| Serious case of over-reaction on 11:41 - Mar 15 with 2729 views | lowhouseblue |
problem is that by a very big margin most of the violence men do is in the home to people they know. making them stay at home would therefore only make things worse. |  |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
|  |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 11:42 - Mar 15 with 2717 views | bluelagos |
She was clearly hoping to prompt a debate rather than it being a serious suggestion.
Hence what can we do to ensure women's safety is improved? What can us men do? Answer that and we can happily assume we'll still be allowed out after 6.. |  |
| |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 11:44 - Mar 15 with 2665 views | mikeybloo88 |
It's just a loony wind up mate...relax |  | | |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 11:45 - Mar 15 with 2691 views | Chondzoresk |
Love it. ‘To reduce discrimination of all kinds’. The irony in that statement. She is discriminating against 99.9% of men. |  | | |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 11:46 - Mar 15 with 2680 views | Darth_Koont |
It’s a political point, yes, but there’s an underlying rational basis – men are the problem. Even allowing for the fact that the vast majority of men aren’t a danger, the threat of male violence keeps women off the streets.
I certainly think a one-off, self-imposed solidarity curfew might help. To show that men are listening and also understand what it means to be restricted in this way. Just for one evening/night.
Though of course there’d be some @rseholes out there making their silly point anyway. So probably a non-starter. |  |
| |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 11:52 - Mar 15 with 2639 views | SpruceMoose |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 11:42 - Mar 15 by bluelagos |
She was clearly hoping to prompt a debate rather than it being a serious suggestion.
Hence what can we do to ensure women's safety is improved? What can us men do? Answer that and we can happily assume we'll still be allowed out after 6.. |
Staggering how many men don't understand this. |  |
| Pronouns: He/Him/His.
"Imagine being a heterosexual white male in Britain at this moment. How bad is that. Everything you say is racist, everything you say is homophobic. The Woke community have really f****d this country." | | Poll: | Selectamod |
| |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 11:54 - Mar 15 with 2636 views | giant_stow |
This caused huge ructions on the local facebook group. Being a bloke, I stayed out of it, but there was a lot of anger and debate over #notallmen. One poor sod made the mistake of asking how some of the agreeing women would like it if all muslims were curfewed because of a tiny minority of extremist terrorists. He ended up with a 100+ post kicking.
The trouble is smart-arse politicking like Jones' idea never reaches the people who need to be reached: ie the minority of men who are potential rapists. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Serious case of over-reaction on 11:55 - Mar 15 with 2618 views | Radlett_blue |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 11:44 - Mar 15 by mikeybloo88 |
It's just a loony wind up mate...relax |
Indeed, by someone from a party which has zero chance of being in power so should be irrelevant, but unfortunately some of this ill thought out nonsense gains some traction among those incapable of making rational, analytical judgement. |  |
| |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 11:56 - Mar 15 with 2617 views | Ftnfwest |
As others have said, its a political statement more than anything, if a bit daft. The problem being you could spend years 'educating' us all - those who need to be or otherwise - and when progress has hopefully been made, still have the psychopaths' out there anyway that actually commit the most heinous crimes against women (hopefully not policemen though...) |  | | |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 12:03 - Mar 15 with 2537 views | MattinLondon |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 11:55 - Mar 15 by Radlett_blue |
Indeed, by someone from a party which has zero chance of being in power so should be irrelevant, but unfortunately some of this ill thought out nonsense gains some traction among those incapable of making rational, analytical judgement. |
This post has made me feel uneasy. Not sure why as I’ve read a lot worse on here and elsewhere. |  | | |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 12:03 - Mar 15 with 2538 views | lowhouseblue |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 11:56 - Mar 15 by Ftnfwest |
As others have said, its a political statement more than anything, if a bit daft. The problem being you could spend years 'educating' us all - those who need to be or otherwise - and when progress has hopefully been made, still have the psychopaths' out there anyway that actually commit the most heinous crimes against women (hopefully not policemen though...) |
the message that should be emphasised is that assault by a stranger in a public place is very rare. anything that exaggerates the perception of that risk is bad.
the old adage remains true - the person who is most likely to assault a woman on the way home is the person who walks her home. | |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 12:14 - Mar 15 with 2447 views | bluelagos |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 11:52 - Mar 15 by SpruceMoose |
Staggering how many men don't understand this. |
Almost as if lots of men are ignorant or blind to the very real issues many women face...
Anyhow - any suggestions? The 3% conviction rate for rape is deeply concerning. It means that 32 out of 33 rapists are free to re-offend. And they know it too... | |
| |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 12:18 - Mar 15 with 2437 views | CBBlue |
I think she's trying to make a point. Women are often warned about going out alone after dark, indeed some on here posted on another thread that they wouldn't be happy about their wife/daughter walking alone in London after dark and many women are too scared to go out after dark.
