Curtis @ 3/11/2017 2:34

Igor: FUCK YEA I WON THE AUCTION FOR A SURVIVOR ORNAMENT lame hah the dudes last name is Cockrum I wanna go to a music festival soooo bad who is going with me aww ye sweaty eyelids im bored lol is ender a chic? hey press 1 if you're having a good nite dicks out for gucci mane yea, hang your head in shame!! anyone wanna play some kickball? OMG ITS WEDNESDAY just jizzed in my pants and my survivor ornament just arrived, what a coincidence oh god and mr robot, dicks out!! man so glad i popped on these tshirts :mariodab: press 1 if you're having a good nite press 1 if you're having a good nite awww yee i still have a burrito from tbell OH SHIT they gave me a cheesy gordita crunch instead of beefy frito burrito fucking thug x future wont drop on spotify even though it was supposed to at midnite!!!! press 1 if you're having a good nite all i want is a 100 million dollars and a bad bitch haha holy shit brain games is so good ranch dipped hot wings doritos are the nutter butters sad my bus driver in elementary school once went to canada to go bear hunting who here is down for some serious scrapbooking? please? i want a real hard down in the pages gluey scrabooking sesh holy shit. broad city is like 90% vagina jokes. if a show did this with dick jokes itd be off the air Except unlike the one Igor for some reason took the time to type up this group chat is sadly real :\

Hmmm I wonder how I missed this?

Oh yes, I know how.

My fucking chats are GOAT

Mine was a satire of the mod/admin corruption on this website.
While the citizens get exploited, we need regime change.
#resist

Chris25 @ 3/11/2017 0:47

Edge @ 3/11/2017 0:42 Chris25 @ 3/11/2017 1:39 Dadd @ 3/11/2017 0:31 It’s an emotional issue Chris ... And thats part of the problem right there. You can't have a logical debate with someone that only relies on an emotional argument, shit's not compatible. We're not discussing whether there is a god, or if Bigfoot exists. We're discussing how a privileged white male received 3 months in prison and a harsh slap on the wrist for ruining a life. No amount of charts and graphs and whatever discussion you want to pretend to have about this would make anyone but you say that he served an appropriate sentence for his crime just because he served what a judge handed down. Again, you're misinterpreting what i said. I never said that he served an appropriate sentence. I said the American legal system, which we all must adhere to and abide by (if we live in America) determined that it was an appropriate sentence and being that they decided it was appropriate, the dude served his time and paid his debt to society according to what the legal system determined was an appropriate amount of time.

Don't have time to address the rest of the thread yet (and Buffy addressed some of Wikey's point better than I could because she has a perspective I can *never* have, no matter how much I try to understand, because what women have to do each day is fucked up beyond belief and I think most guy are just ignorant of the experience rather than intentional assholes).

But addressing the above- yes, we agreed to the legal system, except legal systems change. They don't change if you don't view the problems and try to address them. More so, the original question that sparked this was Igor having a temper tantrum because Michael Jackson touched little boys. The fact he wasn't convicted, like OJ, has zero bearing on whether or not he did it or whether he was punished for it. There is convictions and there is justice and unless your discussion is limited to court proceedings and findings, then emotion very much falls into justice. After all, Dred Scott was a legal proceeding everyone agreed to, right? Why the fuck did the Civil War happen if everyone agreed to just abide by the legal system? *That's* why this isn't a discussion of logic.

In my very emotional opinion, there was no justice for the victims of Michael Jackson, OJ, or Brock Turner.

Igor @ 2/11/2017 19:04

I think a good example is that thread about that new show about the Civil War/slavery. Bunch of people were up in arms when they are not African American and have absolutely no right to say what they should be offended by.

Again- I love that you are the arbiter of what others can and can't discuss or feel emotional about. The Libertarian facade crumbles pretty quickly.

(Igor's response will be "Well, I think it is stupid they do that when they don't have a dog in the show." Great- you can express your outrage at their outrage. That's the joy of free speech- it's a two way street.)

