394 replies to this topic

[Leeroy]

Been reading all of those posts, not sure if my opinion is of any relevance,

 

but like Casilla said crazies gonna craze,

 

all this shooting and stuff, though have a great impact on the society and directly to the victim, isn't it wrong to use this incident to generalize the general populace, sure some people could be raciest sexist have violence on their mind, they could all be ticking time bombs, however shouldn't we focus on helping or prevent them out instead of blaming what made them do it? 

 

then again hindsight is 20 20...

 

 

 

While I have enjoyed some tweets coming out recently, I have to agree that this killer was not a martyr for misogyny..

 

I'd like to make rambling videos about some hot button issue (maybe global warming or gay marriage) and say that's why I'm going to kill people, and go off on the murderous rampage.

Is that issue going to be the reason I killed people? Hell no, they're going to say on TV how I was a crazy psychopath who killed people just to do it.

 

The fact this his name is being spewed anywhere and everywhere is only going to spur more violence for those who are as crazy as him and want to make everyone know their name.

 

^ i agree the media should stop spewing his name as it would also be hurting the victims families. and it really makes me remind me of Spiderman 2 electro who went crazy with all the media attention? (sorry if its just a movie, hope its relatable)

[luvsmyncis]

The fact this his name is being spewed anywhere and everywhere is only going to spur more violence for those who are as crazy as him and want to make everyone know their name.

Yeah. They like to make it seem like the lunatic has done something extraordinary, when really... we could all kill people if we wanted to, couldn't we? That video you posted earlier has some amazing advice, but the news is just a fucking gossip column now. Over saturation and creating stories. It's kind of like what this thread has become. They say opinions are like assholes, everyone has one, and they all stink. But at least people wear pants to hide their holes. Nothing can be done for our opinions.

[Magical]

The fallout now, regarding the 'guns issue' is likely to be huge. It is not a right of humans to freely own weapons that can be used to kill innocent people. The sheer fact that they are so accessible is a painful disregard. I also don't care about mental health checks for purchasing firearms, which are so easy to evade/fake. It shows the disregard for fellow men, it's not a right and it's not a necessity. Members of society can more than cope without such weapons. This gun culture must stop, and it's an insult to the star-spangled banner, that time and time again, Congress fail to challenge this most important issue. It's disappointing, and of course, heartbreaking.

Yeah. They like to make it seem like the lunatic has done something extraordinary, when really... we could all kill people if we wanted to, couldn't we? That video you posted earlier has some amazing advice, but the news is just a fucking gossip column now. Over saturation and creating stories. It's kind of like what this thread has become. They say opinions are like assholes, everyone has one, and they all stink. But at least people wear pants to hide their holes. Nothing can be done for our opinions.

 

I know!! It is so hard to find fact-based informative affairs. They're all so sensationalist now.

[luvsmyncis]

This gun culture must stop, and it's an insult to the star-spangled banner...

...AND THE ROCKETS' RED GLARE. THE BOMBS BURSTING IN AIR....

[Dan]

Yeah. They like to make it seem like the lunatic has done something extraordinary, when really... we could all kill people if we wanted to, couldn't we? That video you posted earlier has some amazing advice, but the news is just a fucking gossip column now. Over saturation and creating stories. It's kind of like what this thread has become. They say opinions are like assholes, everyone has one, and they all stink. But at least people wear pants to hide their holes. Nothing can be done for our opinions.

 

And there you go, sharing yours

 

 

The fallout now, regarding the 'guns issue' is likely to be huge. It is not a right of humans to freely own weapons that can be used to kill innocent people. The sheer fact that they are so accessible is a painful disregard. I also don't care about mental health checks for purchasing firearms, which are so easy to evade/fake. It shows the disregard for fellow men, it's not a right and it's not a necessity. Members of society can more than cope without such weapons. This gun culture must stop, and it's an insult to the star-spangled banner, that time and time again, Congress fail to challenge this most important issue. It's disappointing, and of course, heartbreaking.

 

100% Agreed.

 

I am proud of my country's low gun crime.

 

 

 

The United Kingdom has one of the lowest rates of gun homicides in the world.^[5] There were 0.04 recorded intentional homicides committed with a firearm per 100,000 inhabitants in 2010. Gun homicides accounted for 2.4% of all homicides in the year 2009.^[

[Bone]

 
Do you have a source for that?
 
An NISVS report in 2010 found that over the course of 12 months there were 1,270,000 female rape victims and 1,267,000 male victims that were forced to penetrate.
 
Wondering why it's not male rape victims? It's because according to the CDC the only was for a woman to commit rape is for her to penetrate someone vaginally, anally, or orally. So a woman forcing a man to penetrate her isnt considered a rapist.
 
(Tables 2.1 and 2.2: http://www.cdc.gov/v...port2010-a.pdf)

 

If we're talking about Tables 2.1 and 2.2 it's more helpful to look at the column for lifetime prevalence, considering the 12 month column doesn't list rape statistics for male victims.

 

18.3% of women and 1.1% of men are raped over their lifetimes. So that settles that.

