The Refuge of the Toads

[HunnyBunny]

If you can think about another group you could joke about putting in a concentration camp let me know.

Accusing me of behaving like a Pharyngulite is fucking retarded.

Please show me the actual quote where she said ''çoncentration camp''.

The interview I found, that Bindel says this false claim came from is here:

http://www.radfemcollective.org/news/20 ... lie-bindel

will heterosexuality survive women’s liberation?

It won’t, not unless men get their act together, have their power taken from them and behave themselves. I mean, I would actually put them all in some kind of camp where they can all drive around in quad bikes, or bicycles, or white vans. I would give them a choice of vehicles to drive around with, give them no porn, they wouldn’t be able to fight – we would have wardens, of course! Women who want to see their sons or male loved ones would be able to go and visit, or take them out like a library book, and then bring them back.

I've never heard of Auachwitz having quad bikes and home visits. She made a bad joke about some sort of holiday camp for violent partners (this is the context in which she was talking, and the subject of more than 10 years of campaigning against domestic violence which is overwhelming done by men against women). A men's rights blog turned that into Feminazi Concentration camp complete with nazi symbols. Not her words, not her intent from the quote above, not my take from reading it.

So tell me again why she deserves to be called evil?

[DaveDodo007]

Sometimes straight men on Twitter start a professional conversation with me. They admire my work. They talk shop in a spirited and friendly fashion. And then they start DM’ing to talk. And then they hit on me.

A man friend of mine told me, “The problem is you have an attractive photo and you talk about sex all the time.” Uh. So I changed my photo to my rat’s, and I started talking less about my sex life and restricting myself to talking about sex research. (Too bad, though. Some of my best tweets were things like: “Sex in middle age—when you ask to be on top so you can get the FitBit credit.”)

That slowed down the problem, but it hasn’t ended it. And yeah, I know a lot of my feminist sisters will want to call this sexual harassment, but I think it’s really more like a culture clash, one that has to do with innate sex differences. Men tend to see the whole world as a safe place to look for sex. And I’m a woman who writes openly about sex, so they think I’m comfortable being solicited.

http://alicedreger.com/trolls

[fuck the shitty quote coding on the slymepit]Carrier is a PUA who thinks paying lip service to feminism will absolve him of his sins.

As for Alice Dreger, I'm not familiar, but just from reading this I like her. She's spot on about it being a culture clash, and I don't doubt it's irritating as hell to be hit on night and day. I get livid if I'm asked for change more than once on my way to the subway. "Who are these people? Do they think they're entitled to my money, or even my time?" From their perspective it's a brand new encounter and I'm just being an asshole. For me they're part of a series of a events that I think they should be aware of.[/quote]

It is part of life. Yesterday a 30 year old hit on me, it made me feel good even though it was a bit ham fisted. If I didn't get hit on I would be looking in the mirror wondering what I was doing wrong. But it is annoying as fuck most of the time, especially when some ugly loser is throwing you cheesy chat-up lines... my deep down reaction is, "How dare you, I am way out of your league".

But what really annoys me is having to do some work. Often flattery is thrown my way, the law of reciprocity means I have to at the very least respond by saying "thank you" and telling them they are very kind for mentioning it. Or I could be a complete bitch, either way it's my choice and I have all the power. It is an annoyance I discuss with my friends, especially the nasty approaches (because you do get "A white bitch belongs on a black dick" type opening lines), but I don't think it is something worth bitching about in public, firstly because it is just the way it is. Secondly I don't want to sound like I am actually boasting even though it seems pretty obvious that it is something the vast majority of women seem to go through to some degree.

First world problems.[/fuck the shitty quote coding on the slymepit]

That is because all the onus is on men to ask women out, even studs get so immune to rejection, men end up thinking why the hell not as she can only say no. Women wouldn't last five seconds in the dating game if they had to put up with the rejection rate men tolerate. Christ just look at modern society which is bent on catering to women's self esteem issues (the never ending industry). Don't want to be hit on then change the rules about asking men out and suffer the consequences.

To be fair you recognize there is a problem but walk a mile in men's moccasins and it will be a real eye opener.

[DaveDodo007]

Sometimes straight men on Twitter start a professional conversation with me. They admire my work. They talk shop in a spirited and friendly fashion. And then they start DM’ing to talk. And then they hit on me.

A man friend of mine told me, “The problem is you have an attractive photo and you talk about sex all the time.” Uh. So I changed my photo to my rat’s, and I started talking less about my sex life and restricting myself to talking about sex research. (Too bad, though. Some of my best tweets were things like: “Sex in middle age—when you ask to be on top so you can get the FitBit credit.”)

That slowed down the problem, but it hasn’t ended it. And yeah, I know a lot of my feminist sisters will want to call this sexual harassment, but I think it’s really more like a culture clash, one that has to do with innate sex differences. Men tend to see the whole world as a safe place to look for sex. And I’m a woman who writes openly about sex, so they think I’m comfortable being solicited.

http://alicedreger.com/trolls

[fuck the shitty quote coding on the slymepit]Carrier is a PUA who thinks paying lip service to feminism will absolve him of his sins.

