|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
posted September 07, 2014 08:26 PM |
|
|
barcelonians fed up with nude shoppers. apparently, it is the nude tourists at fault here.
now, you might question WHY there would be nude shopping allowed in the first place. and, you might google to find out why. i cannot post the link, because it leads to nudity, but, to make a long story short, companies in barcelona are promoting this. you come in nude, you get free designer clothes.
so, barcelonians, WHO is at fault here? the tourists, or the company(ies) holding these nude sales?
|
|
Sandman
Known Hero
Fearsome Warrior
|
|
posted September 08, 2014 12:37 PM |
|
|
Who wouldn't want to shop nude - its the future 
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted September 08, 2014 12:53 PM |
|
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted September 08, 2014 02:19 PM |
|
|
You can shop nude any time you want.... at Amazon.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
Trogdor
Legendary Hero
Words in a custom title
|
|
posted September 08, 2014 02:33 PM |
|
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted September 09, 2014 11:15 PM |
|
|
since my feminism thread is locked, as well as the other one, i'll post this here. because, wtf.
female-only transport in cities around the world. how this is not sexist, and being rallied against, i don't know. i guess, the average family-concerned/overprotective male might see pure female transport as a good thing(meaning their female loved ones can be less prone to being felt-up), but i still don't see how this is a good thing. if there was an all-male transport, there'd be an outcry of sexism. same thing if there was all-white, all-black, etc.
how these kinds of things continue to be allowed, in order to further seperate people from one another, only shows how immature people really are. not that there isn't crime against certain genders, or races, but come on. come on, people. wtf. stop the goddamn segregation bull****.
|
|
meroe
Supreme Hero
Basically Smurfette
|
|
posted September 09, 2014 11:59 PM |
|
|
I get what you are saying Fredfro, but unfortunately you have missed the mark again. These 'female only' carriages/services haven't come about because some women want their own carriage. Its arisen because women are not safe on public transport. I mean, if you read the article it mentions certain countries that have an appalling attitude towards women and those poor mares can't set foot outside their doors without some kind of harassment. It is that frickin dangerous.
There is a real risk hailing taxis as a female on your own. And that is why these services come about. I'm afraid its more about protecting people from rape/sexual assault than sexism.
Understand this though, all us gals want to do is to get on the bus/subway etc and get to work. We don't want the mauling and guys copping a feel. Jeepers that can't be hard to understand? Not to mention the sexual assault and worse. So until we can have that freedom, these segregated buses/carriages might be the only damn way forward.
____________
Meroe is definetely out, sweet
as she sounds sometimes, she'd
definetely castrate you with a
rusted razror and forcefeed
your genitals to you in a
blink of an eye - Kipshasz
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted September 10, 2014 12:02 AM |
|
Edited by fred79 at 00:11, 10 Sep 2014.
|
if it's such a risk, have a weapon on you. they make weapons specifically for women who want to protect themselves. and they can be used by anyone. which means that THAT isn't sexist. besides, the city in the link is New York. it's not exactly a city in the middle east.
lol, or Japan. Japan actually has a type of porn dedicated to being felt up in public areas. 
|
|
meroe
Supreme Hero
Basically Smurfette
|
|
posted September 10, 2014 12:19 AM |
|
Edited by meroe at 00:20, 10 Sep 2014.
|
What carry a gun? So what, now all women can't only leave the safety of their homes unless they are armed?? That is nuts. In fact that is frickin crazy. So what people are not allowed to just live now? We have to arm ourselves just in case other people want to break the law and harm us?
You do realize that most of us don't actually want to live our lives that paranoid?
But just like all the other conversations we have had about this subject, you just cannot understand the predicament. And because of that, the blinkers go on and you refuse to believe there is a genuine problem. And you start taking everything so personally the conversation becomes side tracked.
Oh and btw regarding arming ourselves for protection against rapists and sexual predators. Do we give guns and knives to our daughters too? You know, on their way to school they could get accosted by a paedophile or a nasty man who wants to show them his penis. I guess risking our kids lives in handling a gun makes sense huh? Must do, a gun is better than a female only carriage on the subway .... right.
EDIT:
Regarding Japan, women have a real problem on the transport system. That isn't a damn joke.
