Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Members
Stats
  • Total Posts: 5,559,171
  • Total Topics: 106,348
  • Online Today: 719
  • Online Ever: 3,311
  • (July 08, 2021, 03:14:41 AM)
Users Online
Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 29, 2024, 02:03:15 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Suzanne Moore quits The Guardian [split topic]

Started by Sebastian Cobb, November 16, 2020, 07:43:55 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

TrenterPercenter

Quote from: Jumblegraws on December 09, 2020, 07:35:06 PM
It's precisely what you said. If there's an effective right that men are able to commit a crime to with high levels of impunity that women cannot, that is a right held by men whether they commit rape or not. The fact that men will experience trauma if a female friend or relative is rape is just not a complicating fact in this state of affairs.

It is precisely what I said?!

I was actually making a completely different point to what you are saying;

I'm not talking about rights; i'm talking about a perceived benefit from the outside that impunity from rape is of "universal benefit to men" when the men that are attached to victims of rape would not benefit from a rapists impunity.

Nothing at all to do with rights, nothing at all to do with whether considering whether victims trauma is less (in some bizarre trauma olympics), just a plain simple fact that the incredibly shit thing of low rates of prosecution for rape are not beneficial to people whose partners are victims of rape and they can be men.  Saying impunity to rape is beneficial to that person would be an extremely nasty thing to say to someone.

It isn't complicating the state of affairs it's the whole fucking point of what I was saying; it just isn't the weird argument (which has required you to put loads of things in like rights and stuff.......and which I agree with btw) you are making.

TrenterPercenter

Quote from: Johnny Yesno on December 09, 2020, 07:35:57 PM
I don't think the issue of 'balance' is the point Trenter is making. I think it's simply that the 'advantage' of getting away with a serious crime isn't actually an advantage at all. I think a better counterargument is surely that being less likely to be a victim of that crime is an advantage.

Yes i'm not seeing this as some kind of men's rights/woman's rights seesaw.

Being less likely to be victim of that crime is a universally advantage and benefit.  I wouldn't make an argument against it, I can't see how any man could not universally benefit from not being a victim.

Johnny Yesno

I suppose the question is whether differentiating wanting to be able to commit crimes with equal impunity and wanting to avoid being a victim equally is trivially true.

On the face of it, I'd say that it is. However, there is a neoliberal wing in feminism that would be satisfied with equality of opportunity to shit on one's fellow man. For that is the neoliberal solution to everything.

king_tubby


Consignia

Quote from: king_tubby on December 09, 2020, 08:56:11 PM
https://twitter.com/suzanne_moore/status/1336424114664464387

I bet she does, the dirty old bollocks.

That is most boring pedestrian opinion one can have about Masterchef. "Ughh these pommes soufflées are complicated, why not just make a plate of oven chips?" There's even a plethora of cooking shows out there, that cater for simpler home cooking needs if that's what you want.

I'm surprised with such dull opinions that luvvies rallied around her when flounced out of The Graun. Or maybe I'm really not.

Johnny Yesno

It's especially lame since Nigella bigged-up Ash Sarkar's mum's fish finger borta recipe.

idunnosomename

Quote from: king_tubby on December 09, 2020, 08:56:11 PM
https://twitter.com/suzanne_moore/status/1336424114664464387

I bet she does, the dirty old bollocks.
Jay Rayner does a good ol' scoff. oh Suzanne! you crazy pungent bird's nest of a person who has a blue tick like me!

Jumblegraws

Quote from: TrenterPercenter on December 09, 2020, 07:53:14 PM
It is precisely what I said?!

I was actually making a completely different point to what you are saying;

I'm not talking about rights; i'm talking about a perceived benefit from the outside that impunity from rape is of "universal benefit to men" when the men that are attached to victims of rape would not benefit from a rapists impunity.