 

When it comes to other sexual violence, which these tables and the accompanying discussion make clear are not directly comparable to rape, the numbers are closer, but women still face more than men. 44.6% of women face other sexual violence, compared to 22.2%.

 

Are you serious?

 
Out of 2,730 youth victims of staff sexual conduct 92% of them were female staff on male youth. NINETY TWO PERCENT. And you think males don't need to be taught how to protect themselves? Bullshit.
 
Oh btw, 91% of those 2,730 youth victims were male.

(Table 11, http://www.bjs.gov/c...f/svjfry09.pdf)
 

Remember those 1,267,000 male victims that were forced to penetrate? 79.2% of those males reported that the rapist (yes rapists, cuz that's what they are) was female.
 
That means that over that 12 month period, around 40% of rapes were female-on-male.

 

The intention of my post was never to marginalize male rape victims. But I stand my generalization that, when it comes to adult men and women, it is clear which group (generally) more needs to be taught not to rape. 

 

As tragic as sexual abuse of children in prisons is, the statistic you cite doesn't prove that adult men are anywhere near as likely to be victimized as adult women. I would note that the table also says that 91% of adjudicated youth are male, and child sexual abuse isn't necessarily comparable to rape between adults.

 

Like any other decent human being, of course, I believe that all children should be taught to protect themselves from sexual abuse. But an isolated report about an extremely specific circumstance doesn't shed light on the culture of rapea and sexual abuse that women face.

 

Again, the report goes out of its way to distance forced penetration from rape.

 

By what? Making it so that women now hold the authority? If you really want gender equality, then feminism isnt the way to go about it - at least not in the form it's now taken.

 

Equality. That's what feminism is about.

[luvsmyncis]

And there you go, sharing yours

I got no pants for my opinions!

[Magical]

Why shouldn't it be? Anyone who read the manifesto can see that this was a hate crime against women. Yes there are male victims and I'm not sweeping them under the rug but they were killed simply because he saw them as barriers to what he felt entitled to (women's bodies) and he's not alone.

 

I disagree. This was not a hate crime. This hate was not genuine. It was caused by a deeply rooted mental illness that trespassed way beyond the bounds of psychotic. This type of genocide is not the type of sadism as it seems. This manifesto was written by a sick person. Not by a sound of mind hater.

@Dan Yes, and I of mine as well. It's worked in so many other nations - Why can't it be implemented in the US!? The foremost purpose of government is to protect it's citizens - what good is that if they're being massacred?

[Waser Lave]

@Dan Yes, and I of mine as well. It's worked in so many other nations - Why can't it be implemented in the US!? The foremost purpose of government is to protect it's citizens - what good is that if they're being massacred?

 

That particular horse bolted a long time ago...

 

It's pretty obvious that what we really need is total segregation with mating only enabled by way of the glory hole.

[luvsmyncis]

That particular horse bolted a long time ago...

If only we had kept paying your ridiculous taxes. None of this would have happened.

[Dan]

Dan, you're acting ridiculous.

 

You're completely ignoring the fact that the vast majority of rapes, sexual assaults, and murders are perpetrated by men. Men don't need to be taught how to protect themselves from rape, and women don't need (as extensively as men do, at least) to be taught not to rape. To reach equality in a system that is so profoundly skewed against women, it's necessary to fight for women's rights. 

 

 

 

Like any other decent human being, of course, I believe that all children should be taught to protect themselves from sexual abuse. 

 

 

Can you please make up your mind?

[luvsmyncis]

Can you please make up your mind?

Well, I suspect men are different from children.

[Magical]

That particular horse bolted a long time ago...

 

It's pretty obvious that what we really need is total segregation with mating only enabled by way of the glory hole.

 

It's just so simple. What's best for man is best for everyone! It may be laughably simple, but it's the nature of the beast (or horse ).

Well, I suspect men are different from children.

 

Everyman is a child at some point

[Dan]

Well, I suspect men are different from children.

 

But by teaching children... you're also teaching men (future men, at that).

 

Or did @Bone mean that males below the age of 18 should be taught how to protect themselves, but not anyone over the age of 18?

 

(because that's also ludicrous)

[KaibaSama]

 

@Dan Yes, and I of mine as well. It's worked in so many other nations - Why can't it be implemented in the US!? The foremost purpose of government is to protect it's citizens - what good is that if they're being massacred?

2nd amendment.  It was made when people only had guns that took 20 minutes to fire, and now we interpret it wrong as "every American has the right to own a machine gun". That is not what our Founders intended when they wrote that law.

And then there's the NRA, they're a very powerful political group and we all know how much American politicians pander to large groups. Plus, there's the call for "MORE GUNS TO PROTECT OURSELVES!" After one of the school massacres it was suggested, "ARM THE TEACHERS"!

Edited by Satsuki, 27 May 2014 - 07:52 AM.

[Magical]

When it comes to other sexual violence, which these tables and the accompanying discussion make clear are not directly comparable to rape, the numbers are closer, but women still face more than men. 44.6% of women face other sexual violence, compared to 22.2%.

