), a newly formed Government taskforce charged with "eradicating the sexual abuse of children" in Britain. "Women are perceived as the nurturers, those who are there to look after our young people," she explains, adding that female sexual abuse is often even more threatening than male sexual abuse as it undermines what we understand about the way women relate to children. In order for us to recognise it, the spokeswoman continues, we have to set our preconceptions aside. Otherwise, children will continue to suffer in silence: "How can a child be expected to understand they are being abused and that what they are enduring is wrong if we as a society cannot recognise women as abusers?" she asks.

Sexual abuse is usually understood as something bound up with issues of male aggression and power, and the idea of a female abuser totally undermines this well-established belief. Then there is a further problem in getting female abuse recognised: many people simply don't understand how – practically – a woman could abuse.

Understandably, this is a sensitive and highly emotive subject, the fallout from which Michele Elliott of Kidscape has witnessed at first hand. In 1992, she held a conference in London while compiling her book on the subject of female sexual abuse. She recalls how 30 women turned up to disrupt her address: "They stood up and started yelling about how terrible it was that I was detracting from the fact that male power was to blame. It is very disappointing when you encounter such extreme and closed-minded reactions. I was simply responding to what victims had told me."

And such closed-mindedness is rife in the criminal- justice system too, Hilary Aldridge confirms: "There is a tendency in the courts to see the woman as a victim of a male counterpart." But this isn't always the case by any means. Even when there is a male co-offender, this doesn't automatically mean that the female partner is an unwilling accomplice.

Indeed, one of the most disturbing aspects of child abuse committed by women is that – according to studies by independent researchers and highly respected charities – the large majority of it takes place in the home. Aldridge asserts that 60 per cent of cases take place within the family unit – and "women who abuse children regularly do so in the guise of normal, basic care". This, of course, is part of what makes it so hard to detect.

Sharon Hall, whose abuse by her mother went unnoticed for her entire childhood, knows all too well the devastating effects of being forced to suffer in silence. "If I'd had just the smallest impression that I'd be believed," she says, "I might have had the guts to come forward." The reality, she says, is that no one wanted to know what she was going through, and even today we continue to switch ourselves off from the suffering of an unknown number of children across the country.

If we are to have any chance at all of saving those children who are suffering now and those who will no doubt be suffering in the future, she says, the best place to start is by opening our eyes to the abuse going on around us. "I never had the chance to come to terms with what happened, and not only has my life been ruined, but so in turn has my daughter's," Sharon concludes. "All I hope now is that by coming forward and raising awareness of this issue, that I might in some small way be able to help those children for whom it isn't too late."

You are a perfect example of modern feminists perpetuating myths when it benefits them.

[starlord]

Totally avoiding Lolret's pic he posted just for you... Nice
Told you numbers are BS.
So easy to fabricate to fit ones agenda.

you mean the one where he linked my name to a picture of an obese person?
and some numbers have actual research and facts behind them.

[Kalyyn]

Cause apparently woman should be able to behave as irresponsibly as they want and never deal with any possible consequences.

It's kind of like leaving your car unlocked with a wad of cash inside. Sure, we're still going to punish the guy who stole it. But you really need to stop leaving your damn car unlocked.

[Lolretadin]

they're not, hence "outrage". and it doesnt highlight a double standard at all. if it actually did that im sure no one would have a problem with it. all it does is say "women deserve to be raped if they get drunk". so they got people talking about how mens rights think women deserve to be raped.

which as i said, is an example of why they arent taken seriously because they focus so much on "retaliating" instead of helping.

First off, this.
Second off, no it doesn't say that at all.

I will try and explain in the simplest terms...
The first one means that just because you are drunk, does not mean you are absolved from all responsibility. As it stands, only men are seen as capable of raping people when both parties, or one party, is drunk. If the female is drunk and the male is not, it will be classified as rape the moment the female regrets it. If the male is drunk and the female is not, it can go both ways as women have an easier time with the law when it comes to rape. When both parties are drunk, society immediately points to the man.
The second one means that if you decide to have consensual sex with someone, you cannot immediately regret it after and then claim rape as it was not. If you were perfectly clear that you are good with sex before having it, and then decide you regretted it, then you have to live with your decision and shouldn't claim rape as it is what you wanted and consented to.

The former deals with the consequences of drunkenness, the latter deals more with sober acceptance of consensual sex. Telling women that they don't have to live with their decision, like most feminists do, is a pretty shitty message.

- - - Updated - - -

you mean the one where he linked my name to a picture of an obese person?
and some numbers have actual research and facts behind them.

I linked it to a meme, get over yourself.

[vickvinegar]

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-st...o-1767688.html


You are a perfect example of modern feminists perpetuating myths when it benefits them.

and you are another perfect example of stats staring you in the face and choosing to turn toward against them

[starlord]

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-st...o-1767688.html


You are a perfect example of modern feminists perpetuating myths when it benefits them

how dare i use facts instead of speculation.