The NationStates Feminist Thread III

[Ostroeuropa]

BBC only just broke the news after criticism that they had said nothing, though notably they dropped the story at 11pm UK time instead of hours earlier when it was time for the news to actually air on tv and people would have been awake. They also buried it beneath other such important stories as a policeman being given a ticket while helping someone, and a baby being born in a helicopter, and a football club changing the paint in its dressing room, all deemed more important front page news. A few others had to be pressured into it on twitter and shit. It's a resolved issue now for most of those who delayed and didn't publish.

To springboard from there, It's worth noting the BBC has never aired a story on a suicide following a false accusation, even when they published the accusation, it's come up a few times where the false accusation was eventually proven. (Likewise without retractions usually), and that the BBC has been pro-feminist to the point it's broken it's charter a few times by endlessly fawning coverage about the womens equality party and its policies in the UK, something they're not allowed to do because it's disproportionate coverage for a party with only a couple of dozen supporters. (Their explicitly supportive coverage of their policies was also a direct violation of their charter.)

They also broke their charter with coverage of the mens rights party in the UK, by suddenly deciding that the MP constituency debate there for the local radio would only have women in the audience, women hosts, and would be about womens issues only, as well as interviewing the womens equality party ABOUT the mens rights party running in a completely different constituency for far longer than they interviewed the mens rights party, in total they gave the mens rights party about 1 minute air time to respond to a series of accusations they were sexists and a list of people who said so, then claimed they had given them a chance to air their views.

They have been repeatedly biased in favor of feminism, it's narrative, and biased against it's critics. There's been a number of instances of feminists working for the BBC caught out for bias on this topic too, but not much gets done about it. Feminists are probably the only group allowed to consistently get away with this shit at the BBC, because, surprise! Just like the recent scandal, feminists with power do not hold feminists to account for anything they do. The ideology appears to cultivate abuse of authority, cronyism, misrepresentation of facts, bias and so on, not surprising, because it is a prejudiced ideology and worldview, and those are common factors of other hate movements.

It is only through this kind of control over information, institutions and so on that feminism survives in the modern age, only through abuse of authority and gatekeeping that it can propagate, only by censoring, ignoring, or misrepresenting its critics. Where feminism is opened up to debate and criticism, it quickly becomes a minority viewpoint, see literally any forum that allows open debate on the topic.

https://j4mb.org.uk/key-posts/

(Scroll to bbc anti-male bias.)

Wait, we're not outraged that major news outlets aren't reporting things, just that it takes some time (>24H) before they do? And that it's now 'buried' on the front page?

Man, you disappoint my outrage glands...

The story broke on some outlets half a day before the BBC acknowledged it.
It's not on the front page.

Notably not present in their report is all the usual guff and commentary and theorizing/assertions of ideology on what caused her to act that way like happens for men and concluding it must be femininity in her specific individual case (rather than societal trend) because they're mind readers or something (Pssst. It's because they're bigots and assume things about men in this situation because they're men and it fits their preconceptions about their mindsets.) and how all women need to consider changing their attitudes and supporting men better. Just reporting the verifiable facts instead of voicing a bunch of prejudice disguised as intelligent thought, or putting commentary out there, or urging people to action, and so on.

We also don't get them using it as a springboard to talk about mens issues in general, or the prevalence of womens perpetration and male victims and the lack of support, or commenting about prejudicial attitudes surrounding the issue, and so on and so on.

It's almost like they're not equipped to do any of that, because feminism hasn't equipped them to do it. Almost like it's inadequate.

Or maybe they simply don't care enough to put the effort in because it doesn't allow them to once again push feminist propaganda.

Pretending there's not pro-feminist and gynocentric bias is ludicrous.

https://blog.simplejustice.us/2018/08/2 ... s-a-woman/

NYT went further than not just shilling for mens issues like they do womens, they actively framed it in a way that would get people up in arms if they did it to a woman.

[Nekokuni]

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-45261188

Pretty sad news. I hope it doesn't end up being used as a tool to bludgeon the #MeToo movement with.