____________
Meroe is definetely out, sweet
as she sounds sometimes, she'd
definetely castrate you with a
rusted razror and forcefeed
your genitals to you in a
blink of an eye - Kipshasz
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted September 10, 2014 01:50 AM |
|
|
all i'm saying, is that it's sexist, meroe. you don't fight a problem by creating another one. that's avoiding the issue. and, i didn't say, gun. because in New York, the common person isn't allowed to carry a firearm(which is another issue entirely).
you don't think that the groping problem might be solved by a stun gun to the balls? or some chemical dye mace? try going to a meeting with your face covered in red dye. or how about even a bullhorn, or screaming, "STOP snowING TOUCHING ME, YOU GODDAMN CREEP!" or gouging eyes. or grabbing the balls and twisting. any of those things would be seen as understandable, if someone was being groped.
no, people don't think about that. their only concern is being embarrassed. kinda shallow, if you ask me. i say, brutalize the people doing it. don't HIDE from it by taking a sexist way out. that's sweeping the real issue under the carpet, instead of dealing with it, face to face.
|
|
bloodsucker
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted September 10, 2014 02:06 AM |
|
|
Regarding female only transportation I would just say is still "teaching women to avoid rape instead of teaching men not to rape"...
I believe if we change the criminal system just a bit here things would go somethly.
I know it is hard to prove rape but if when proved the penalty was something like being publicly sodomized with a large iron object and have images of the humiliation published in the internet the number of sex offenders would decrease fast. 
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted September 10, 2014 02:47 AM |
|
|
..Yeah, sodomizing him publicly until his man-pudding ejaculates down along his stomach hair!
I never liked the idea of committing a crime with the excuse that it prevents a crime. I'll go as far as saying that doing so is being guilty of letting the same feelings run off that may also lead to the very crime which we wish to prevent.
Sodomizing someone against their will is rape. Hence the same thought processes applies to this instant as well.
Of course there are people who're deterred by punishment, but I do not think it solves the matter entirely. Some do act without considering the consequences, and to be honest, when it comes to any kind of violence, I'd like to think that goes for the majority.
With which I mean that I hope we're not simply calculating machines who do whatever we feel like unless some leash is upon us.
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
meroe
Supreme Hero
Basically Smurfette
|
|
posted September 10, 2014 02:51 AM |
|
Edited by meroe at 02:52, 10 Sep 2014.
|
fred79 said:
all i'm saying, is that it's sexist, meroe. you don't fight a problem by creating another one. that's avoiding the issue. and, i didn't say, gun. because in New York, the common person isn't allowed to carry a firearm(which is another issue entirely).
you don't think that the groping problem might be solved by a stun gun to the balls? or some chemical dye mace? try going to a meeting with your face covered in red dye. or how about even a bullhorn, or screaming, "STOP snowING TOUCHING ME, YOU GODDAMN CREEP!" or gouging eyes. or grabbing the balls and twisting. any of those things would be seen as understandable, if someone was being groped.
no, people don't think about that. their only concern is being embarrassed. kinda shallow, if you ask me. i say, brutalize the people doing it. don't HIDE from it by taking a sexist way out. that's sweeping the real issue under the carpet, instead of dealing with it, face to face.
What do you mean, its creating another problem? What problem?
So the next time I'm using the subway/tube/metro and someone puts his hands over my chest, I will just zap in their general direction shall I?? I mean forget the fact that sometimes you have no idea who is responsible for the 'wandering hands'. Just mete out justice in all directions should I? Men, women and children.
I mean we can shout out all we want, but when you are packed in like sardines, it can, sometimes, be practically impossible to find the perpetrator. You know, you've fought your way through the bodies to get close to the door to get out at your station and everyone is pressing against everyone else and someone is stroking your behind. Shouting out is about the only thing we can do. However, shouting out and using stun guns doesn't much help if its a group of guys.
Anyway regardless of all the above. Why the hell can't women just be able to travel around unmolested? Huh. Talk of arming women or encouraging them to "shout out" is like putting a Band Aid on a gunshot wound. It aint gonna fix nothing. If it was the other way around and sweaty woman were groping you guys and sexually assaulting you on your way to and from work, or raping you in a taxi after a night out with your friends - you'd be demanding safe travel too. (FYI, no not all women get raped by taxi drivers - but the statistics are there, it happens).
Take the blinkers off and start to realize that this isn't sexist - its just a damn shame that women have to go through all this rigmarole just to get around in one piece.
Subnote:- Getting groped isn't like a slap on the behind, or a guy running his hands over you. Sometimes its vicious, yanking and pulling, leaving you bruised and hurt. And much much worse.
Oh and the sexist way out - is to not do anything about it.
