"No-one could say they were innocent. Those slags dancing around"

[Caligula]

This sent a chill through me. The level of hatred for women in some of the men we live among, is so worrying and is not seen as a particular issue. This was what one of those men jailed today said about blowing up the Ministry of Sound. The idea of young women dancing around, enjoying thenselves, was such anathema to him, that he honestly thought if he blew them up, that would be recieved more positively in the general population as these particular victims wouldn't be "innocent".

WTF is going on in these men's minds and why isn't this mysogyny being taken as seriously as racism?

caligula, I agree in principle about not slagging off girls dancing and enjoying themselves - BUT I know someone who once worked at a well known nightclub (not named on this thread), the owners of which have been seen on the tv sanctimoniously talking about their no drugs policy, and the reality was so disgusting that I cant say it here. Think of the worst possible depravity, it was either happening on the premises, or the owners were up to it in their spare time.

Everything I have ever found out about clubs in my life reinforces this - union street in plymouth makes my stomach turn - it is just one big drug mart/brothel.

so dont lets have any illusions about clubs and what they are.
Not saying they should be blown up of course - but they are not innocent either.

not innocent? that is a very loaded term.
they are innocent in the sense that they do not deserve to have their limbs blown off , as you said. And many teenagers experiment with drugs and alchol, it is part of the growing up process for many. Yes we have a problem with binge drinking and drug dealing in many young populations, which need addressing, but i hardly see how these terrorists would have made their decision to bomb a nightclub based on that. And even if they did they would still obviously be cold blooded murderers.

Dino there was a piece in the Sunday Times a few weeks ago about the rise of 'Torture Porn' in mainstream films [ Hostel, Saw, etc]. It really is very, very, worrying.

Nightynight . Does that also mean if a woman is drunk she can't be raped? Anyone who knows someone who's been raped will know that low level misogyny is a society thing.
I watched that c4 thing about a rape trial a few months back and was totally taken aback by the assumptions about the situation that were made by the female members of the jury.

I don't really understand what you're saying about nightclubs not being innocent, Nightynight.

What d'you mean? I don't think anyone's claiming they're like churches, but I don't really know what you're getting at? Do you mean it's no wonder that some of these nutters (as well as normal people) think they're dens of iniquity?

I think people who get off their face may well be stupid and objectionable.

However I don't feel that makes them fair game to be blown up.

We have a right to be protected , even when we are being stupid.

There was a charming case last year of an Autralian Imam who likened women to 'raw meat' tempting a dog for 'tempting' men to sin. THe muslims he ministered to him removed him from his position IIRC.

I'd love to know why it always seems to be the women's 'fault' for tempting these poor, innocent men.

Why can't men learn some bleedin' self control???

Ah because men are not responsible for their behaviour

Women are.

Doncha know.

You see the same principle generally being enunciated by motorists claiming that people who drive too slowly cause accidents. Apparantly, the reason they do, is because other drivers get so angry with them that they overtake them inappropriately. So um...it's not the fault of the person who has allowed themselves to be wound up, but that of the person who has wound them up.

Similarly domestic violence. Not the fault of the abuser, but the attacker. Because she wound him up.

Because sexual agency is 'acceptable' in men and not in women. Therefore women whose dress or behaviour suggests that they are sexually active are considered aberrent and by extension abhorrent and 'deserve' the 'consequences'. And I don't care if I sound hysterical, that's the reality, not limited to specific cultural groups but in mainstream western culture. Rape convictions are down to 1 in 20, it's getting worse, not better. We're expected to believe that feminism is outdated and has achieved its goals; or worse still that feminism is somehow to blame for the ills of modern society (e.g. all that 'men don't know what's expected of them so boys are all knifing each other'; 'you tried to have it all and of course that's impossible' - not if you've got a wife it's not - crap). You know what teenage boys call girls in London schools? 'Gash'.

Sorry, I'm ranting but this makes me so angry.

Ahem. Although the quote uses the word "slags," if a nightclub had indeed been bombed, the bomb would have killed men and women equally.

Therefore, I feel that in this case, we can absolve the potential bomber of misogyny, until he develops a bomb that targets women only.

footnote: anyone who thinks nightclubs are OK should try living near Union Street in Plymouth. Dirt, vomit, piss, rubbish, drunks, child prostitutes, drug dealers, adult prostitutes, addicts, girls showing their buttocks & thongs (I would mention men if I had seen that as well), f*d up children of all these f*d up people attacking you in the street.
Do I have to repeat that I don't advocate clearing up this mess with a few bombs?

The whole "torture porn" thing worries me - what kind of society deems it acceptable to watch films involving women being sadistically tortured? I was cross with DH when he went to see Wolf Creek because it gives that kind of thing an audience which encourages more films in a similar vein. If even one screwed up person watches it and thinks "Oh great I fancy doing that" then how safe are we and our daughters?