As for Alice Dreger, I'm not familiar, but just from reading this I like her. She's spot on about it being a culture clash, and I don't doubt it's irritating as hell to be hit on night and day. I get livid if I'm asked for change more than once on my way to the subway. "Who are these people? Do they think they're entitled to my money, or even my time?" From their perspective it's a brand new encounter and I'm just being an asshole. For me they're part of a series of a events that I think they should be aware of.[/quote]

It is part of life. Yesterday a 30 year old hit on me, it made me feel good even though it was a bit ham fisted. If I didn't get hit on I would be looking in the mirror wondering what I was doing wrong. But it is annoying as fuck most of the time, especially when some ugly loser is throwing you cheesy chat-up lines... my deep down reaction is, "How dare you, I am way out of your league".

But what really annoys me is having to do some work. Often flattery is thrown my way, the law of reciprocity means I have to at the very least respond by saying "thank you" and telling them they are very kind for mentioning it. Or I could be a complete bitch, either way it's my choice and I have all the power. It is an annoyance I discuss with my friends, especially the nasty approaches (because you do get "A white bitch belongs on a black dick" type opening lines), but I don't think it is something worth bitching about in public, firstly because it is just the way it is. Secondly I don't want to sound like I am actually boasting even though it seems pretty obvious that it is something the vast majority of women seem to go through to some degree.

First world problems.[/fuck the shitty quote coding on the slymepit]

That is because all the onus is on men to ask women out, even studs get so immune to rejection, men end up thinking why the hell not as she can only say no. Women wouldn't last five seconds in the dating game if they had to put up with the rejection rate men tolerate. Christ just look at modern society which is bent on catering to women's self esteem issues (the never ending industry). Don't want to be hit on then change the rules about asking men out and suffer the consequences.

To be fair you recognize there is a problem but walk a mile in men's moccasins and it will be a real eye opener.

[Sulman]

This characteristic of certain Twitter users massively gets on my tits. I see tweets like this from SJW's all the time, and they're retweeted as some kind of wisdom.


Except....

None of these arguments were made. None of them.

[sp0tlight]

I still don't think banning buqini is OK. Our strategy should be satire.

[Kirbmarc]

This characteristic of certain Twitter users massively gets on my tits. I see tweets like this from SJW's all the time, and they're retweeted as some kind of wisdom.


Except....

None of these arguments were made. None of them.

Many SJWs just want to feel morally superior to anyone else. Accuracy doesn't matter. It's all about telling other people how racist, sexist, homophobic and in general prejudiced they are.

[Sunder]

I still don't think banning buqini is OK. Our strategy should be satire.

Non-feminists should just stand back and let the various sects of feminism argue with one another over this issue. Feminist in-fighting is the best way to create more non-feminists.

[Suet Cardigan]

If you can think about another group you could joke about putting in a concentration camp let me know.

Accusing me of behaving like a Pharyngulite is fucking retarded.

Please show me the actual quote where she said ''çoncentration camp''.

The interview I found, that Bindel says this false claim came from is here:

http://www.radfemcollective.org/news/20 ... lie-bindel

will heterosexuality survive women’s liberation?

It won’t, not unless men get their act together, have their power taken from them and behave themselves. I mean, I would actually put them all in some kind of camp where they can all drive around in quad bikes, or bicycles, or white vans. I would give them a choice of vehicles to drive around with, give them no porn, they wouldn’t be able to fight – we would have wardens, of course! Women who want to see their sons or male loved ones would be able to go and visit, or take them out like a library book, and then bring them back.

I've never heard of Auachwitz having quad bikes and home visits. She made a bad joke about some sort of holiday camp for violent partners (this is the context in which she was talking, and the subject of more than 10 years of campaigning against domestic violence which is overwhelming done by men against women). A men's rights blog turned that into Feminazi Concentration camp complete with nazi symbols. Not her words, not her intent from the quote above, not my take from reading it.

So tell me again why she deserves to be called evil?

A fucking holiday camp? Oh, you mean one of those holiday camps that you aren't allowed to leave? With wardens? And where does she say that these camps would only be for violent men?

Here's Bindel's answer in full:

will heterosexuality survive women’s liberation?
It won’t, not unless men get their act together, have their power taken from them and behave themselves. I mean, I would actually put them all in some kind of camp where they can all drive around in quad bikes, or bicycles, or white vans. I would give them a choice of vehicles to drive around with, give them no porn, they wouldn’t be able to fight – we would have wardens, of course! Women who want to see their sons or male loved ones would be able to go and visit, or take them out like a library book, and then bring them back. 
I hope heterosexuality doesn’t survive, actually. I would like to see a truce on heterosexuality. I would like an amnesty on heterosexuality until we have sorted ourselves out. Because under patriarchy it’s shit.
And I am sick of hearing from individual women that their men are all right. Those men have been shored up by the advantages of patriarchy and they are complacent, they are not stopping other men from being shit. 
I would love to see a women’s liberation that results in women turning away from men and saying: “when you come back as human beings, then we might look again.” 

Bindel is a man hating loon. She is only concerned about violence if the perpetrator has a penis and the victim has a vagina. She is a despicable piece of shit full stop.

[Kirbmarc]

I still don't think banning buqini is OK. Our strategy should be satire.