Nothing at all to do with rights, nothing at all to do with whether considering whether victims trauma is less (in some bizarre trauma olympics), just a plain simple fact that the incredibly shit thing of low rates of prosecution for rape are not beneficial to people whose partners are victims of rape and they can be men.  Saying impunity to rape is beneficial to that person would be an extremely nasty thing to say to someone.

It isn't complicating the state of affairs it's the whole fucking point of what I was saying; it just isn't the weird argument (which has required you to put loads of things in like rights and stuff.......and which I agree with btw) you are making.
Define "benefit" in this context

Urinal Cake

This is like an old joke too circa 2010. Much like pretending not to understand transgender rights. Woman is stuck in a time loop.


Buelligan

Ah, the three-headed dog at the gates of the underworld...

idunnosomename

oh i suppose Cerberus wants to be referred to by multiple genders now!!! you couldnt make it up.

Poobum

Quote from: idunnosomename on December 09, 2020, 09:56:54 PM


Last time I checked, I had a cervix, it's where I like to keep my cervical vertebra. I mean if you're going to do a "It's basic biology, cuh!" take, then maybe get the basic biology bit down.

chveik


dissolute ocelot

Quote from: Johnny Yesno on December 09, 2020, 07:35:57 PM
I don't think the issue of 'balance' is the point Trenter is making. I think it's simply that the 'advantage' of getting away with a serious crime isn't actually an advantage at all. I think a better counterargument is surely that being less likely to be a victim of that crime is an advantage.
The prevalence of rape and the likelihood of getting away with it and the stigma attached to it (including women still having their sexual histories questioned) all make it easier for men to pressure women into sex short of rape or generally into "being a good sport" (benefit to men), as well as making it harder for women to walk outdoors at night, go places alone, etc (disbenefit to women). The notion that rape just affects people who're actually raped with no other social consequence is totally wrong.

Menu

Quote from: king_tubby on December 09, 2020, 08:56:11 PM
https://twitter.com/suzanne_moore/status/1336424114664464387

I bet she does, the dirty old bollocks.

Reverend Richard Coles underneath with one of his 'quips'. Ugh I hate him. He's like a religious Richard Osman. Everyone else seems to fucking love him.

Menu


Kankurette

Quote from: TrenterPercenter on December 09, 2020, 07:20:04 PM
My point was discuss these things further but based on things PGC chose - my overall point is that things are more complicated than the blanket idea that all men benefit from all assumed male benefits in society (of which there are many) for example taking one PGC said; better prosecution rates for rape are not "beneficial" for men universally, they are beneficial for rapists; how is it beneficial to a man whose wife, daughter or mother is raped and the perpetrator not prosecuted?
Bit of a difference between being raped and someone close to you being raped, bucko. I'd say the wife/mother/daughter has it worse.

This is exactly why a lot of feminists find talking to men exhausting. We bring up DV and the fact that most of it is men on women and men will bring out the whataboutery, or try to turn the discussion to male suicide rates or trans/disabled/gay/black men or how the patriarchy hurts them too. We KNOW it hurts you. WE KNOW. It's like if I tried to hijack a conversation about racism by going on about how white people have it hard too.

And yes, I did feel like I was being told to shut up tbh.

TrenterPercenter

Sorry Kankurette I really didn't mean it to come across as telling you to shut up.

I haven't said anything that suggests the partner has it worse.  Someone just decided to say that I did.  I said several times since I never said that and I don't agree with it. And I should know.

Im going to shut up myself now. All the best.

evilcommiedictator

It's all good she's being cancelled on BBC Newsnight, it'll all be fine*

JaDanketies

Quote from: TrenterPercenter on December 10, 2020, 10:54:08 PM
Sorry Kankurette I really didn't mean it to come across as telling you to shut up.

I haven't said anything that suggests the partner has it worse.  Someone just decided to say that I did.  I said several times since I never said that and I don't agree with it. And I should know.

Im going to shut up myself now. All the best.