[Petrasylvania]

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-45261188

Pretty sad news. I hope it doesn't end up being used as a tool to bludgeon the #MeToo movement with.

It will be of course from the crowd that keeps bawling about an imaginary Global Amazonacracy and can't work up the nerve to openly say The Handmaid's Tale needs to be reality.

[Des-Bal]

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-45261188

Pretty sad news. I hope it doesn't end up being used as a tool to bludgeon the #MeToo movement with.

I hope it completely torpedoes it. Too many people are rejecting skepticism for the sake of being supportive to victims and what we've seen with Rose McGowan's shameless backpedaling is that it's because they are denying the humanity of the accused.

[Kowani]

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-45261188

Pretty sad news. I hope it doesn't end up being used as a tool to bludgeon the #MeToo movement with.

I hope it completely torpedoes it. Too many people are rejecting skepticism for the sake of being supportive to victims and what we've seen with Rose McGowan's shameless backpedaling is that it's because they are denying the humanity of the accused.

Welcome to America! Innocent until proven guilty, except in the court of public opinion! ...Which is the one that decides the court of law... So really, you’re just guilty all around.

[Chestaan]

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-45261188

Pretty sad news. I hope it doesn't end up being used as a tool to bludgeon the #MeToo movement with.

It will be of course from the crowd that keeps bawling about an imaginary Global Amazonacracy and can't work up the nerve to openly say The Handmaid's Tale needs to be reality.

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-45261188

Pretty sad news. I hope it doesn't end up being used as a tool to bludgeon the #MeToo movement with.

It says a lot about both of you that your primary concern is with PR and not the fact that someone has, allegedly, been abused.

If, as the #metoo movement says, we must believe those who allege abuse then both of you should be calling for severe prion time for this abuser.

[Galloism]

It will be of course from the crowd that keeps bawling about an imaginary Global Amazonacracy and can't work up the nerve to openly say The Handmaid's Tale needs to be reality.

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-45261188

Pretty sad news. I hope it doesn't end up being used as a tool to bludgeon the #MeToo movement with.

It says a lot about both of you that your primary concern is with PR and not the fact that someone has, allegedly, been abused.

If, as the #metoo movement says, we must believe those who allege abuse then both of you should be calling for severe prion time for this abuser.

Honestly, the case is super creepy if true.

That she played his mother on a film she wrote and directed, then continued the relationship as a mother/son type relationship all the way until he was 17... whereupon she allegedly raped him. Yes I said alleged rape. Keeping in mind the age of consent in California is 18, that's statutory rape under California law.

(whether 18 really makes sense as an age of consent at all is another discussion, but that IS the law)

Creepyness, however, would be true in any state.

That being said though, just because she paid him off doesn't mean guilt. This came up while she was going after Weinstein, which is a good time for a victim of hers to say "hey, that shit ain't right" (people hate hypocrisy as a general rule), but also would be convenient for her to make this go away so as not to be outed as a hypocrite.

[Nekokuni]

It says a lot about both of you that your primary concern is with PR and not the fact that someone has, allegedly, been abused.

If, as the #metoo movement says, we must believe those who allege abuse then both of you should be calling for severe prion time for this abuser.

You're making some pretty huge assumptions from a single post that was intended to be relevant to the Feminist Thread. I certainly believe the accusations made against Argento, I don't have any reason to assume that there's incentive for a man to claim rape if that's not the case, and hope that a court case could be made against her. That's partly the reason I feel so sad about this, because a victim of sexual assault did the same thing to someone else.

[Petrasylvania]

It will be of course from the crowd that keeps bawling about an imaginary Global Amazonacracy and can't work up the nerve to openly say The Handmaid's Tale needs to be reality.

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-45261188

Pretty sad news. I hope it doesn't end up being used as a tool to bludgeon the #MeToo movement with.

It says a lot about both of you that your primary concern is with PR and not the fact that someone has, allegedly, been abused.

If, as the #metoo movement says, we must believe those who allege abuse then both of you should be calling for severe prion time for this abuser.