I agree that outright banning burquini is probably likely to backfire, and is an authoritarian move. Satirizing burqini should be the way, that and liberalizing laws so women are allowed to go topless, which would rustle many Muslim supremacist jimmies. The French government, however, is under a lot of pressure from the Front Nationale, and they're reinforcing the traditional French lacitè

The UK, on the other way, has gone the other way around all the other way around and offers specific times reserved to burqini and/or full body bathing suits, with no "offensive nudity" allowed. I'd say that a burqini ban is a lesser evil compared to instituting "burqini time".

[MarcusAu]

To be fair you recognize there is a problem but walk a mile in men's moccasins and it will be a real eye opener.

I think a little empathy goes a long way - and Vicky C. clearly has very little empathy....Ha, No, I mean the opposite.

VC can stand and defend her own views - and I'm sure she will. But, I don't think that there is anything fundamentally different about the points of view or feelings of groups of human beings that can't be overcome with a little thought and caring. Which is why most modern feminists and SJWs come across as particularly callus to me (at least when interacting with [white] men), and why VC doesn't . (Though that's not much of a compliment for her considering the quality of the comparison group).

[sp0tlight]

Non-feminists should just stand back and let the various sects of feminism argue with one another over this issue. Feminist in-fighting is the best way to create more non-feminists.

Yup. Just let the SlutWalk/Trans*friendly section fight with Objectification/TERF fraction and the Muslims Is Feminism join in the final stages for maximum clusterfucking explosion.

[Kirbmarc]

Non-feminists should just stand back and let the various sects of feminism argue with one another over this issue. Feminist in-fighting is the best way to create more non-feminists.

Yup. Just let the SlutWalk/Trans*friendly section fight with Objectification/TERF fraction and the Muslims Is Feminism join in the final stages for maximum clusterfucking explosion.

I'd side with the SlutWalk ones on this issue. "Objectification" is just an excuse for prudes and authoritarians. And if you think that Islam is feminism you're a complete moron.

[sp0tlight]

I agree that outright banning burquini is probably likely to backfire, and is an authoritarian move. Satirizing burqini should be the way, that and liberalizing laws so women are allowed to go topless, which would rustle many Muslim supremacist jimmies. The French government, however, is under a lot of pressure from the Front Nationale, and they're reinforcing the traditional French lacitè

I understand that France sits between rock and a hard place in here. I'm OK with baning religiouse costumes in schools, hospitals, publicly funded, secular-by-default, science-over-feeling places. Baning what you can wear in public spaces will (and probably will, police undressing modes muslim women by force is like IS PR dream) backfire.

It's hard to navigate this web of fuck we've webbed.

[HunnyBunny]

I still don't think banning buqini is OK. Our strategy should be satire.

I just think it's weird. I fully support the ban face-coverings thing, because seeing a face is important for all kinds of reasons. And I think Islam sucks for the way it brainwashes women into hiding in baggy sacks so men don't go all Carrier in public, and men into thinking the mere sight of flesh should turn them into sex machines. But telling women what they should wear on the beach is just stupid.

Nigella Lawson wears a burkini sometimes cos she doesn't want The Daily Mail flashing her bits. Why the fuck does it matter? There are plenty of women outside of Islam who don't feel comfortable in a bikini, or even a swimsuit, just as I'm sure there are plenty of men who feel the same. Armed police standing over a woman telling her to take her top off cos reasons is fucked up. Muslim dress is retarded, nun's clothes are stupid, turbans are gross, but the French towns doing this are full-on dumb. I hope people start turning up on Cannes beaches in a nun's habit.

[Sunder]

I'd say they're in the right on this particular issue, but every faction is filled to brim with thirty batshit ideas for every one sensible statement. And they're all competing to blame the others of reinforcing the patriarchy the most. Accusing each other of being not real feminists.

Non-feminists taking sides in this issue works to their detriment, but more importantly, feminists should be left alone to rake and claw one another. Best case scenario is that a big clusterfuck of irrational feels-before-reals garbage will disillusion some of the participants and they'll realize that every sect is peddling garbage.

[sp0tlight]

I'd side with the SlutWalk ones on this issue. "Objectification" is just an excuse for prudes and authoritarians. And if you think that Islam is feminism you're a complete moron.

I was not trying to take position (it's obvious that SlutWalk Feminism will always be closer to my hearth because a) contains more forms of expression, so b) has more freedom for a person c) and also sluts) on it, just noted that Feminism has the Christian sects problem.

[Kirbmarc]

But what really annoys me is having to do some work. Often flattery is thrown my way, the law of reciprocity means I have to at the very least respond by saying "thank you" and telling them they are very kind for mentioning it. Or I could be a complete bitch, either way it's my choice and I have all the power. It is an annoyance I discuss with my friends, especially the nasty approaches (because you do get "A white bitch belongs on a black dick" type opening lines), but I don't think it is something worth bitching about in public, firstly because it is just the way it is. Secondly I don't want to sound like I am actually boasting even though it seems pretty obvious that it is something the vast majority of women seem to go through to some degree.

First world problems.

If someone approaches you with "a white bitch belongs on a black dick" I think you're pretty entitled to say something along the lines of "I'm not a white bitch, but you are, indeed, a black dick".

