Do you think society (and actually feminist quite a lot) are conspiring to gas light women?

[WhatWitchcraftIsThis]

We constantly tell women they shouldn't be afraid of men, but actually they're dangerous. I would not leave my children with a man other than my husband, I don't tell people that but it's true. I trust my husband but even then... I'm always aware what the statistics say. I know what has happened to me, what has happened to friends. Maybe instead of laughing at women for "seeing rapist and pedophiles around every corner" we should accept that men are dangerous and that if men were a another species of animal you'd tell women to stay the fuck away from it. It's dangerous.

Yes you're absolutely right

Sorry, I realised you weren't flattered buffy

To be fair to larry a lot of posters are happy to jump in with a stream of ridicule and insults. It would be nice if people could disagree without using personal attacks.

Fair enough I'm not on enough to know the regulars.

It's been a really interesting thread. +1 for the patronising comments thing .. I was annoyed when Jo Pavey won the 10,000m gold and all everyone wanted to say was how amazing it was for a mum of 2.

To be fair this was a 200 post thread, but Larry decided (without reading it) that he still knew more than everyone else and that our personal experiences weren't as important as his knowledge of fucking nothing. You don't have to have to say someone is an idiot to imply they are an idiot. And Larry has basically called us all fucking idiots.

Also it is not simply "disagreeing" when you are telling someone that something has personally affected them isn't true and isn't as important as they think it is. It's fine to play that game when it doesn't affect you. He doesn't get the privilege of simply disagreeing that women die every day due to men because the facts disagree with him.

Stick around Idigui, and you'll see that when some random person comes along and says similar tripe things as Larry does, they are given a fair hearing and we engage with them as much as possible. Sadly, it's become apparent that engaging in a constructive way with him is pointless. He doesn't come to discuss, he comes to browbeat the silly feminists with his superior manly intellect.

I probably shouldn't rise to it, I manage not to when other idiots refuse to engage in rational discussion. Must try harder to be a nice, fluffy, reasonable feminist from now on.

Not that being reasonable is a bad thing, it's just that I'm not terribly good at it in the face of people who won't listen

And Larry went to Oxbridge you know. Double first in mansplaining to Feminists, I understand.

So if we DO accept men are dangerous - what then ?

So if we DO accept men are dangerous - what then ?

Try and deal with male violence? Which is one of the main points of feminism. Work with media and laws to make things better call out male violence as male violence and stop pretending it's specific to one "special" group of men and not men as whole. Stop telling women they are crazy for fearing men because it's #NAMWALT

Yes - I absolutely agree, try and deal with male violence - in terms of the law, did you have specific changes in mind ?

I think the laws we have now are fine for the most part. I'd like to see some of them enforced.

I certainly think the police need to be more accountable and they need to investigate complaints with a lot more vigour and determination. When they fuck up big they should be out and their pensions withdrawn.

Heads should be rolling in Rotherham for an immediate start.

As I understand it, the Judge is meant to point out the errors of falling into various rape myths when they sum up cases for the jury. I don't know how well that works, but the CPS can appeal if there is poor summing up

Interesting couple of threads at the moment going around.

What is interesting is that even though women and girls (as we know from various threads and surveys and our own lives and our friends lives etc) are routinely assaulted by men, we really do have to pretend that doesn't happen and remember NAMALT when it comes to things that men want to do which puts them in a position which has the potential to make a woman in a vulnerable position feel uncomfortable.

The equality laws are interesting because of course laws are used most effectively by people who have power, influence and the wherewithall to complain ie privilege.

It would be interesting if there was some way of looking at the things that have been changed as a direct result of these laws, and which group was positively affected IYSWIM. I wonder if it would show that a disproportionate amount of rulings were around the groups they weren't formed for IYSWIM ie male / white / heterosexual etc etc etc

Indigui I think people have been quite restrained with regards to larry.

For example my first thought was to tell him to fuck off. Phew. Thank goodness I didn't do that.

"the CPS can appeal if there is poor summing up" a Following on from Just, even if it were done universally it still wouldn't combat the prejudices of the jury, unless it was really obvious. In fact, unless it was glaring it probably wouldn't even be appealed.

I'd like to see the sexual history of a rape victim become irrelevant, along with what they were wearing and how much she had to drink unless it was pertinent to the case e.g. they were too drunk to consent. This is mainly about changing attitudes not laws.

Gin, returning to the thread abit late but I meant the "active" thing not the NAMALT thing.