Absolutely nothing cynical at all about denouncing and dismissing an entire awareness movement and trying to exonerate Harvey Weinstein by implying every single participant is possibly a criminal hypocrite like Asia Argento. Ideally there should be a wait for an investgation to find out the truth, but guess that only applies when it's poor brutally oppressed menz being accused as opposed to ballchopping feminazis.

[Des-Bal]

Absolutely nothing cynical at all about denouncing and dismissing an entire awareness movement and trying to exonerate Harvey Weinstein by implying every single participant is possibly a criminal hypocrite like Asia Argento. Ideally there should be a wait for an investgation to find out the truth, but guess that only applies when it's poor brutally oppressed menz being accused as opposed to ballchopping feminazis.

That's a pretty impressive blend of strawmanning and bullshitting.

[Galloism]

Absolutely nothing cynical at all about denouncing and dismissing an entire awareness movement and trying to exonerate Harvey Weinstein by implying every single participant is possibly a criminal hypocrite like Asia Argento. Ideally there should be a wait for an investgation to find out the truth, but guess that only applies when it's poor brutally oppressed menz being accused as opposed to ballchopping feminazis.

That's a pretty impressive blend of strawmanning and bullshitting.

Gauth is reaching new levels of straw that shouldn't even be possible

[Chestaan]

It says a lot about both of you that your primary concern is with PR and not the fact that someone has, allegedly, been abused.

If, as the #metoo movement says, we must believe those who allege abuse then both of you should be calling for severe prion time for this abuser.

Absolutely nothing cynical at all about denouncing an entire awareness movement and trying to exonerate Harvey Weinstein by implying every single participant is possibly a criminal hypocrite like Asia Argento. Ideally there should be a wait for an investgation to find out the truth, but guess that only applies when it's poor brutally oppressed menz being accused as opposed to ballchopping feminazis.

Who's trying to exonerate Weinstein?

Mate let's be honest here, you are the biggest hypocrite on this forum. You would be the first to condemn a man if they were accused of rape or sexual assault, but when a woman is accused of it you immediately go "oh no! this may harm a movement!" You couldn't give a fuck about victims of sexual assault and don't pretend you do. And YOU of all people saying we should wait on the evidence before we condemn someone? Funny I can't remember you saying that when it wasn't a metoo leaders being accused. Funny that isn't it? But I suppose people do accuse others of that which they are guilty themselves. What happened to believing the victim?

Personally I think the metoo movement is pretty good, but its the attitudes of people like you that are damaging it by refusing to stick to any kind of consistency. Either we believe victims or we don't, which is it? If you're going to call for calm and not jumping to conclusions when talking about Argento, then do it for Weinstein as well.

[Ostroeuropa]

Absolutely nothing cynical at all about denouncing an entire awareness movement and trying to exonerate Harvey Weinstein by implying every single participant is possibly a criminal hypocrite like Asia Argento. Ideally there should be a wait for an investgation to find out the truth, but guess that only applies when it's poor brutally oppressed menz being accused as opposed to ballchopping feminazis.

Who's trying to exonerate Weinstein?

Mate let's be honest here, you are the biggest hypocrite on this forum. You would be the first to condemn a man if they were accused of rape or sexual assault, but when a woman is accused of it you immediately go "oh no! this may harm a movement!" You couldn't give a fuck about victims of sexual assault and don't pretend you do. And YOU of all people saying we should wait on the evidence before we condemn someone? Funny I can't remember you saying that when it wasn't a metoo leaders being accused. Funny that isn't it? But I suppose people do accuse others of that which they are guilty themselves. What happened to believing the victim?

Personally I think the metoo movement is pretty good, but its the attitudes of people like you that are damaging it by refusing to stick to any kind of consistency. Either we believe victims or we don't, which is it? If you're going to call for calm and not jumping to conclusions when talking about Argento, then do it for Weinstein as well.

MRAs certainly aren't. They've at worst said it means we should re-examine Argento's claims but emphasized she was far from his only victim, and those comments prompted the importance of emphasizing to people that people can be both victims and abusers, an important meme to push out in society for gynocentric feminists to finally get a clue about sexism and how it actually works.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-45261188

Pretty sad news. I hope it doesn't end up being used as a tool to bludgeon the #MeToo movement with.