Politeness is for polite people.

[Clarence]

Here's bindel in her own words:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... hyihatemen

[Kirbmarc]

I still don't think banning buqini is OK. Our strategy should be satire.

I just think it's weird. I fully support the ban face-coverings thing, because seeing a face is important for all kinds of reasons. And I think Islam sucks for the way it brainwashes women into hiding in baggy sacks so men don't go all Carrier in public, and men into thinking the mere sight of flesh should turn them into sex machines. But telling women what they should wear on the beach is just stupid.

Nigella Lawson wears a burkini sometimes cos she doesn't want The Daily Mail flashing her bits. Why the fuck does it matter? There are plenty of women outside of Islam who don't feel comfortable in a bikini, or even a swimsuit, just as I'm sure there are plenty of men who feel the same. Armed police standing over a woman telling her to take her top off cos reasons is fucked up. Muslim dress is retarded, nun's clothes are stupid, turbans are gross, but the French towns doing this are full-on dumb. I hope people start turning up on Cannes beaches in a nun's habit.

I think it's a largely political move. People keep asking their authorities to "do something" about the issues of integration, and politicians take the easy (read: retarded) way out.

It's far better to expel imams who preach Salafist messages of violence and subversion than to focus on women who wear full-body bathing suits. The imams are actually dangerous.

[HunnyBunny]

Here's bindel in her own words:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... hyihatemen

Indeed:

I will say loud and proud, yes, today I hate men, and will tomorrow and the day after. But only the men who perpetrate these crimes against my sisters, and those who do nothing to stop it. Are you in either one of those categories? If so, then I despise you.

People can twist anything to say what they want. ''Camps with quad bikes'' become concentration camps, ''I hate men who are violent to women becomes I hate all men. Personally I don't like men who are violent to women, but I'm not evil. Neither is Julie Bindel. Neither is Germaine Greer. Neither is Paul Elam. Evil is a whole other category to ''people who say stuff I don't agree with online''.

[jet_lagg]

Carrier is a PUA who thinks paying lip service to feminism will absolve him of his sins.

As for Alice Dreger, I'm not familiar, but just from reading this I like her. She's spot on about it being a culture clash, and I don't doubt it's irritating as hell to be hit on night and day. I get livid if I'm asked for change more than once on my way to the subway. "Who are these people? Do they think they're entitled to my money, or even my time?" From their perspective it's a brand new encounter and I'm just being an asshole. For me they're part of a series of a events that I think they should be aware of.

It is part of life. Yesterday a 30 year old hit on me, it made me feel good even though it was a bit ham fisted. If I didn't get hit on I would be looking in the mirror wondering what I was doing wrong. But it is annoying as fuck most of the time, especially when some ugly loser is throwing you cheesy chat-up lines... my deep down reaction is, "How dare you, I am way out of your league".

But what really annoys me is having to do some work. Often flattery is thrown my way, the law of reciprocity means I have to at the very least respond by saying "thank you" and telling them they are very kind for mentioning it. Or I could be a complete bitch, either way it's my choice and I have all the power. It is an annoyance I discuss with my friends, especially the nasty approaches (because you do get "A white bitch belongs on a black dick" type opening lines), but I don't think it is something worth bitching about in public, firstly because it is just the way it is. Secondly I don't want to sound like I am actually boasting even though it seems pretty obvious that it is something the vast majority of women seem to go through to some degree.

First world problems.

Nailed it.

I'd add that we do live our lives in public to an unprecedented degree. This forum is technically "in public" and I say things here that I'd never say in a train station. Getting called a bitch repeatedly for making relateable complaints with your online friends would be tiresome, to say the least, and thinking of leaving twitter to avoid it is indisputably reasonable. So, I agree with everything Dreger is saying, contrary to Hunnybunny's accusation ;)

[Gumby]

And I think Islam sucks for the way it brainwashes women into hiding in baggy sacks so men don't go all Carrier in public, and men into thinking the mere sight of flesh should turn them into sex machines.

Not on topic but just an observation. I think that a society that allows things like topless beach-going is more mature about sexuality than societies who go to great lengths to cover up and repress sexuality, and therefore there is much less likelihood of men going full Carrier - because in those more progressive societies it's no big deal to see bare titties on a beach. But when your society or culture is sex-negative and repressively prudish, that's when the problems start. People are sexual beings and when their sexuality is massively repressed the urge to express it becomes that much more pronounced. As we USAians know from Prohibition, telling people they can't do something often just makes them want it more. TL;DR... trying to prevent men from going Carrier just makes men more likely to go Carrier.

http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/8f/8f6b1913 ... 32e04d.jpg

[Clarence]

Also, she's either extremely stupid, or a liar:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/com ... ploitation

“It is only women who are deemed so worthless as to be denigrated with this indignity, and it is only women whose equal human status is so unthinkable as to motivate them to turn their backs on their own politics.”

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... 1970s.html

http://www.villagevoice.com/news/lost-boys-6433393

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacha_bazi

But that's Bindel for you: Male victims of sexual and physical violence or coercion don't exist , or at least not in enough numbers to be cared about(she sometimes handwaves an 'acknowledgement' and goes back to doing and saying what she has been doing and saying for 30 or 40 years now), and whenever a woman does something wrong, you can bet some evil man or men were to blame for it.