Igor @ 2/11/2017 19:04

But whats "not ok" to you is totally fine to other people. 500 people might be totally fine with a comment or a joke but its incredibly narcissistic for one person to just say "THAT OFFENDS ME" like anyone gives a shit. I'm 100% sure that there is nothing in the constitution that says you have a right to not be offended nor are there any laws that say that its not ok for people to offend you.

There is that whole free speech thing. They can be offended all they want- they have that right. Government can't control what they say or feel- that's 1A. You also have the right to say you think it is stupid. That's great! But you can't say you think it is stupid and then be surprised when they something in return. Again- it is a two way street.

This has always been my issue with the "PC police" argument, because people think free speech is free of consequences. That's not true- it is only free of governmental control. If you say something dickish, then people can feel you are a dick and call you on it.

I think this thread is proof that we need moderation around here. This isn't a welcoming community.

You can have emotion without being irrational ... it's also called empathy. And without it, you're pretty much not give a damn about anyone else.

Nofo @ 3/11/2017 9:23

I think this thread is proof that we need moderation around here. This isn't a welcoming community.

Expert trolling

Nofo @ 3/11/2017 9:23

I think this thread is proof that we need moderation around here. This isn't a welcoming community.

Great work Brian

Curtis @ 3/11/2017 10:32

Nofo @ 3/11/2017 9:23 I think this thread is proof that we need moderation around here. This isn't a welcoming community. Great work Brian

Maybe actually have rules. You're the problem here.

Wikey @ 2/11/2017 21:11

Come on man, for real? Mulder and Scully getting intimate is part of some great cultural problem? That’s silly. What does that have to do with powerful people committing sexual abuse? Besides, it’s hard to believe we have a cultural problem with the way men and women are portrayed on TV when we have massively popular shows like Orange is the New Black on the air. But let’s say it is a problem…what exactly would your solution be?

I do think it is a problem and at least something to try to be conscious of. The Mulder/Scully thing is a single example of a single problem (men and women working together needing to be "shipped"). It's a matter of at least being more aware of the media we consume (something the Atlantic article I posted earlier in the thread notes and has made me more aware of). The Mulder/Scully thing is one example because it's always bothered me since the plot didn't need it, because it essentially says "If you work together long enough, you should hook up". Again- I think being more aware of what we consume is a good thing, similar to looking for the propaganda in the news we choose to read.

Quote

I have not heard of the #NotAllMen guys, so I can't really address your point there.

It was a reaction to past social media instances where women described being harassed (like the #metoo thing) where a bunch of guys, instead of reading the stories and sympathizing/empathizing, react with a "Not all men do this stuff- don't pigeon hole all men into this!" It tends to be the angry reaction some people give whenever they get any guilty feeling or feel like they are meant to feel guilty. While they are free to have their reaction (see the "offended" discussion above) I can still say I feel it is a stupid reaction.

Quote

As for the drink thing...well....if any guy thinks they can leave their drink unattended at a bar, they are stupid. Out of all the dangers women exclusively face you could have picked, I’m surprised you chose that. Men can and have had their drinks spiked.

Again, this is similar to the "NotAllMen" or the "AllLivesMatter" reactions. Yes, men can have their drinks spiked. Yes, they can end up violently raped afterwards. But, like the false accusations for rape, the prevalence is pretty low compared to the reverse. For example: I have never, in my life, even thought of a problem with leaving my drink unattended. Never. Why? Because the instance is tiny- it's not a real risk to worry about, like worrying about getting blown up by a terrorist at the shopping mall. While it can happen, the risk is tiny. OTOH, my wife was instructed from a young age how to hold her hand over her drink so that someone doesn't slip something in there literally while she is sitting right there. Why? Because it is a larger, prevalent risk. And it denigrates the real risk women face when you say "Well, it *can* happen to guys too."

Quote

Unless of course, the Defense secretary was gay. Then perhaps he would have done that to a dude.

And that would have been just as wrong. But that occasion is super rare, mainly because culturally it doesn't happen and we don't have large numbers of gay men in positions of power. Again- read the Atlantic article I posted earlier where it discusses the nature of consent and can you really offer "consent" when someone has a position of control over your livelihood.