The point is many women effectively have already been given an unwritten 6pm curfew. |  |
| |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 12:28 - Mar 15 with 2340 views | itfcjoe |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 12:14 - Mar 15 by bluelagos |
Almost as if lots of men are ignorant or blind to the very real issues many women face...
Anyhow - any suggestions? The 3% conviction rate for rape is deeply concerning. It means that 32 out of 33 rapists are free to re-offend. And they know it too... |
Bit of a silly point to say someone is a rapist if they aren't convicted. |  |
| |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 12:36 - Mar 15 with 2277 views | Darth_Koont |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 11:54 - Mar 15 by giant_stow |
This caused huge ructions on the local facebook group. Being a bloke, I stayed out of it, but there was a lot of anger and debate over #notallmen. One poor sod made the mistake of asking how some of the agreeing women would like it if all muslims were curfewed because of a tiny minority of extremist terrorists. He ended up with a 100+ post kicking.
The trouble is smart-arse politicking like Jones' idea never reaches the people who need to be reached: ie the minority of men who are potential rapists. |
Even putting aside rape and sexual assault, the problem is that the incidence of sexual harassment and making women feel unsafe is much, much, much higher among men than the incidence of Muslims being terrorists.
May not have been the intention, but by suggesting this is about a tiny minority of men, the comparison seems to denying a problem that has become accepted and normalized in everyday life.
There will be plenty of men on this board who have been guilty of making women feel unsafe. In fact, we should all be thinking about times that we might have done so however unintentionally. | |
| |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 12:38 - Mar 15 with 2254 views | Mookamoo |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 12:14 - Mar 15 by bluelagos |
Almost as if lots of men are ignorant or blind to the very real issues many women face...
Anyhow - any suggestions? The 3% conviction rate for rape is deeply concerning. It means that 32 out of 33 rapists are free to re-offend. And they know it too... |
There is (or was pre Covid) a very good scheme in Ipswich run by Volunteer Matters. They take male volunteers to act as role models to groups of 12-16 year olds in schools and basically teach them not to be a-holes. They get young actors in to do small plays, role playing etc.
Young men need education and positive people in their lives. |  | | |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 12:47 - Mar 15 with 2170 views | bluelagos |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 12:28 - Mar 15 by itfcjoe |
Bit of a silly point to say someone is a rapist if they aren't convicted. |
Would you say that to a woman who has been raped but whose attacker remains unconvicted? That she is a bit silly to think she's been raped?
(Not being facetious)
The 3% conviction rate is real - and unless you are arguing that significant numbers of women are making false allegations (which can happen) - then the justice system is failing them, and their attackers remain free.
Most of these cases don't even get to court, never mind result in a conviction. | |
| |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 12:53 - Mar 15 with 2128 views | itfcjoe |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 12:47 - Mar 15 by bluelagos |
Would you say that to a woman who has been raped but whose attacker remains unconvicted? That she is a bit silly to think she's been raped?
(Not being facetious)
The 3% conviction rate is real - and unless you are arguing that significant numbers of women are making false allegations (which can happen) - then the justice system is failing them, and their attackers remain free.
Most of these cases don't even get to court, never mind result in a conviction. |
I don't debate the conviction rate, but I think classifying anyone who stands trial for rape as a rapist is the wrong road to go down. | |
| |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 12:55 - Mar 15 with 2109 views | MattinLondon |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 12:47 - Mar 15 by bluelagos |
Would you say that to a woman who has been raped but whose attacker remains unconvicted? That she is a bit silly to think she's been raped?
(Not being facetious)
The 3% conviction rate is real - and unless you are arguing that significant numbers of women are making false allegations (which can happen) - then the justice system is failing them, and their attackers remain free.
Most of these cases don't even get to court, never mind result in a conviction. |
Isn’t rape quite extreme hard to prove? Especially if it happens in the home of either the accused or victim? Maybe out alcohol in the equation as well I would imagine that an experienced lawyer will be able to seed a few doubts in the minds of the juror. If the man has a history of good behaviour with not violent convictions then that makes the case against him even harder to prove.
I’m not making excuses as the conviction rate is extremely poor but it must be very hard to prove. | | | |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 12:56 - Mar 15 with 2101 views | gordon |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 12:14 - Mar 15 by bluelagos |
Almost as if lots of men are ignorant or blind to the very real issues many women face...
Anyhow - any suggestions? The 3% conviction rate for rape is deeply concerning. It means that 32 out of 33 rapists are free to re-offend. And they know it too... |
There's a nice thread below describing the state of the criminal justice system - the problem of male violence against women has many aspects to it, but a properly funded, functioning criminal justice system would be a big step forward.