[CaptainFluffyBunny]

Here's bindel in her own words:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... hyihatemen

Indeed:

I will say loud and proud, yes, today I hate men, and will tomorrow and the day after. But only the men who perpetrate these crimes against my sisters, and those who do nothing to stop it. Are you in either one of those categories? If so, then I despise you.

People can twist anything to say what they want. ''Camps with quad bikes'' become concentration camps, ''I hate men who are violent to women becomes I hate all men. Personally I don't like men who are violent to women, but I'm not evil. Neither is Julie Bindel. Neither is Germaine Greer. Neither is Paul Elam. Evil is a whole other category to ''people who say stuff I don't agree with online''.

Evil is indeed another category. I have looked upon evil, a man who took human life quite casually and was entirely unrepentant about killing people. Bindel isn't evil, but staying that bit about heterosexuality, patriarchy and "but my man's all right" does make her a bit of a loon.

[Clarence]

Here's bindel in her own words:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... hyihatemen

Indeed:

I will say loud and proud, yes, today I hate men, and will tomorrow and the day after. But only the men who perpetrate these crimes against my sisters, and those who do nothing to stop it. Are you in either one of those categories? If so, then I despise you.

People can twist anything to say what they want. ''Camps with quad bikes'' become concentration camps, ''I hate men who are violent to women becomes I hate all men. Personally I don't like men who are violent to women, but I'm not evil. Neither is Julie Bindel. Neither is Germaine Greer. Neither is Paul Elam. Evil is a whole other category to ''people who say stuff I don't agree with online''.

If evil is doing needless harm, then Julie Bindel's blinkered, one-eyed view on just about everything concerning heterosexual men and their problems is evil. Bitches like her are arguably costing people their lives and mental health every day of the year, and not just men. Her views on prostitituion are actively harmful to prostitutes, as are her views on heterosexual sex. And she's an active political campaigner. She doesn't just speak things on the net, she influences and tries to influence governmental policy on a worldwide level.

[gurugeorge]

Meh, the French and the Germans never quite got liberalism, even back in the 17th and 18th centuries - they've always been too hung up on the idea of centralized, "rational" ordering of society.

It's like, they have the right idea that reason is the way forward, but they misapply it in politics; they never understood the Burkean idea of "little battalions", ground-up social order, etc. They've always thought that clever people should be in charge and order society according to apriori rational principles, as if humanity were a fucking topiary garden.

Reason, in its rule of society, works most effectively by virtue of the mass of individuals severally applying it to their lives, not by virtue of some clever people ordering others around.

That means, in economics, separation of economics and state, i.e. capitalism strictly understood. The "missing half" of the equation is the necessity for ground-up self-help organization amongst workers and those likely to be affected by capitalist "bad weather", buggy whips going out of fashion, etc. Which is what unions and labour organizations were originally for, until they were captured by Marxist idiots who saw workers as the vanguard of their silly revolution. That's what a true, liberal Left would be going for, encouragement of collective self-help and self-organization - instead, they got the rationalism-in-politics bug, and dreamt of how wonderful things would be if only they were in charge ...

The State has no business being involved with economics, and it has no business being involved with the amelioration of the condition of the poor, the working class, etc. Its sole business, which it should rigorously prosecute, is being a delegated monopoly of force upholding negative rights, and only negative rights, to form a foundation on which spontaneous social order can arise.

Something for the future.

[HunnyBunny]

And I think Islam sucks for the way it brainwashes women into hiding in baggy sacks so men don't go all Carrier in public, and men into thinking the mere sight of flesh should turn them into sex machines.

Not on topic but just an observation. I think that a society that allows things like topless beach-going is more mature about sexuality than societies who go to great lengths to cover up and repress sexuality, and therefore there is much less likelihood of men going full Carrier - because in those more progressive societies it's no big deal to see bare titties on a beach. But when your society or culture is sex-negative and repressively prudish, that's when the problems start. People are sexual beings and when their sexuality is massively repressed the urge to express it becomes that much more pronounced. As we USAians know from Prohibition, telling people they can't do something often just makes them want it more. TL;DR... trying to prevent men from going Carrier just makes men more likely to go Carrier.

[.img]http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/8f/8f6b1913 ... 32e04d.jpg[/img]

Agreed, and we see that in Europe now with the attacks over New Year. But equally, you can't force sexual openness. Some people aren't as sexual as others, and they shouldn't have to be bothered by not being naked on a beach. People should just wear what the fuck they want, without pressure from religion or state or the twat sat next to them. I wear a long sleeved shirt and leggings on a beach, because I don't want to get skin cancer and have 8 operations to remove half my leg like my mother. I shouldn't have to have a medical certificate to say I allowed to. This is the opposite of prohibition and it is just as unenforceable.

[Suet Cardigan]

I will say loud and proud, yes, today I hate men blacks, and will tomorrow and the day after. But only the men blacks who perpetrate these crimes against my sisters whites, and those who do nothing to stop it. Are you in either one of those categories? If so, then I despise you.

But I'll let all those blacks have quad bikes when I put them in a camp, so it will be a holiday camp and not a concentration camp.