Quote

I’m not saying it isn’t sleazy or inappropriate. But it’s not sexual assault, nor harassment. And when you conflate it with something so serious, I think you marginalize real victims.

Not at all. If someone gets shot and killed, is your immediate reaction: "Well, there were people who were horribly tortured for days before they were eventually killed, so you are just marginalizing murder by making a big deal out of it."

The point I am making is that if you think it is no big deal, you are likely just ignorant of how prevalent this is out in the world. Not an isolated instance of a single hand on the leg (which, I noted, none of the guys addressed when I talked about the death row prisoner touching their leg). This happens so frequently for women in society that men are able to pretend it doesn't bother them, because women have developed coping mechanisms in order to brush it off. Women deal with this shit so much that most men don't even have an inkling of what they goo through, or they think the woman should be somehow "flattered" by the "attention". That's why I have tried to personalize it differently to try to get guys to empathize what women deal with and sadly the only concept that seems to get through to dudes is the prison analogy. If you wouldn't want it to happen to you in prison- if it would make you extremely uncomfortable in prison, then you have a small measure of understanding of the daily life of most women.

Quote

Some general things: - Going by the standards of what constitutes sexual harassment to some of you, I’d say women are just as bad as men!

Again- going back to Igor's dick-grabbing analogy: did he, at any time, feel in danger of being raped by this girl or of being beaten, then raped? Did a series of women then come up afterwards and tell him it was only because he dressed so nice that night and therefore it was his fault? Did they tell him he should have just enjoyed it? Did they talk about his past sexual experience in order to show that he was "thirsty" as he says?

Quote

- It would seem some of you think women are incapable of looking after themselves. The idea that a woman has been victimized when a man puts a hand on her knee is ludicrous to me. As far as I’m concerned, women are perfectly capable of looking after themselves in situations like that. Simply tell the guy to fuck off, put him in his place.

Some feel able to say "Fuck off" without any effect on their career. Others don't have that ability. Again, read the Atlantic article, then come back to discuss. It's amazing some of the information in there (stuff like that women have only been able to have credit cards in their own names for 40 years in the US and that in many states until the 70s, a man could legally beat and rape his own wife. I may be "older" but I'm not "old" and this is within *my* lifetime that these things have changed. And things have gotten better in many cases, but in others, we are starting to slip backwards.

Quote

- I keep seeing you guys mention the ‘cultural issue’. What is this cultural problem exactly? What needs to change? What about our culture is so awful that needs changing...other than fictional characters fucking each other?

Again- read the Atlantic article and then we can discuss more.

Dadd @ 3/11/2017 9:34

You can have emotion without being irrational ... it's also called empathy. And without it, you're pretty much not give a damn about anyone else.

Who's being irrational? I'm just trying to understand what exactly your point is but being irrational and someone calling them out on it are both also covered in Vlady's free speech comments. They're also up to individual interpretation.

Edge @ 2/11/2017 20:08

I think you guys are offended by empathy.

Not sure if this was aimed at me, but just because I have a different opinion on this topic doesn't mean I lack empathy.

Edge @ 2/11/2017 23:09

Wikey the bold statement is thinking that the three or four women on this board wouldn't have a story about some guy being a handsy creep.

I'll grant you that. Vlady was probably only referring to the three or four active female users on the site, in which case it is more probable that they have experienced at least one instance of harassment. Fair enough.

Maddie @ 2/11/2017 23:23

Wikey @ 2/11/2017 22:11 As far as I’m concerned, women are perfectly capable of looking after themselves in situations like that. Simply tell the guy to fuck off, put him in his place. Yeah that's great and all, but half the time they don't fuck off. Half the time they laugh and make some comment about us getting "too emotional." Half the time they only fuck off if you lie and tell them you have a boyfriend.

And in the situation you describe, that probably would constitute harassment, sure, I agree. But in the incident involving the UK Defense Minister, we are talking about an advance he made, which was then rejected. And that appears to be the end of the story.

Surely it can only become harassment if after having made it clear to them you aren't interested, they continue. Like in the example you gave.

