Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

“Have you killed any men today? And if not, why not?”

Jump to new
basilio said:
Rumpy you have misunderstood what I have said.

No way, NO Way, would I want to see people or their families abused the way many women have been. But in the context of this discussion I'm saying that either direct personal experience of such abuse or seeing it's effects on people they care about would give people another perspective.
It's a perspective that I think is lacking in many comments to date.

I included the link to Clementines Ford blogspot to give people an idea of the sort of abuse she has been subjected to. I certainly wouldn't want to wake up facing that rubbish.
Click to expand...

Yes, she has certainly been subject to abuse, disgusting and insulting, and whoever does it should be named and shamed, it's inexcusable.

However after reading some of her foul mouthed rants it's disappointing to know that generations of women are being educated to think that misandry and feminazism is the only way to respond.

There are actually decent men in the country and putting them offside achieves nothing.
 
basilio said:
Rumpy you have misunderstood what I have said.
No way, NO Way, would I want to see people or their families abused the way many women have been. But in the context of this discussion I'm saying that either direct personal experience of such abuse or seeing it's effects on people they care about would give people another perspective.
It's a perspective that I think is lacking in many comments to date.
I included the link to Clementines Ford blogspot to give people an idea of the sort of abuse she has been subjected to. I certainly wouldn't want to wake up facing that rubbish.
Click to expand...
Fair comment Bas
 
How about considering how abusive behaviour of women is treated by Facebook and how facebook deals with responses to that behaviour. This is an except from one of Clementine Fords articles.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Liddle isn't the only woman who's been targeted for bans by Facebook for supposed "guideline violations" while demonstrated racists, misogynists and other social miscreants are given free rein to behave as abusively as they please. I've also experienced this first hand. Last year, the private message service on my public Facebook page was bombarded with unsolicited messages from men (all of whom were strangers) demanding that I send them nude photographs, calling me names like "slut" and "whore" and, in some cases, sending me images of what they presented as their own erect penises. In addition to this, the comments threads of my public posts were filled with men contributing much of the same (minus the dick pics). In one instance, a man told me to sit on a butcher's knife so that I could never reproduce.

When this comment and others like it were reported, the same response kept being handed down - they were not in violation of the company's community guidelines, and all I could do was politely ask the offenders to remove them.

Instead of embarking on the entirely fruitless exercise of trying to reason with the people who see women as objects to be ridiculed and degraded, I chose instead to screencap and post their messages on my wall.

It turns out that the men happy to send you private messages calling you a dog and saying you need a "good hard coxk up ya" don't much like it when you show the world what they consider a good time. And Facebook doesn't much like it either. As a noted "repeat offender" myself, I was given a 30 day ban. In the world of Facebook, sending a woman violent degrading messages is exercising freedom of speech. Sharing those messages, on the other hand, is a violation of privacy.

Another journalist friend of mine was recently sanctioned by Facebook for similarly confounding reasons. A man had left a comment on her public page calling her a "slut" and a "moll". She posted a humorous reply correcting his grammar, and BOOM. A stern warning followed demanding she prove her identity as well as her comment being removed.

http://www.dailylife.com.au/news-an...s-censorship-double-standards-20160314-gniycj

If anyone is interested in reading more of Ms Fords articles to get a direct idea of her views check them out here

http://www.dailylife.com.au/news-and-views/by/Clementine-Ford?offset=20
 
SirRumpole said:
The OP was about Clementine Ford old chap, .
Click to expand...

So now we can't post real life stuff because it offends the rank and file followers of the very person who wrote the hateful sentences in the first place?

I find it hard to believe someone would want to shut down a conversation because, in that someone's opinion, the beast deserves every right to behave as badly if not worse as her creators, but with impunity because of gender. Where's the logic in that?
 
Agree GB. there is so much fake news around nowadays, we all need to read comments wisely.

Then not react.

If you are unfamiliar with the author do a google search... "Ratbag" wiki. Ratbag being the person.

See what their past is and why they post sometimes such crap.

I know it's boring , but "Walk in their RM Williams"
 
A couple of weeks ago a tread was started using a satirical comment made by Clementine Ford in the fly leaf of a book she had written. The comment managed to create righteous ENRAGEMENT amongst the thousands of people who have taken the role of head kickers anonymous on Ms Ford. I think the fact that ASF joined those ranks was not a great look.

In theory, perhaps, the viciousness of the response to this comment may have "died down". Maybe. Maybe not. Clementine Ford has just penned a piece on the fallout over her little note of satire.