____________
Meroe is definetely out, sweet
as she sounds sometimes, she'd
definetely castrate you with a
rusted razror and forcefeed
your genitals to you in a
blink of an eye - Kipshasz
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted September 10, 2014 03:53 AM |
|
|
so, being sexist is ok, in order to fight criminality? and, what about the boys? screw them, right? they have to fend for themselves, obviously. 
no, it won't be easy in a crowd to make out the perpetrator, but if you're yelling at the top of your lungs "GET YOUR HAND OFF MY ASS!", i'm pretty sure they'll get the message. no, women will silently take it, instead of speaking up about it. it's avoiding the issue entirely. it's not SOLVING it. and, it's SEXIST to have female-only transport.
believe me, i'm well aware, that this kind of transport would only happen because the groping thing might be rampant. i took that into consideration first and foremost. every time i see an issue, i think about what might have created it(because i like to find the core of what's wrong). but using sexism to fight groping, isn't going to stop groping. if the ass-clowns can't do it by bus or train, they'll do it at the office. and what then? female-only workplaces? a female cannot LIVE in a female-only world. they have to face the jackasses, just like everyone has to face anything they want to fix. doing whatever one can to avoid an issue, isn't going to solve the problem. THAT'S putting a band-aid on a bullet wound, meroe.
|
|
meroe
Supreme Hero
Basically Smurfette
|
|
posted September 10, 2014 01:54 PM |
|
|
Fred, its not sexist if because of the high number of sexual crimes against women whilst using public transport means that we have to have 'female only' carriages etc. What it is is a sad indictment of the way some men behave towards women. If its sexist, its because some men cannot control themselves. So stop trying to turn this into some kind of sexist game. It isn't. Its sad. Its disappointing - that even in free first world countries, some men still have to act in such a predatory and vile way towards women.
And then trying to put the onus of responsibility upon the victims is typically sexist. "We don't need to change anything, its up to you (the victim) to fight more, or shout out more". Its like some archaic Old Testament ruling that "if the woman does not fight her rapist or call out, means she wants it and should be stoned to death for adultery etc". No the onus of responsibility is not on women here, its on men - and to combat this problem the transport companies have realized that they (unfortunately) may need to provide safer transport for women ..... because men can't be trusted.
It isn't a case for 'a female only world'. That is a typical blinkered, knee-jerk 'Men's Rights Movement' rally cry whenever things like this come up. No woman is advocating a 'female only' world. That is just dumb. Honestly *facepalm*.
You know, when a situation arises like this and the transport system realizes there is a serious issue regarding the safety of a huge percentage of people whilst using the their system - they have to take action because its negligent if they don't. Its Health & Safety for crying out loud. If they didn't put up handrails on stairs and 25% of people were falling and injuring themselves - there would be an outcry for frickin handrails.
So until there is either a guard in every carriage or police presence etc etc etc, or men get it in their heads that a woman's body is not just there for them to do what they want with and that it isn't all just a bit of fun - this is the answer that these companies have arrived at. At least they are trying to do something about it. According to you though, we should just have some posters up encouraging victims to take responsibility for 'causing' the incident, by shouting out more, because surely it can't be that bad, right? Just the girlies kicking up a stink. Its only a bit of fun, right? Female only carriages have purely only come about because a couple of women made a few complaints right? I mean, surely this isn't some well thought out solution to a particularly pernicious and surreptitious crime, by the companies who run these public services. Nah its just easier to blame the victims again. Especially when they are women and its a sexual crime.
"She wouldn't have been raped if she wasn't wearing a short skirt". "She was drunk, she was asking for it". "She was asking for trouble wearing that outfit". Lets just blame the victim for the crime.
I mean wouldn't it be interesting if women were to paw and grope and sexually assault guys with the same excuses. "He was topless, he was asking for it". "He didn't fight me off, he wanted it". "He was dressed like a snow, he wanted the attention". "Yes he was drunk, but he agreed to it". Predatory women driving taxis, raping drunk helpless guys while driving him home. Or predatory women yanking men's privates whilst being crammed onto a train, causing injury. Or a group of women surrounding a guy and pawing him, leaving him terrified.
I remember when Anti posted that vid of the woman humiliating the young boy on the bus. Everyone was very vocal about that. Yet somehow when its the other way around, its just a woman problem.
____________
Meroe is definetely out, sweet
as she sounds sometimes, she'd
definetely castrate you with a
rusted razror and forcefeed
your genitals to you in a
blink of an eye - Kipshasz
|
|
Trogdor
Legendary Hero
Words in a custom title
|
|
posted September 10, 2014 02:24 PM |
|
|
fred79 said:
if it's such a risk, have a weapon on you. they make weapons specifically for women who want to protect themselves. and they can be used by anyone. which means that THAT isn't sexist.
Not all places would allow for anyone to carry a weapon in self defence, although hand-to-hand combat would be an exception.
Also, if women wanted to feel safer on public transport in the presence of men, have the perpetrator get kicked off. Everyone would be safer, not just the women.
[quote name=fred79]besides, the city in the link is New York. it's not exactly a city in the middle east.
Although here in Australia, you're more likely to be harassed on public transport because of your ethnicity.
fred79 said:
lol, or Japan. Japan actually has a type of porn dedicated to being felt up in public areas.
