The London Riots: The Elephant in the Room

[smugaboo]

I am probably being too quick off the mark in posting this as people are still digesting what is happening in London and Birmingham. I have seen references on here to police "shutting down the internet" and "shooting protesters" (rubber bullets, so that's okay). Let's hope that's the shock talking. But when the dust settles and people start analysing the root causes of the riots (i.e. social problems, poverty, unemployment, cultural concerns) one thing that will inevitably be overlooked, or at least not given enough attention, is the fact that this is gendered violence. It hardly needs to be said that very few women are involved in the actual rioting although I don't doubt that there are quite a number involved in looting. The same can be said in most similar situations anywhere in the world.

So I guess what I'm interested in exploring is whether or not this is actually gendered violence as such. Are the wives, mothers and sisters of the protestors sitting at home cheering them on? Is the only reason they don't join in fear for personal safety? Or do they feel fundamentally differently? I mean, would they ever be the ones to precipitate the violence? Do the males feel more disaffected - or are they actually more disaffected (I hardly think so!). Or, controversially, does this opportunity stir up some innate desire in males to simply be violent?

I've got to disappear but I'd love to hear what you think.

I missed out the word society.

'Claig, I'm not blaming women at all.'

That's good to hear. All policies are political and it is politicians who vote them in. Most are men. It has nothing to do with women or feminists.

During Thatcher's tenure, I loathed her, but I was young and untutored in the ways of the world. Now I realise if she hadn't done what she did, we'd be in a mass of trouble.
Anyway, why would you assume that feminisation of society is women's "fault" Oh I think I see. Patriarchal society is men's "fault" Well there is a logic there I suppose, but personally I wouldn't blame women for the feminisation of society, it seems polarising, divisive and illusory to do so.

claig there is plenty evidence that tesosterone isn't to blame as much as you would like to believe. And as for people taking anabolic steroids being more violent that fails to take into account that those people take other substances and that they were more competitive/violent before taking drugs.

These people are violent because they want to be. Stop trying to making excuses for their bad behaviour. They know what they are doing they have cognitive reasoning. They aren't ruled by hormones and most of them artificially increasing their testosterone levels.

Still laughing about feminisation of society. Lots of evidence for that obviously .

and most of them artificially aren't increasing their testosterone levels

Obviously!

or and most of them even artificially increasing their testosterone levels.

Even!!!

I give up! You know what I mean!

archieleach - feminisation/masculinsation. patriarchy/matriarchy. HTH.

Out of interest Claig, is it not possible then for a female MP to represent her male constituents for it appears that you believe the converse to be true.

"That's good to hear. All policies are political and it is politicians who vote them in. Most are men. It has nothing to do with women or feminists".

'Stop trying to making excuses for their bad behaviour.'

I'm not making excuses. I know that a rottweiler is more potentially violent than some other dogs. I think men are potentially more violent than women and I believe that is because of nature not nurture. That's why more men are DV abusers. If you don't think so, then so be it.

Yes Alice, but juxtaposing the "masculinisation" of society would be a non sequiter in this discussion as it is not in the zeitgeist is it.

'Out of interest Claig, is it not possible then for a female MP to represent her male constituents for it appears that you believe the converse to be true.'

I think Margaret Thatcher was the best MP and PM we have ever had and she represented everyone. She is better than all the Labour PMs put together in my view. If only we had less men MPs and more MPs like Margaret Hilda Thatcher.

Sorry Alice, I should have said yes, dear, in the vein of HTH

I think men are more violent than women - just not for the same reasons you do. Testosterone may be a factor but hormones don't rule you. I would be insulted to think that someone thought hormones ruled me.

Must have misunderstood Archie - assumed you were hoping for some logic in your post. Nevermind then.

Well I totally agree Claig, but how about the gender representation question?

You seem to be saying that if education is being feminised (and in my opinion it is and to the detriment of all) then even though most of the teachers are women, it is male MPs who make the rules and yet it would somehow be different if the MPs making the rules were women. Don't want to put words into your mouth but is that what you meant?

'I would be insulted to think that someone thought hormones ruled me.'

Well that's where we differ. I don't believe in my own logical control of myself. I think we are controlled by unconscous forces and chemicals and hormones as well as free will and reason. But I believe people can easily be swung out of reason and swayed by spin and propaganda, which is what all the political spinners and 'Princes of Darkness' and propagandists know. Even our breathing is controlled by subconscious forces. We have to realise that we are at heart animals, subject to the laws of nature. If we don't understand that, then we cannot understand the territorial and tribal behaviour of football hooligans and many other aspects of human behaviour.

Very true Claig but many would have you believe that we are all just puppets dancing to the tune of the great god Socialisation

I wore a hoody to work yesterday. I wanted to represent the zeitgeist fully.

'Well I totally agree Claig, but how about the gender representation question?'

what gender representation question? I don't know what you mean.

'You seem to be saying that if education is being feminised (and in my opinion it is and to the detriment of all) then even though most of the teachers are women, it is male MPs who make the rules and yet it would somehow be different if the MPs making the rules were women. Don't want to put words into your mouth but is that what you meant?'

I disagree with modular courses etc. I think it has led to the dumbing down of education with everyone getting A* etc. I believe in standards, because I am a Tory. I believe that liberals have dumbed down society. But it has nothing to do with women or feminisation. It is purely political and has been done for political objectives. Many Tory women are opposed to the dumbing down and want to reverse it. It depends which women were in power. If progressives were in power they would continue their policy, but if Thatcher was now in power, she would correct these policies.

Milly

I think I have entered some parallel universe. Or maybe I am asleep and dreaming this thread.

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to Heaven, we were all going direct the other way