Hopefully not the spirit of the #meetoo movement, yes. But if the main figureheads of the movement are being hypocritical, they should be held accountable like this.

[Chestaan]

Who's trying to exonerate Weinstein?

Mate let's be honest here, you are the biggest hypocrite on this forum. You would be the first to condemn a man if they were accused of rape or sexual assault, but when a woman is accused of it you immediately go "oh no! this may harm a movement!" You couldn't give a fuck about victims of sexual assault and don't pretend you do. And YOU of all people saying we should wait on the evidence before we condemn someone? Funny I can't remember you saying that when it wasn't a metoo leaders being accused. Funny that isn't it? But I suppose people do accuse others of that which they are guilty themselves. What happened to believing the victim?

Personally I think the metoo movement is pretty good, but its the attitudes of people like you that are damaging it by refusing to stick to any kind of consistency. Either we believe victims or we don't, which is it? If you're going to call for calm and not jumping to conclusions when talking about Argento, then do it for Weinstein as well.

MRAs certainly aren't. They've at worst said it means we should re-examine Argento's claims but emphasized she was far from his only victim, and those comments prompted the importance of emphasizing to people that people can be both victims and abusers, an important meme to push out in society for gynocentric feminists to finally get a clue about sexism and how it actually works.

I think this is the real reason why Gauth is so upset that Argento has been accused of abuse. It challenges the traditionalist reactionary narrative of men as abusers and women as victims.

And this is the main problem. If anyone points out that women abuse men and not only that but society at large is brutally failing male victims of female abuse, then Gauth and his ilk will claim that you're trying to exonerate Harvey Weinstein! And people eat this shit up!

It makes sense though, because the alternative is to come out and just say that you think it's impossible for women to abuse men (although some do that as well), and its much harder to get people behind that rather than trying to get people to attack those who defend Weinstein.

[Petrasylvania]

MRAs certainly aren't. They've at worst said it means we should re-examine Argento's claims but emphasized she was far from his only victim, and those comments prompted the importance of emphasizing to people that people can be both victims and abusers, an important meme to push out in society for gynocentric feminists to finally get a clue about sexism and how it actually works.

I think this is the real reason why Gauth is so upset that Argento has been accused of abuse. It challenges the traditionalist reactionary narrative of men as abusers and women as victims.

And this is the main problem. If anyone points out that women abuse men and not only that but society at large is brutally failing male victims of female abuse, then Gauth and his ilk will claim that you're trying to exonerate Harvey Weinstein! And people eat this shit up!

It makes sense though, because the alternative is to come out and just say that you think it's impossible for women to abuse men (although some do that as well), and its much harder to get people behind that rather than trying to get people to attack those who defend Weinstein.

Right after you just ranted about me strawmanning. Oh the irony.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

MRAs certainly aren't. They've at worst said it means we should re-examine Argento's claims but emphasized she was far from his only victim, and those comments prompted the importance of emphasizing to people that people can be both victims and abusers, an important meme to push out in society for gynocentric feminists to finally get a clue about sexism and how it actually works.

I think this is the real reason why Gauth is so upset that Argento has been accused of abuse. It challenges the traditionalist reactionary narrative of men as abusers and women as victims.

And this is the main problem. If anyone points out that women abuse men and not only that but society at large is brutally failing male victims of female abuse, then Gauth and his ilk will claim that you're trying to exonerate Harvey Weinstein! And people eat this shit up!

It makes sense though, because the alternative is to come out and just say that you think it's impossible for women to abuse men (although some do that as well), and its much harder to get people behind that rather than trying to get people to attack those who defend Weinstein.

The issue is that some people, like Gauth for example, have knee-jerk reactions instead of practicing discernment. To point out that a woman can and has been sexually assaulting a man, or a child or many men is not akin to exonerating Weinstein. It's just pointing out that there is yet another predator out there, this time, a woman. Women are human beings, capable of great things, like men, and of fucked up things, like men. We are victims and we victimize.