Btw, my point about minor things like this marginalizing real victims wasn't based off of nothing. In the UK, everybody is distracted by the flurry of minor accusations been made about knee touching and what not, to the point that everybody seems to be forgetting an actual rape allegation was made against a Labor MP.

JJ @ 3/11/2017 0:46

Wikey @ 2/11/2017 22:11 As for the drink thing...well....if any guy thinks they can leave their drink unattended at a bar, they are stupid. Out of all the dangers women exclusively face you could have picked, I’m surprised you chose that. Men can and have had their drinks spiked. Yes, I'm sure it has happened to men, too, but it's pretty silly to say it isn't usually women this happens to. And this was just one isolated example.

I don't think I said anywhere that it isn't usually women that it happens to. In fact, I'm partial to agree that women are the most likely victims of sexual assault / harassment

JJ @ 3/11/2017 0:46

And whether it's a "hand on the knee" or something else, if it's unwelcome and uninvited, it's not okay. Period.

Sorry, I just disagree. It might not be appropriate, but there is a chance the woman might reciprocate. If she tells the man to stop and he doesn't, only then is it harassment.

Edge @ 3/11/2017 0:48

Every counter-argument seems to come down to "but hold on, us too - what about us". As if it happening to both sexes somehow makes it even steven or some shit.

If that's what you are getting from this, you are misunderstanding me. What I'm trying to point out is that if you think a man putting a hand on a woman's knee without permission is a problem, then by your own standards, you should have a problem with women too. Because they can be just as touchy feely as men, and make the same uninvited advances that men so often do. I say that based on my own experiences and other peoples that I know.

Zersch, let's say a woman made an uninvited advance on you, you told her to stop, and she did. Would you consider it sexual harassment?

I personally don't think there is a widespread cultural problem with men or women. I think we are conflating flirting and normal sexual interactions with genuine harassment. And tbh, it has echoes of puritanism to it.

Nofo @ 3/11/2017 0:50

My point is that everyone makes their own decisions about public trials all the time. Why is rape treated differently in the court of public opinion than murder? Both accusations ruin lives.

Having an opinion on a public trial is one thing. A witch hunt is another.

I've heard stories from my sister about her own experiences with harassment over the years. And yeah, it often pisses me off to hear about guys hitting on her in bars and refusing to take no for an answer. Or random strangers in the street making inappropriate comments to her. But douchebags exist. And they always will.

Going back to the 'cultural change' thing. What changes do people want to see? What change could we ever make that would completely eliminate the possibility of men slipping roofies into women's drinks at bars? How would you propose to stop men from ever making an unwanted advance against a women ever again? I'd really like to know.

Most of the harassment talked about in this thread can only ever be prevented by social pressure imo. And culturally I think we already frown upon sexual harassment and rape. Actual harassment is no longer socially acceptable. And sure, maybe we aren't all the way there yet, but I can't subscribe to this idea that men have some entrenched backwards attitudes towards women.

I know it's popular to claim we live in a rape culture in the West, but all the evidence suggests otherwise.

The whole Weinstein thing is not about some great cultural problem with how men treat women. It is about powerful men abusing their power. It is pretty absurd that this thread descended into a discussion about how men treat women when the source of the thread is a man accusing another man of sexual abuse/pedophilia.

I also don't like how this discussion seems to be framed in a way that all women would naturally agree with the opposing position to me on this. Plenty of women I know, many who have no doubt experienced some of the things talked about in this thread first hand, don't subscribe to a lot of the stuff you guys are saying.

Oh, Vlady responded whilst I was posting. Whoops!

I'm gonna have to read it later tho, gotta go out now.

Wikey I'm not going to quote you because I am too lazy right now :P but a "hand on the knee" again is just a small example and I know you're referring to a specific thing but let me just elaborate.

A woman's boss or co-worker etc puts his hand on her shoulder or on her knee during a meeting and she feels uncomfortable but also feels unsure of what to do, what to say. Thinks maybe he just won't do it again. Wonders if she is overreacting, etc. She might never say anything or she might. And she should feel empowered to say something, absolutely! But that is not always the case for various reasons.

This is not okay whether she says stop or no or keeps quiet. Just keep your f'ing hands off people unless you know for sure it's welcome.