[VickyCaramel]

To be fair you recognize there is a problem but walk a mile in men's moccasins and it will be a real eye opener.

I think a little empathy goes a long way - and Vicky C. clearly has very little empathy....Ha, No, I mean the opposite.

VC can stand and defend her own views - and I'm sure she will. But, I don't think that there is anything fundamentally different about the points of view or feelings of groups of human beings that can't be overcome with a little thought and caring. Which is why most modern feminists and SJWs come across as particularly callus to me (at least when interacting with [white] men), and why VC doesn't . (Though that's not much of a compliment for her considering the quality of the comparison group).

I can't walk in those shoes, but I can recognize that if Brad Pitt had been in an elevator in Ireland five years ago, we might not be here now, and Watson would still be boasting about how she once sucked Brad Pitt's dick. Obviously Brad Pitt has to be very drunk in this story, but in this case drunken sex wouldn't be rape at all.

[Clarence]

I should also mention that Bindel's definition of 'harm to women' is a radfem one, almost as bad as saying all heterosexual sex is rape.

Certainly she views all prostitution as basically rape, and all clients as rapists.
I've visited prostitutes twice in my life. Once at 19, once at a bordello in the Phillippines. Am I a rapist?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julie_Bindel#Rape

[Kirbmarc]

And I think Islam sucks for the way it brainwashes women into hiding in baggy sacks so men don't go all Carrier in public, and men into thinking the mere sight of flesh should turn them into sex machines.

Not on topic but just an observation. I think that a society that allows things like topless beach-going is more mature about sexuality than societies who go to great lengths to cover up and repress sexuality, and therefore there is much less likelihood of men going full Carrier - because in those more progressive societies it's no big deal to see bare titties on a beach. But when your society or culture is sex-negative and repressively prudish, that's when the problems start. People are sexual beings and when their sexuality is massively repressed the urge to express it becomes that much more pronounced. As we USAians know from Prohibition, telling people they can't do something often just makes them want it more. TL;DR... trying to prevent men from going Carrier just makes men more likely to go Carrier.

It's not a bug, it's a feature. Organized religion isn't made to make people morally better, it's shaped (consciously or not) by clerics in way that support the existence and the power of clerics.

Sexual shaming of both women (if they don't cover themselves up) and of men (who are painted as monsters held back only by the "right" clothes and by religion) is a tool of control. Sex is a very powerful tool for control in general. By shaming people for certain behaviors the clerical class controls them through guilt and self-hatred. Priests need sin: sin is their bread and butter, it's what gives them power and makes sure that other people pay them and treat them with deference for blathering about nonsense.

The rules of every religion are so strict that anyone violates them all the time. Everybody is destined for damnation and is made to feel guilty for their human urges: if you're married and still sexually attracted to other people you're "lusting for them in your heart" and that's a sin. If you show flesh you're a sinner. If other people treat you badly it's because you've sinned.

It's the same thing which happens in feminism: all men have to feel guilty for the actions of other men and check their male privilege. All white people have to feel guilty about being white because of colonialism.

Sexual repression isn't aimed at protecting women from predatory men. It's aimed at shaming women and men so that they have to ask god for forgiveness, and listen to their priest/imam/rabbi/blogger (and when they're about to die maybe leave something for their church...).

It's all a massive con. What makes it great is that the con men themselves are often true believers, at least to a certain degree.

[CaptainFluffyBunny]

snip...was talking, and the subject of more than 10 years of campaigning against domestic violence which is overwhelming done by men against women)...snip

Not to be nit-picking, but overwhelmingly might be a bit off.
http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/p ... 2010-a.pdf
http://www.saveservices.org/2012/02/cdc ... ner-abuse/
https://www.yahoo.com/beauty/the-number ... 63030.html
But I agree that Druger shouldn't have to be hit on or propositioned all the time. That would be creepy instantly and get old very quickly. Nor do I understand why men would do that. It probably never works, unless they get off on being rejected.

[jet_lagg]

One Punch Man is great fyi

Red few chapters of manga, still sitting on anime. Maybe today is a day?

The cartoon is a condensed version of the first seven volumes. Might as well read through that far before watching.

If the anime was just the theme song followed by 23 minutes of Rebecca Watson's standup then the theme song again, and no way to skip through, it would still be worth watching each episode.

[HunnyBunny]

I should also mention that Bindel's definition of 'harm to women' is a radfem one, almost as bad as saying all heterosexual sex is rape.

Certainly she views all prostitution as basically rape, and all clients as rapists.
I've visited prostitutes twice in my life. Once at 19, once at a bordello in the Phillippines. Am I a rapist?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julie_Bindel#Rape

What Bindel's philosophy is wasn't the point. The point is that saying stuff you might disagree with doesn't make her evil. The point started out with people taking a tiny line in Alice Dreger's blog post and reading into it a novel-sized dissertation on how she gets men wrong. No wonder she is wanting to leave twitter when people can misconstrue so much from so little. I guess that sums up the internet really.