The story is challenging. The video Clementine posts is even more disturbing. Well worth considering with thought.

Clementine Ford: This is the personal price I pay for speaking out online

214 reading now
Show comments
A lot has been written about the consequences of doing activism online, particularly if you work in the feminist space. Too often, these testimonies or complaints are dismissed as the rantings of oversensitive baby-women. We provoke it, we're told. Some of us are even accused of courting it, laying traps to ensnare the splendid chaps who wouldn't normally dream of dropping by to talk about the various ways you should be beaten or violated but who just couldn't resist telling you this one time how your face looks like a bridge fell on it.

...... It's in the cost of knowing that the rules are different for you and always will be; that you must be composed at all times and never scrap in the muck laid down by your opponents because your moral purity is measured differently to theirs.

You can be told 20 days in row that you should be raped and sodomised and beaten and strung up and thrown out and taught a lesson, but if on the 21st day you turn around and make a joke about firing men into the sun using a cannon, you are a scold who hates men and is teaching her son that he's a rapist.

... And since uncovering a sardonic joke written in a friend and fellow feminist's copy of my book – a note that wryly asked her if she had "killed any men today" and if not, why not – a note that was a direct hat tip to the relentless accusation made to feminists that we hate men and want them all to die and that our efforts to better the world for everybody are actually just code for wanting to commit widespread manocide; a message that was quite clearly withering satire – the same people who tell me all the ways they'd like to hurt me, or who say nothing as other men tell me those same things too, have been using it as an opportunity to double down on their assertion that it's me who poses the real threat to social order.

That I am a terrorist who should be reported to ASIO. That DOCS needs to be made aware of my child and track his welfare. And, as someone saw fit to tell me on my Facebook page, that I am the reason my son will kill himself one day.

The cost is in the lies. There have been so many lies told about me that started from one tenuously made allegation and snowballed out to include blatant falsehoods, it's difficult to know where to start.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/lif...-for-speaking-out-online-20170713-gxaa6z.html
 
Just realised something interesting.
I deliberately started a new thread with the title "Why a woman might say "Have you killed any man today..."

I started the new thread in that way because I didn't want to give any more oxygen to what I saw as the "not very nice" title of this thread.

Somehow, that thread has now been subsumed into the pit I was attempting to redirect the conversation away from.

Why ???? Are posters in ASF able to create quite a strikingly nasty titled thread but offering a more even handed approach to the same topic is then thrown into the pit ?
Not cool .
 
basilio said:

I started the new thread in that way because I didn't want to give any more oxygen to what I saw as the "not very nice" title of this thread.

.
Click to expand...

The title was fact basilio.

This woman has issues, trying to mollify her vitriol towards men as some kind of vanguard movement for the betterment of women's causes and is just nonsense. She's milking it for all its worth and fame, rather than facing the fact that the vast majority of men are good people and don't deserve to be maligned constantly by her hate.

Even a schoolchild recognises back peddling when they see it, which is the substance of her article you posted. In days gone by a parent would give their child a hiding for what this essentially is = lying wrapped up as an implausible yarn.
 
Tisme said:
The title was fact basilio.

This woman has issues, trying to mollify her vitriol towards men as some kind of vanguard movement for the betterment of women's causes and is just nonsense. She's milking it for all its worth and fame, rather than facing the fact that the vast majority of men are good people and don't deserve to be maligned constantly by her hate.

Even a schoolchild recognises back peddling when they see it, which is the substance of her article you posted. In days gone by a parent would give their child a hiding for what this essentially is = lying wrapped up as an implausible yarn.
Click to expand...

Ok Lets go Tisme.

You read what she said in explanation of her statement . lets requote to refresh please
... And since uncovering a sardonic joke written in a friend and fellow feminist's copy of my book – a note that wryly asked her if she had "killed any men today" and if not, why not – a note that was a direct hat tip to the relentless accusation made to feminists that we hate men and want them all to die and that our efforts to better the world for everybody are actually just code for wanting to commit widespread manocide; a message that was quite clearly withering satire – the same people who tell me all the ways they'd like to hurt me, or who say nothing as other men tell me those same things too, have been using it as an opportunity to double down on their assertion that it's me who poses the real threat to social order.

There are a few possibilities I can see when a comment like Clementine made is not recognised as a pretty savage satire on the state of the world

1) Person reading the statement have extremely limited understanding of the use of satire and how to recognise it

2) Person sees the the dark satirical point but decides to wilfully disregard it because accusing someone of such an action suits their agenda.