I'm a feminist and I know it's possible because it happens, for women to abuse men.

[AK-47s for Everyone]

In my country, men like to fuck women, women like to fuck men, and that's pretty much all there is to say in regards to gender relations. We haven't spoiled our women the way Westerners have, so there really isn't any feminism, people are just trying to get by, and no one has the time or disposition to waste intellectual energy on such things. Without the massive amount of wealth and comfort the West provides, feminism has no ground in which to grow. Besides, there's just something about European women, your men gave you literally the world and all the comfort you could want, and you decide to bitch? A bunch of spoiled brats is what you are. You don't see Japanese women bitching to their society. How European men have put up with you for so long is a testament to their masochistic tendencies. You guys gotta travel more, import foreign women by the millions instead of men, lol then watch your women screech about how refugees need to be turned back! Ya'll need to chill, order some pizza, pour some rum, and fuck the neuroticism out of your systems.

[Chestaan]

I think this is the real reason why Gauth is so upset that Argento has been accused of abuse. It challenges the traditionalist reactionary narrative of men as abusers and women as victims.

And this is the main problem. If anyone points out that women abuse men and not only that but society at large is brutally failing male victims of female abuse, then Gauth and his ilk will claim that you're trying to exonerate Harvey Weinstein! And people eat this shit up!

It makes sense though, because the alternative is to come out and just say that you think it's impossible for women to abuse men (although some do that as well), and its much harder to get people behind that rather than trying to get people to attack those who defend Weinstein.

Right after you just ranted about me strawmanning. Oh the irony.

Firstly, I never said you strawmanned, but you did. Secondly, you claimed I wanted Weinstein exonerated, did you not? So I don't see how saying that you did that is strawmanning?

[Knask]

MRAs certainly aren't. They've at worst said it means we should re-examine Argento's claims but emphasized she was far from his only victim, and those comments prompted the importance of emphasizing to people that people can be both victims and abusers, an important meme to push out in society for gynocentric feminists to finally get a clue about sexism and how it actually works.

I think this is the real reason why Gauth is so upset that Argento has been accused of abuse. It challenges the traditionalist reactionary narrative of men as abusers and women as victims.

And this is the main problem. If anyone points out that women abuse men and not only that but society at large is brutally failing male victims of female abuse, then Gauth and his ilk will claim that you're trying to exonerate Harvey Weinstein! And people eat this shit up!

It makes sense though, because the alternative is to come out and just say that you think it's impossible for women to abuse men (although some do that as well), and its much harder to get people behind that rather than trying to get people to attack those who defend Weinstein.

Some feminists might say that the main problem is the abuse itself, regardless of whom the perpetrator is, but we all know that's a silly notion.

[Chestaan]

I think this is the real reason why Gauth is so upset that Argento has been accused of abuse. It challenges the traditionalist reactionary narrative of men as abusers and women as victims.

And this is the main problem. If anyone points out that women abuse men and not only that but society at large is brutally failing male victims of female abuse, then Gauth and his ilk will claim that you're trying to exonerate Harvey Weinstein! And people eat this shit up!

It makes sense though, because the alternative is to come out and just say that you think it's impossible for women to abuse men (although some do that as well), and its much harder to get people behind that rather than trying to get people to attack those who defend Weinstein.

The issue is that some people, like Gauth for example, have knee-jerk reactions instead of practicing discernment. To point out that a woman can and has been sexually assaulting a man, or a child or many men is not akin to exonerating Weinstein. It's just pointing out that there is yet another predator out there, this time, a woman. Women are human beings, capable of great things, like men, and of fucked up things, like men. We are victims and we victimize.

I'm a feminist and I know it's possible because it happens, for women to abuse men.

In general I don't think feminists or feminism are the problem. What I do think is the problem is those who react to the news that Argento has been accused of abuse by saying that those who call her out are trying to exonerate Weinstein. Some of those who act like this are feminists, some are not and I would say that they are probably a small minority of feminists. It is sad that some of those feminists tend to be very vocal and some are unfortunately quite influential, but I should re-iterate that I don't tar all or even most feminists with this brush.