When the government make statements about 'Tougher sentences' for whatever, the main point is to distract us from where the problem lies. |  | | |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 12:56 - Mar 15 with 2093 views | giant_stow |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 12:36 - Mar 15 by Darth_Koont |
Even putting aside rape and sexual assault, the problem is that the incidence of sexual harassment and making women feel unsafe is much, much, much higher among men than the incidence of Muslims being terrorists.
May not have been the intention, but by suggesting this is about a tiny minority of men, the comparison seems to denying a problem that has become accepted and normalized in everyday life.
There will be plenty of men on this board who have been guilty of making women feel unsafe. In fact, we should all be thinking about times that we might have done so however unintentionally. |
Just to be clear, when I say tiny minority, I'm referring to men who rape and assault. Thats where the comparison with generalising curfews for other groups is valid. Can you imagine the outcry if anyone even suggested such a blanket ban on Muslims, as some way of making a wider point?! Its dangerous ground which devalues Jones' wider message.
Sexual harassment is a different kettle of fish and I do agree that more men will have been guilty of that, either maliciously or accidently. Equally, there will be loads of men who go out of their way to avoid unnecessary alarm, such as not walking behind women late at night. How do we reach the guilty ones?
I have no idea how to deal with harassment other than better education. I also wonder whether society and popular culture in particular is overly sex-obsessed? Sex sells and permeates everything - perhaps we could work on that, men and women together? I realise i sound very old-fashioned. | |
| |
| The Never Ending Story - A Violent History on 12:57 - Mar 15 with 2091 views | Pendejo |
All publicity is good publicity? Ask the Met post weekend vigils... But this instance gets headlines for the Greens and was made days ago.
There are no answers guaranteed to end violence from that against individuals or groups, however you draw a line; women, red heads, religion, skin colour, sexual orientation, nationality, being left handed etc. From random acts of individual savagery to war / genocide.
Let's face it the human race has always produced some pretty nasty specimans, some get to do their thing on an industrial scale right down to people who abuse animals. There is no definitive answer to all.
There is much to be made public about the Everard case, but the swift movement from missing woman to man charged I think indicates something that when it becomes public knowledge will make any protest this far seem small. Someone knew something and didn't act on it, purely conjecture on my part.
Stranger danger probably plays on most people's minds but is miniscule, most acts of violence, from low level assault to rape to murder, is committed by someone known to the victim, usually serially and no amount of protesting or putting more laws on the statute books will change.
The only thing, imo, that can change things is identifying and intervention early to prevent escalation. But how the deck you do that I don't know.
We have to accept that there are people out there that are evil and opportunistic, people who care not about the rights of others but once caught have their rights protected in law.
Just think in Islam and Judaism there is the dressing of woman modestly, presumably so as not to inflame rampant make testosterone and sexual aggression, yet wearing there more extreme end of this clothing "incites" rampant hatred in some.
Ramble over... |  |
| |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 12:58 - Mar 15 with 2083 views | bluelagos |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 12:53 - Mar 15 by itfcjoe |
I don't debate the conviction rate, but I think classifying anyone who stands trial for rape as a rapist is the wrong road to go down. |
We have a legal system that does 2 things it seems to me.
1. It assumes we all innocent unless convicted (Which I accept)
2. It fails miserably to convict men for sexual assualts.
Now I am happy to concede that a man, who is unconvicted is innocent in the eyes of the law. But the question of why are the level of convictions so low remains to be addressed... | |
| |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 12:58 - Mar 15 with 2081 views | Ryorry |
| Serious case of over-reaction on 11:42 - Mar 15 by bluelagos |
She was clearly hoping to prompt a debate rather than it being a serious suggestion.
Hence what can we do to ensure women's safety is improved? What can us men do? Answer that and we can happily assume we'll still be allowed out after 6.. |
In case some people haven't seen it, many found this and another thread over the past few days helpful & constructive -
Met police officer arrested in connection with missing Sarah Everard by hatch 10 Mar 2021 0:35Been following this closely since she went missing near Clapham last Wednesday. They’ve just announced they’ve arrested a Met police officer.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56342465
And bizarrely at the same time I was messaging my friend to say ‘what sort of person would gain trust with a woman? A police officer possibly?’ and literally 10 seconds later we saw the news break on Twitter.
Such a worrying case and the outcome doesn’t look promising but at least an arrest has been made.
Re Jones wanting to prompt a debate - I just don't think it's good PR when, however well-intentioned, the headline statement is too subtle to be immediately understood by those it's primarily aimed at, as it instantly gets the hackles of some up & alienates them - obviously counter-productive. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