Oh Nightynight, what on earth are you on? Do you honestly think that the slags reference was to everyone blown up?

Of course it wasn't. The point is, the men being blown up are irrelevant - the real pleasure, is blowing up the "slags". In English, on the whole, unless very specific, slags means women.

This thread isn't about how awful nightclubs are. (I agree, I don't go to them either.) It's about how much hatred there is for women in our culture (and in that of mentalist suicide bombers, obv.) I really don't know what you are trying to get at with the nightclubs are a nuisance angle. [puzzled]

you think that what I described is just a nuisance? that is naive.

where on earth do you get the idea from that al Quaida or this bomber is out to blow up women and how can you possibly go into their heads and say that the men blown up in Bali, for example were just an irrelevance? there is really no evidence to back that up.

well the evidence is in the quote 'No one could say there were innocent. Those slags dancing around.' 'Slags' refers to women. Which suggest a misogyny of a murderous degree. I find it rather distasteful that you try somehow to rationalize a would be murderer's statement ,which you are doing, however many times you end your sentence with 'I don't justify blowing them up'.

The nasty state of some nightclubs is not women 's fault [or the slags' fault] either. Men own them, men run them, men are usually the pimps, often the drug dealers. So bringing up the state of our nightclubs is not actually that relevant in light of the topic.

Of course 'slags' refers to women!

this is the mentality we are dealing with how do you go about changing it?

After reading that, I can't put into words what I'm feeling.

NN, what is naieve about the description of nightclubs as nuisance? The OED defines nuisance as "something harmful or offensive to the community..." and that is the sense in which I was using it (as opposed to "I've forgotten to put the kettle on, what a nuisance") This seemed to be your angle on nightclubs, which is a fair enough one but I'm struggling to see what point you are trying to make in the context of the thread.

THis is to my mind, one of those topics where the word, 'but' iis terribly important.

Of course they should have been killed BUT they are dreadful people.

He shouldn't have beaten her up , of bourse, BUT she was deliberatly provoking her.

The BUT negates everything that was said before. It works every time

I love you BUT....

You worked really hard on this BUT.....

Of course women should have equal rights BUT....

There should be no BUT. These gurs were women haters, life haters. And were prepared to kill anyone who disagreed with them, or who had the termerity to enjoy like or express themselves and a different way to the one chosen by these psychopaths.

No BUT, no excuses

exactly MB

yes mb but it's taught

are people like this open to education, to change their views?

I fear not

GiantSS, I am not looking at nightclubs from the point of view of the good citizen tutting about the nuisance to myself.
It is the people who use Union street who are most harmed by it - but they are so deeply harmed, that they can't even see what is wrong with their lives.

mb, I don't accept your last post - we should be allowed to say if we don't like nightclub culture without fear of being thought to sympathise with bombing nightclubs, and without comparison to wife-beaters excusing themselves.
I agree with the quote given. Many of the girls AND men in nightclubs ARE slags dancing around. Surely you are familiar with the mentality of many teenagers "if I dont pull and have sex on the beach, Saturday night was a failure"
We don't do ourselves any favours by ignoring or excusing the slag culture that pervades parts of Britain. The contrast between the experience of teenagers who grow up in the near of, for example, the Plymouth nightclubs, and those who grow up in posher places, is just too great. If we don't follow the Thatcherite model of a collection of individuals, then we have a duty to be concerned about this.

I am also familiar with how other cultures disapprove of what they see as loose english morals, and I can assure you, that they despise the men as much as the women.
You are trying to say that these bombers hate women, I am telling you, the evidence up til now is that they target men exactly the same as women.

and how about blaming the english language, which doesn't have a unisex or male word for slags? Because if it did, the guy in question might very well have used it instead.

i am sorry NN but i am finding your reasoning a little disingenuous. If he wanted a word that accused both men or women, there are plenty of ways he could have said it.

Young people do a lot of stupid things. That does not make them bad individuals. I also fail to see how talking about the way people in other cultures view us does anything but try to rationalize the would be murderers' argument.

i worry about young people brought up in a culture of hatred towards anyone but those in their own religion. I am worried about the inherent misogyny, maybe not in the Muslim Faith, but in the way it is often practised. So it seems there are faults in both cultures. Making nightclubs better places for the people in and near them should be something we work towards, but not out of fear lest someone with hatred and murderous intent choose to target us.

I don't have a provblem with you being anti night club. But to 'tag' it onto the justification that the bombers gave, gives them (inadvertantly I'm sure) justification.

I don't want people to behave badly anywhere. I have high standards.

But the place to argue this is in an anti night club stance.

By saying they shouldn't have done it BUT these people really are slags you are giveing them a degree of supposrt. Whicj I'm sure you don't mean. But it is how it is read. And it is how it would be read by these people and their real supporters.

We all have a right to be protected in the this country. Even people who act like idiots.