I find sometimes that people misrepresent any statement that is made to suggest it's not men vs women, or that societal expectations are harmful to men, or that all men aren't shits. I'm not saying that your detractors disagree with any of the previous statements, but there's kind of an expectation that whoever is arguing from a pro-male or defensive POV is a massive shithead and the worst example of an MRA.

So, for instance, Kankurette believes you claimed men have it worse when it comes to rape, because you said that men have wives, mothers, sisters and daughters, and she now says it is frustrating to talk to men about it. This is clearly a misrepresentation of your views, again falling back into my belief that people think rights and respect is a zero-sum game, and if you say that rape affects men too, then you must be claiming that it does not affect women so badly. Like there's some trade-off between sympathising with men who have been raped or whose loved ones have been raped, and sympathising with women who have been raped.

I don't think there's much room for discourse in this area when the conversations always end up like this. It's a dead-end, and it leads to Kankurette being annoyed because she thinks you're belittling female rape victims, and you being annoyed because you feel like you've been misrepresented. And at every juncture in the argument, someone has got to say, "hold up, that's not what I said," because there's this overwhelming need for people to view it as a zero-sum game. 

Quote from: evilcommiedictator on December 11, 2020, 03:13:03 AM
It's all good she's being cancelled on BBC Newsnight, it'll all be fine*

Suzanne Moore was indeed on Newsnight yesterday talking terfness but I switched it over rapidly. Do they ever have any pro-trans people on Newsnight?

jobotic

You know Kankurette can read what you're writing, don't you?

GoblinAhFuckScary


Shoulders?-Stomach!

QuoteI don't think there's much room for discourse in this area when the conversations always end up like this.

It's pretty sad isn't it? People* seem less and less equipped to debate, think critically, and default to assuming good faith/reasonable motivation. There is even a creeping problem with people simply not reading the entirety of a post (which, to be fair, is pretty tempting at times) and missing the various caveats, clauses and mitigations that are designed to encourage civility and ward off misinterpretations.

*just to head this off at the pass, I do not directly or indirectly  mean anyone involved in this thread.

idunnosomename

I am totally in support of the guardians attempts to sideline and silence Suzanne Moore, but unfortunately they appear to have had the opposite effect

JaDanketies

Quote from: jobotic on December 11, 2020, 11:56:29 AM
You know Kankurette can read what you're writing, don't you?

Yeah, and they said:

Quote from: Kankurette on December 10, 2020, 10:36:49 PM
Bit of a difference between being raped and someone close to you being raped, bucko. I'd say the wife/mother/daughter has it worse.

To assume that any reasonable and sane person thinks that it is just as painful and difficult to love someone who gets raped as it is to actually be raped is ridiculous. Maybe they were just doing rhetoric but it would be galling to be painted as someone so dunderheaded as to need that clarifying, or to be painted as someone so much of an MRA as to be so blind to the trauma of rape. The conversation just becomes someone assuming the worst of their 'opponent' and then their 'opponent' trying to defend or clarify themselves against offensive misinterpretations.

And yeah Kankurette can see this and if they want to explain why they thought TrenterPercenter thinks it's worse to know someone who gets raped than to be raped yourself, then they're free to. But from my perspective, it looks like an offensive misrepresentation. TrenterPercenter has always seemed to me to be patient and insightful in their posts and is not the kind of moron who would think what Kankurette alleged they think. If such a moron even exists on this Earth.

If I was to clarify what I believe TrenterPercenter is saying, I'd say to the men in this thread - is the low prosecution rate for rape beneficial to you, personally? If so, you must be a rapist. The only men who the low prosecution rate helps is rapists. It is harmful for other men, who have a stake in society and are therefore interested in rape being prosecuted. Some rebuttals have dealt with this point, but many seem to be deliberately misconstruing it.



Blue Jam

Quote from: idunnosomename on December 09, 2020, 10:20:16 PM
oh i suppose Cerberus wants to be referred to by multiple genders now!!! you couldnt make it up.

Cervixberus

buttgammon

Newsnight has real form with this. Is it fair to assume there are some known terves working on the programme?