3) Person doesn't actually care why the hell the comment was made and is not interested in finding out. It just makes a useful baseball bat to attack anything and everything the writer says.

4) Your thoughts.

It disappoints me beyond belief that if you read the article I posted you can't/won't acknowledge that the abuse heaped on Clementine Ford and others for just being forthright is unacceptable. Somehow the flippant, dark, satirical response is your focus.

I despised the title of this thread for the reasons I have outlined. I wanted to take the conversation to a more even handed level - like asking why such a comment might be made.

If I had to reiterate the casual/ frustrated/ satirical/ fed up comments all of us hear and say about teenagers, bosses, workers, wankers/students/clients ....... we would quickly recognise none of us have clean hands. I question the venom with which this comment has managed to gain so much mileage.
 
Tisme said:
Not impressed by piffle?
Click to expand...

We all tell our kids not to play with guns even though they think that they are not loaded. People in positions of leadership in various areas should remember that.

I remember the outrage over some TV political advertisements mentioning "targetting" some politicians with a bullseye overlaying the alleged targets. Of course, no one believed the ads were really saying people should be shot, but it just wasn't acceptable even to do it as a joke.

I see no difference between that and what CF did.
 
SirRumpole said:
We all tell our kids not to play with guns even though they think that they are not loaded. People in positions of leadership in various areas should remember that.

I remember the outrage over some TV political advertisements mentioning "targetting" some politicians with a bullseye overlaying the alleged targets. Of course, no one believed the ads were really saying people should be shot, but it just wasn't acceptable even to do it as a joke.

I see no difference between that and what CF did.
Click to expand...

And continues to do as long as there is a fawning audience to encourage her. She's obviously tapped into a rich vein of emotional claptrap that turns otherwise intelligent heads.
 
basilio said:
Ok Lets go Tisme.

You read what she said in explanation of her statement . lets requote to refresh please
... And since uncovering a sardonic joke written in a friend and fellow feminist's copy of my book – a note that wryly asked her if she had "killed any men today" and if not, why not – a note that was a direct hat tip to the relentless accusation made to feminists that we hate men and want them all to die and that our efforts to better the world for everybody are actually just code for wanting to commit widespread manocide; a message that was quite clearly withering satire – the same people who tell me all the ways they'd like to hurt me, or who say nothing as other men tell me those same things too, have been using it as an opportunity to double down on their assertion that it's me who poses the real threat to social order.

There are a few possibilities I can see when a comment like Clementine made is not recognised as a pretty savage satire on the state of the world

1) Person reading the statement have extremely limited understanding of the use of satire and how to recognise it

2) Person sees the the dark satirical point but decides to wilfully disregard it because accusing someone of such an action suits their agenda.

3) Person doesn't actually care why the hell the comment was made and is not interested in finding out. It just makes a useful baseball bat to attack anything and everything the writer says.

4) Your thoughts.

It disappoints me beyond belief that if you read the article I posted you can't/won't acknowledge that the abuse heaped on Clementine Ford and others for just being forthright is unacceptable. Somehow the flippant, dark, satirical response is your focus.

I despised the title of this thread for the reasons I have outlined. I wanted to take the conversation to a more even handed level - like asking why such a comment might be made.

If I had to reiterate the casual/ frustrated/ satirical/ fed up comments all of us hear and say about teenagers, bosses, workers, wankers/students/clients ....... we would quickly recognise none of us have clean hands. I question the venom with which this comment has managed to gain so much mileage.
Click to expand...


The title is what it is basilio. The even handed treatment you desire is such a subjective thing that your crusading for a mentally deranged women cannot and will not be supported by objective people.

We all have our own axes to grind about unfair bias, but we all must resist superimposing our own aggravations onto a convenient vehicle that partially addresses our own situation.

Of course there are ar5eh0les out there that make life a complete misery for women, but how does making ubiquitous slurs at males and encouraging the killing of men equate to sardonic, sarcastic and tongue in cheek banter? There are damaged women out there who would feel justified in knocking the old boy off with just that little push from Her Highness Ford :- and when that happens will you be defensive of that murder (of course I would also argue some of those bastards deserve it)?
 
Oh please Bas....
Clementine gets her hoards of man haters to do her dirty work. Attacking business, MRA's or whoever disagrees with her.
She gives as good as she gets.
Shes into clickbait. Then has a cry.
She's into alternative facts on occasions.
 
Anyone heard anything about the physical aptitude tests being lowered by a significant amount (over half in some cases) in the:
Firefighters.
Army.
Airforce.
Based on gender quotas?
 
Top