Its funny because, as you said women are capable of a vast variety of things, and those who deny that women can be abusers are in actual fact denying women agency and are themselves acting misogynistically.

[Chestaan]

I think this is the real reason why Gauth is so upset that Argento has been accused of abuse. It challenges the traditionalist reactionary narrative of men as abusers and women as victims.

And this is the main problem. If anyone points out that women abuse men and not only that but society at large is brutally failing male victims of female abuse, then Gauth and his ilk will claim that you're trying to exonerate Harvey Weinstein! And people eat this shit up!

It makes sense though, because the alternative is to come out and just say that you think it's impossible for women to abuse men (although some do that as well), and its much harder to get people behind that rather than trying to get people to attack those who defend Weinstein.

Some feminists might say that the main problem is the abuse itself, regardless of whom the perpetrator is, but we all know that's a silly notion.

I would argue that the vast vast majority of feminists would say that. And they'd be right. Make no mistake, I don't think that the denial of abuse of men is something the majority of feminists are into, a small amount are but I think they are being increasingly relegated to the sidelines by the sane ones.

[Ostroeuropa]

I think this is the real reason why Gauth is so upset that Argento has been accused of abuse. It challenges the traditionalist reactionary narrative of men as abusers and women as victims.

And this is the main problem. If anyone points out that women abuse men and not only that but society at large is brutally failing male victims of female abuse, then Gauth and his ilk will claim that you're trying to exonerate Harvey Weinstein! And people eat this shit up!

It makes sense though, because the alternative is to come out and just say that you think it's impossible for women to abuse men (although some do that as well), and its much harder to get people behind that rather than trying to get people to attack those who defend Weinstein.

Some feminists might say that the main problem is the abuse itself, regardless of whom the perpetrator is, but we all know that's a silly notion.

What they say is irrelevant compared to how they act and how the movement operates. What they claim to believe in and support is no defense against noting the clear bias, misandrist tendencies, and gynocentrism that their ideology and movement fosters in the adherents.

Ask US media in the run up to the Iraq war if people other than Muslims can be terrorists, for instance.

"Sure they can, we just wanna stop terrorism in general you guys."

...
Sure.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

The issue is that some people, like Gauth for example, have knee-jerk reactions instead of practicing discernment. To point out that a woman can and has been sexually assaulting a man, or a child or many men is not akin to exonerating Weinstein. It's just pointing out that there is yet another predator out there, this time, a woman. Women are human beings, capable of great things, like men, and of fucked up things, like men. We are victims and we victimize.

I'm a feminist and I know it's possible because it happens, for women to abuse men.

In general I don't think feminists or feminism are the problem. What I do think is the problem is those who react to the news that Argento has been accused of abuse by saying that those who call her out are trying to exonerate Weinstein. Some of those who act like this are feminists, some are not and I would say that they are probably a small minority of feminists. It is sad that some of those feminists tend to be very vocal and some are unfortunately quite influential, but I should re-iterate that I don't tar all or even most feminists with this brush.

Its funny because, as you said women are capable of a vast variety of things, and those who deny that women can be abusers are in actual fact denying women agency and are themselves acting misogynistically.

Truly, I do think that you bring a legitimate complaint and that you're not painting every feminist with the same brush.

[Galloism]

I think this is the real reason why Gauth is so upset that Argento has been accused of abuse. It challenges the traditionalist reactionary narrative of men as abusers and women as victims.

And this is the main problem. If anyone points out that women abuse men and not only that but society at large is brutally failing male victims of female abuse, then Gauth and his ilk will claim that you're trying to exonerate Harvey Weinstein! And people eat this shit up!

It makes sense though, because the alternative is to come out and just say that you think it's impossible for women to abuse men (although some do that as well), and its much harder to get people behind that rather than trying to get people to attack those who defend Weinstein.

Some feminists might say that the main problem is the abuse itself, regardless of whom the perpetrator is, but we all know that's a silly notion.

Well, Christina Hoff Summers was pretty harsh on the subject in regard to Rose McGowan.