[Kirbmarc]

Agreed, and we see that in Europe now with the attacks over New Year. But equally, you can't force sexual openness. Some people aren't as sexual as others, and they shouldn't have to be bothered by not being naked on a beach. People should just wear what the fuck they want, without pressure from religion or state or the twat sat next to them. I wear a long sleeved shirt and leggings on a beach, because I don't want to get skin cancer and have 8 operations to remove half my leg like my mother. I shouldn't have to have a medical certificate to say I allowed to. This is the opposite of prohibition and it is just as unenforceable.

You can't force anything on people. There's always some backlash. What you should expect of people is to respect other people's rights to do what they want. You should be able to dress how you want, but you shouldn't be able to others not to dress how they want.

[Kirbmarc]

Evil is indeed another category. I have looked upon evil, a man who took human life quite casually and was entirely unrepentant about killing people.

Now I'm curious. Who was this guy?

[CaptainFluffyBunny]

I will say loud and proud, yes, today I hate men blacks, and will tomorrow and the day after. But only the men blacks who perpetrate these crimes against my sisters whites, and those who do nothing to stop it. Are you in either one of those categories? If so, then I despise you.

But I'll let all those blacks have quad bikes when I put them in a camp, so it will be a holiday camp and not a concentration camp.

Wait, are those quads these?

download (10).jpg

(9.28 KiB) Downloaded 239 times

'cause those are pretty awesome. Still, my wife and kids would miss me.

[Clarence]

Here's Bindel's organization:
http://www.justiceforwomen.org.uk/about-us/

Shorter version:
If abused man, get murdered by your partner. She'll claim you were the real abuser, and this organization was founded to let her off the hook.

[Kirbmarc]

We often forget that we don't need to be evil to cause suffering. Decent but misguided or fanatical people can hurt others just like selfish bastards or bloodthirsty loons.

[Clarence]

No.
She does active harm, and almost all based on prejudice and hate.
She's evil.

[Shatterface]

I think it's easy to dismiss Bindel as a loud mouth idiot until you wake up one night and she's perched on the end of your bed with a clown mask and a taser.

[Sunder]

Red few chapters of manga, still sitting on anime. Maybe today is a day?

The cartoon is a condensed version of the first seven volumes. Might as well read through that far before watching.

If the anime was just the theme song followed by 23 minutes of Rebecca Watson's standup then the theme song again, and no way to skip through, it would still be worth watching each episode.

As long as we're being weaboos, there's a couple of the JJBA opening themes I like a bit more but OPM's theme is definitely an earworm.

[HunnyBunny]

No.
She does active harm, and almost all based on prejudice and hate.
She's evil.

You have references for this áctual harm? Specific people who have suffered actual physical harm because of something Julie Bindel said? Court case documents? Has she been to undergo a psychiatric assessment for her disorder causing her to be evil? Has she in fact harmed so much as fly, or are we going to go with the whole mean words on the internet upset my fee-fees nowdays?

[Clarence]

Oh..
Just because I say she is evil doesn't mean words should be put in her mouth.
Or that she shouldn't be able to speak.
Or that she's wrong about absolutely everything.
Unless you actively call for violence or actively slander , I don't believe in 'no platforming' anybody, particularly in a place like a college.

But she's a disgusting piece of shit as a human being, and one of a few thousand ideologues worldwide who have had some effect on their nations or international policies concerning crime and human rights.

[CommanderTuvok]

Bindel has proposed putting men in concentration camps.

If she isnt evil, who the fuck is?

She did? Or did she make a joke in an interview? I thought we were on he sceptical side of things here, not AVFM or Pharyngula style crap.

Men can be sensitive creatures. Last year I made a joke in an interview in response to the question, “What can we do to end male violence?”, a campaign I have been involved with since 1979. I replied, jokingly, that if men could not learn to behave themselves, it might be a good idea to put them into an enclosed space, modelled a bit like a holiday camp, with a choice of quad bikes, white vans or bicycles. Female partners, mothers and friends could visit, and take them out like a library book, returning them at the end of the day. This would continue, I suggested, until men could learn to behave better towards women.

Within hours of the interview going online, men’s rights groups were accusing me of wanting to put men in “Nazi concentration camps”. And they say feminists are the ones with no sense of humour.

You might not agree with her, but writing stuff as a rad fem makes her evil? Really?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... -fertility

It was obviously a joke, but I do believe Bindel has a hate-on for men. Given "intent doesn't matter", Bindel is obviously evil scum, according to SJW standards. She acts quite a lot like a SJW radical feminist, but she has a lot of views the SJWs don't like. She is an example of how easy it is to divide and conquer the SJW-feminist-regressive left axis.

[Kirbmarc]

No.
She does active harm, and almost all based on prejudice and hate.
She's evil.

But is she aware that she's harming people who don't deserve it, or that her prejudices are harmful? Who knows?

Anyway I find it pointless to call people we don't know "evil". If they're not doing anything illegal, it's more effective to focus on reporting the negative consequences of their actions than to try to label them as monsters.

[Clarence]

No.
She does active harm, and almost all based on prejudice and hate.
She's evil.

You have references for this áctual harm? Specific people who have suffered actual physical harm because of something Julie Bindel said? Court case documents? Has she been to undergo a psychiatric assessment for her disorder causing her to be evil? Has she in fact harmed so much as fly, or are we going to go with the whole mean words on the internet upset my fee-fees nowdays?