Best we not mention any more about what the Japanese consider "pornography". Being felt up in public barely scratches the surface.
____________
"Through the power of the dollar you can communicate with the dead." - Artu
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted September 10, 2014 07:10 PM |
|
|
@ meroe: ok. you're clearly not even trying to see my point; and moreover, you keep turning the sexism around on me. like I'M somehow sympathizing with the gropers. i've made it QUITE clear, where i stand. because i think people should stand up for themselves, though, somehow, i'm sexist. no, i should coddle this kind of behavior, right? wrong. **** that.
the reactionary behavior on female public transport due to groping, is just as sad as what's causing it. but that's the way of the world, i guess. people keep avoiding the cause, and find ways around it, instead of dealing directly WITH it. 
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted September 10, 2014 08:33 PM |
|
|
I gotta agree with Fred. Your discussion style is rather combative @meroe. So while I think you've a very good and important point, it's not very cool that you make Fred look like some kind of a villain in the process.
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
meroe
Supreme Hero
Basically Smurfette
|
|
posted September 10, 2014 11:45 PM |
|
Edited by meroe at 23:47, 10 Sep 2014.
|
Freddums and myself always get combative with each other. We're like an old married couple. "I hate you!". "I hated you first, you lazy old sod". "I can't stand the sight of you, woman". "That's right, drink yourself to death!! See if I care". "Leave me be, you nagging harridan". "My mother warned me about marrying you. I should have listened to her". "Yes!!! Why the hell didn't you!?!". Etc etc etc.
I know that Freddles isn't a bad guy and that he means well. I just want to kick him in the a$$ sometimes 
However, the issue is this:-
As a society, we have discovered that a high proportion of females are sexually harassed (or worse) whilst using public transport. So what do we do?
Do we - employ a private police force to be present at every station, or in every carriage/bus etc as a deterent;
Do we - have a 'female only' section for those females who feel vulnerable or have had problems before. A place to travel without fear of assault;
Or do we do nothing. See No Evil, Hear No Evil, Speak No Evil.
However, what has creamed my corn is why put the onus onto the victim? What kind of action is that? Its victim blaming. And part of this thinking comes from the fact that most guys don't get it. They don't understand what its like, because luckily you don't get to experience it. Its not always some guy rubbing his erection against you, or a quick feel up. Stop thinking that is all it is. Start understanding its assaults/rapes like a guy forcing a 14 year old on her way home from school to felate him on a deserted subway station. That's no joke. What if she was your daughter, or your sister/mother/girlfriend/wife? Would that change your attitude?
You think that young girl is going to, what, fight the guy(s) off?? Shout??? She is more than likely going to be frozen with fear. Actually frozen, paralyzed. She's not going to suddenly turn into Gina Carano and kick box the guy into a pulp.
So what I take issue with his Fred's assumption that providing a safer way for women to travel around is sexist. That seems incredibly narrow-minded to me. Especially when its blindingly obvious something needs to be done to protect people.
In an ideal world we should all be able to use the facilities without fear of violence. However, sadly and pathetically we are still far away from that dream. But pretending we don't need to take action to protect people in certain situations because having to admit that there are still men out there who cannot behave themselves around women is insulting to other men.
So by Fred's logic - we don't need to do anything to protect women because they should just fight back against their assailants. Problem solved.
http://nextcity.org/daily/entry/in-aftermath-of-fatal-bus-rape-in-india-l.a.-woman-calls-for-safer-transit
EDIT:
FYI, just because I am female does not mean I have no right to get as as combative as any man.
____________
Meroe is definetely out, sweet
as she sounds sometimes, she'd
definetely castrate you with a
rusted razror and forcefeed
your genitals to you in a
blink of an eye - Kipshasz
|
|
fred79
Disgraceful
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted September 11, 2014 12:17 AM |
|
Edited by fred79 at 00:20, 11 Sep 2014.
|
i wasn't getting combative with you, meroe. i was making it a point, that women should be getting combative with the men who **** with them, and you turned that into getting combative with ME(someone who is on the side of equality, remember?).
going a different route, isn't going to get the message across to the ass****s. they're just going to laugh about it. and, they'll find other ways to be ass****s towards women. if you don't see that, i don't know what to tell you. bottom line is, RE-segregation ISN'T the answer.
correct me if i'm wrong, but i thought segregation was a bad thing. didn't many countries GET RID of that? and WHY would they do such a thing?
more to the point, why use something that was fought against by women, to now protect women? you don't see the hypocrisy and backwards thinking in that? it's like they're saying that segregation was RIGHT to begin with.
that's like saying, that the muslims have a point. and we know where THEY stand on female equality...
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