 

Please don't say things like this. Neither of those figures are in any vicinity of the truth. So many cases are inaccurate and unreported. It doesn't settle anything. Statistics are merely a weak way of substantiating a point. It doesn't settle anything. (I've done two units of qualitative measures in my education, and it's academically acknowledged to falsely recognize a population)

[luvsmyncis]

Or did @Bone mean that males below the age of 18 should be taught how to protect themselves, but not anyone over the age of 18?

I do believe the cut off age for the "How Not to Get Raped" course is 'manhood'.

[Dan]

I do believe the cut off age for the "How Not to Get Raped" course is 'manhood'.

 

Oh ok, that totally makes sense, because males can't get raped after manhood.

[Kat]

Unfortunately the gun culture in the US is not going away for a long, long time. Even after Columbine, Virginia Tech, Sandy Hook.... etc. etc. We still have a long way to go. 

[Magical]

2nd amendment.  It was made when people only had guns that took 20 minutes to fire, and now we interpret it wrong as "every American has the right to own a machine gun". That is not what our Founders intended when they wrote that law.

And then there's the NRA, they're a very powerful political group and we all know how much American politicians pander to large groups. Plus, there's the call for "MORE GUNS TO PROTECT OURSELVES!" After one of the school massacres it was suggested, "ARM THE TEACHERS"!

 

Indeed it is!

It's quite contrasting how intentions and meanings have been selfishly manipulated. If we're going to go by law, the amend the 2nd amendment!

[Kat]

Please don't say things like this. Neither of those figures are in any vicinity of the truth. So many cases are inaccurate and unreported. It doesn't settle anything. Statistics are merely a weak way of substantiating a point. It doesn't settle anything. (I've done two units of qualitative measures in my education, and it's academically acknowledged to falsely recognize a population)

 

So what you're saying is it doesn't settle anything right?  It doesn't settle anything. ( I agree with you by the way)

[Magical]

So what you're saying is it doesn't settle anything right?  It doesn't settle anything. ( I agree with you by the way)

 

What do you mean!?! My speed-proof-reading is flawless!!

 

I SORRY! xD

[luvsmyncis]

Oh ok, that totally makes sense, because males can't get raped after manhood.

No no, it's not that. The problem is you can't teach a man anything he doesn't already know.

[KaibaSama]

Indeed it is!

It's quite contrasting how intentions and meanings have been selfishly manipulated. If we're going to go by law, the amend the 2nd amendment!

Congress is not going to amend the bill of rights. Again, too many big groups would be against it, and even some normal people would be against changing the bill of rights. Plus, 3/4 of the states and  2/3 of each part of Congress (House and Senate) would be very, very unlikely to approve that. Same issue with trying to add in another amendment that allows the 2nd to stand, but throws in a bit more restriction. (so you wouldn't have to change the bill of rights).

Edited by Satsuki, 27 May 2014 - 08:04 AM.

[Bone]

Source? (and nothing speculative, please - something proving your claim of "vast majority". 

 

91% of rape/sexual assault victims are female. 99% of offenders are male.(p.2)

 

 

I would pay a lot of money to hear you tell that to a group of men who have been raped.

 

Do you think men are not at danger of rape?

 

I didn't mean for my post to be taken so literally. Again, I don't  think men can't be raped. But what would prevent far more rapes than teaching women (and/or men) how to avoid being raped would be to teach men not to rape, considering they are the perpetrators in 99% of rapes.

 

This is where I just can't bear to read this anymore.

 

Enlighten me - exactly what is your definition of this "patriarchy"?

 

 the societal construct that men should hold authority over women. 

 

That.

 

The fact is that men and women in western, developed nations, are mostly equal - consider the vote, the equality around job opportunities and the mostly equal pay. If an overbearing and controlling "patriarchy" did exist, how would we have ever got to this point?

 

In some cases (although I'm sure you're conditioned to believe otherwise!) women even have more opportunities than men - I suppose this is the "matriarchy", no? 

 

 

Improvements have been made, but men and women are far from equal. This has been discussed at length in the last topic about feminism, so I won't say too much. But as I said earlier, the patriarchy negatively affects men as well, but even when it affords women more opportunities than men, feminists oppose it.

 

The fact remains, however, that the patriarchy overwhelming results in men having more opportunities than women, whether through institutionalized marginalization or deep-seated constructs about gender roles. There is no "matriarchy" because there is not a widely-accepted or institutionalized societal construct that women should hold power over men.

 

Forgive me, but it is just so hard for me to take this seriously when you've made such mistakes as the very obviously quoted portion above. If you do not recognise that men and women share the same risks as far as sexual assault, rape and these other issues go then you need to have a little think about just how equal you claim to want things to be.

 

Men and women do not face the same risks as far as sexual assault and rape. I feel safe walking home at night after having a few drinks.

 

And to those of you repping the posts made by the man-haters, care to step forward and share your thoughts rather than hiding behind the obvious choice? (I thought not)

 

lol man-haters