Did you notice she is a political activist and her words have SOME weight?
She's not a 'nobody'.

Acknowledge that, and maybe you won't have to ask for proof.
I mean, silly me, thinking that people that have input into public policy discussions might affect other people's lives!

Otherwise you just seem to be dishonest to me, giving her the benefit of every doubt and pretending the only thing she does is 'speak mean words on the internet'.

[CaptainFluffyBunny]

Evil is indeed another category. I have looked upon evil, a man who took human life quite casually and was entirely unrepentant about killing people.

Now I'm curious. Who was this guy?

441d698f-e9d0-49f6-8e85-8b1dc9deb8dc-large16x9_Western_state_hospital_7.jpg

(153.49 KiB) Downloaded 223 times

I interned at Western State Hospital for a time after I retrained from my injury. It's a mental hospital that has a nice shiny new wing for violent and certain accused that are being psychiatrically evaluated for the court. It was an interesting experience, also more than a bit disheartening. PM me for more details if you're morbidly curious.

[Clarence]

For a single feminist (and working in the BACKGROUND at that) to have some bad effect on public policy I refer you to this:

https://tamenwrote.wordpress.com/2013/1 ... propriate/

[paddybrown]

I still don't think banning buqini is OK. Our strategy should be satire.

I just think it's weird. I fully support the ban face-coverings thing, because seeing a face is important for all kinds of reasons. And I think Islam sucks for the way it brainwashes women into hiding in baggy sacks so men don't go all Carrier in public, and men into thinking the mere sight of flesh should turn them into sex machines. But telling women what they should wear on the beach is just stupid.

Nigella Lawson wears a burkini sometimes cos she doesn't want The Daily Mail flashing her bits. Why the fuck does it matter? There are plenty of women outside of Islam who don't feel comfortable in a bikini, or even a swimsuit, just as I'm sure there are plenty of men who feel the same. Armed police standing over a woman telling her to take her top off cos reasons is fucked up. Muslim dress is retarded, nun's clothes are stupid, turbans are gross, but the French towns doing this are full-on dumb. I hope people start turning up on Cannes beaches in a nun's habit.

Yep, I agree. There are problems with the expectations muslim society puts on women, but policemen accosting women on beaches to tell them what they can and can't wear doesn't do anything to ameliorate that. Just like telling girls they can't wear the hijab in school. Secularism is about the state not imposing religion on people - not about the state imposing on-religion on them.

[Lsuoma]

I still don't think banning buqini is OK. Our strategy should be satire.

How about a whole-body covering with just the tits, bush, and bum exposed?

[Gumby]

I can't walk in those shoes, but I can recognize that if Brad Pitt had been in an elevator in Ireland five years ago, we might not be here now, and Watson would still be boasting about how she once sucked Brad Pitt's dick. Obviously Brad Pitt has to be very drunk in this story, but in this case drunken sex wouldn't be rape at all.

SkepchickFeminism_zps81f7c05b.png

(223.34 KiB) Downloaded 230 times

[Suet Cardigan]

Burkini ban leads to spike in sales:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-37171749

[paddybrown]

When I wrote that Bindel was "straight-up evil", I was perhaps over-stating. Evil is a big word. But she is gleefully hateful. Her "concentration camps" comment may have not been meant entirely seriously (like her recent tweet that all men should be put in jail and then shot, which she made pretty clear she was only saying to wind people up). But she did say, in that passage Suet Cardigan quoted:

I would love to see a women’s liberation that results in women turning away from men and saying: “when you come back as human beings, then we might look again.”

I have a bit of an aversion, not an unreasonable one in my opinion. to people who think identifiable groups of people, whether or not those groups include me, are not human.

[sp0tlight]

How about a whole-body covering with just the tits, bush, and bum exposed?

I can support that but only because I'm a heterosexual hypocrite!

[paddybrown]

[quote="paddybrown/
Yep, I agree. There are problems with the expectations muslim society puts on women, but policemen accosting women on beaches to tell them what they can and can't wear doesn't do anything to ameliorate that. Just like telling girls they can't wear the hijab in school. Secularism is about the state not imposing religion on people - not about the state imposing on-religion on them.[/quote]

Non-religion, not on-religion, whatever that is.

[paddybrown]

Aargh. I can't even quote myself.

[Shatterface]

I'd rather ban mankinis.

http://www.menkind.co.uk/media/catalog/ ... ng-081.jpg

[Mr. X, Indeed]

https://www.spreaker.com/user/smalleyan ... mp_value1=

I'm struck by how rude and passive-aggressive PZ was. That exasperated sigh whenever David Smalley said something he didn't like was exhausting. PZ seemed more interested in playing word games and straw-manning than having an honest discussion. He was sidetracking and trying to avoid conversations which made him uncomfortable. I'm glad I don't have to deal with the man.

The language of "social justice" gives him every excuse to be self-righteous and judgemental while not looking at his own behavior. He says all the right words, after all. Just insufferable.

[CaptainFluffyBunny]

I'd rather ban mankinis.

http://www.menkind.co.uk/media/catalog/ ... ng-081.jpg

I would instead make them mandatory for male SJWs. Maybe enough of them will accidentally catapult their genitalia that it will reduce the pervert population a bit.