On Chivalry and Sexual Violence

Amen to that. I believe that abusers suffer from something going on inside of them, thus they hurt others. This is why I take issue with it’s society’s fault or some other external factor as to why people abuse others, is not really going to get abusers to see who they are and work to change. My opinion, abusers rarely change. It’s not impossible but most abusers, especially spousal and child abusers, are narcissistic and those types struggle when it comes to self reflection and actualization.

It’s kind of a cop out to suggest that because society “is on the verge of a nervous breakdown” (whatever that even means), we have abusers. Just my opinion.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Yeah. I think that society plays some role in enabling abusers, and we could do a better job at identifying them earlier and providing strong disincentives - but even in a perfect society we'd see them. A great many of them are born, not made by society.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

That's nice and refreshing.

It appears to many that you are talking about all men, yes.
And no, I'm not defending myself. I have nothing to defend and simply putting an increasing view by both sexes.
https://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/has-metoo-has-gone-too-far-20180116-h0ivul.html

her's another...
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jan/13/has-me-too-catherine-deneuve-laura-kipnis
“If the question is whether #MeToo has gone too far or not far enough, the answer is obviously BOTH. "
That second article seems reasonably balanced and I have no real argument with it

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

And yet you do it so very often . . . . strange.

 

As I have already informed you, I can only relate personal experiences in making a point. None of them involve sexual assault.

 

So, sexual assault is not something that you could empathize with.

 

Is that just a smart arse question? I believe I have made that clear in many posts.

 

Guess I'm correct.

 

Derailing discussions? I see many posts in this thread that could also be accused of derailing considering the thread title is "
"On Chivalry and Sexual Violence"
depending of course in how much of a hard line view one takes.
Again, to make my point, I have given a few examples of false accusations. Do you see this as simply collateral damage with regards to pushing a cause?
Here's another I accidently came across.....
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...elf-after-being-accused-of-rape-a6676611.html
"A teenager killed himself after being accused of rape in an allegation that was withdrawn before it came to court, an inquest has heard."
Do you simply see this as a derailment tactic?
Let me again make myself clear Bells. The murderous arsehole who burnt his wife and kids is not worth considering, and personally I don't give a stuff about his state of mind. The same applies to the crazy Mother who drove her kids into a Dam.
I see nothing wrong in highlighting the two sides of a horrible coin. I don't see that as derailing the just woman's movement for equal rights in all respects.
Then you say

OK, do you have a story involving homosexuals and/or lesbians?
I can't say I have seen too many of later, but I am sure my opinion would not alter and dependent on the facts only.

The author is giving an opinion, one that I believe not to be entirely valid. The women's movement does not need that sort of extremism in my opinion.

 

Understood.

 

OK. You agree that society plays a part in enabling abusers (how big a part?)
but you don't agree that society plays a part in producing abusers.
Would you come as far as agreeing that culture factors into bullying in general?
What about the laws and morality of a country? I mean, would you agree that a country where one groups has significantly ,ore rights than another group is likely to raise more people who feel entitled to oppress other people?
Or that the examples set for children by the adults around them influence their behaviour?

When? How?

What is your source for this? What genetic factor(s) are involved?
If this is true, it's a very big deal! It means that, as with autism or sexual orientation, the subject is not responsible, can't change and that disincentives or punishment are ineffective.
How, then, can they be stopped, other than early identification and life-long imprisonment?
What percent of this 'epidemic' is completely unpreventable? I mean, one in three???

 

Hi Tiassa: Not often we have crossed swords on this forum, but be that as it may, I just left my local club at Bondi Junction, and was waiting at a crossing for the green walk sign. Once it started flashing I dashed across in my usual haste and happened to look back to see a mid to late 60ish something woman, making her way slowly...she had just about entered the middle of the road and the "dont walk" started flashing as a warning for no more to cross. It was obvious this stressed her out as she attempted to hurry with obvious difficulty, when two young blokes around 25ish, grabbed her either side and proceeded to help her complete the crossing. She barely had time to thank them when reaching the footpath when the two lads made their way back to the other side. So still some courtesy and respect left even with the younger brigade. Great to see and if I wasn't in any hurry to get back home, I would've followed them into the club and bought them a schooner each.
Obviously they, both of them were raised and taught well about respect, care and courtesy
Still some hope!

 

Society plays a part in both. Popular media glorifies violence against women; ad campaigns send messages of "be passive and let him come to you" and "present yourself so as to attract men."

Of course.

To which part? Identifying them early? Look for behavior that looks like it will lead to rape (the Kavanaugh case is a good example) and intervene early and strongly.

Several sources. James Cantor identified brain structure differences in pedophiles that seem to separate them from non-pedophiles. "All the evidence suggests that paedophilia begins in the womb. A person does not pick it. And despite every kind of treatment that has been attempted over a century, nothing has been shown to be able to change these people from paedophiles into non-paedophiles."

An Oxford/Karolinska study found that genetic factors are associated with a higher risk of sexual abuse. They found "high quality evidence from a large population study that genetic factors have a substantial influence on an increased risk of being convicted of sexual offences."

I don't think that's true at all. Men also have a genetic predisposition to have sex with women, but they do NOT have a genetic predisposition to ask for consent. But most men manage pretty well even though they have evolved a sex drive that pushes them to have sex.

 

Having gone to a Catholic school for all my schooling up to seondary Intermediate cert, I remember a little book we had entitled Christian Politeness, although obviously it was simply politeness based on normal everyday respect and what you would be expected to be treated like by others. Three of the 30? I think points I remember were always give up your seat to a Lady and the elderly on public transport, Don't antagonize or bully anyone else or anyone less fortunate then yourself, and finally the one point I could never get my laughing gear around and failed to make any sense to me,

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

was always leave the table after a meal, feeling as if you could eat a little bit more.
The first two I remember, certainly still or should hold today.

 

Again in line with the title of the thread.....
https://twentytwowords.com/man-refuses-to-give-up-seat-to-women-because-they-never-do-the-same/
"While traveling on any kind of public transport, it's sort of a given that, if an elderly person or someone with a health issue comes along, you should give up your seat for them. But, should men give up their seats for women?

In the age of feminism, many argue that the age-old idea of "chivalry" has now become more confusing than ever, with men feeling like they don't know whether they can "be the gentleman" by opening doors or offering help to women.

Well, during a national television debate surrounding feminism and chivalry, one man came out and said that he would rather not give up his seat for a woman on public transport because women "never do the same" in return.

The debate was sparked by a tweet posted by American feminist writer, Caroline Rothstein, who refused to let a man help her with her luggage - and the issue has since spread like wildfire.

With so many varying opinions, the debate has become pretty complex, so keep scrolling to unravel this issue and see whose side you're on."
Whose side you're on??? Laughable!!
extract:
"In her piece for Medium, she wrote: “His refusal to enter simply because a woman opened the door was chauvinism at its finest. I had been polite, and he could not accept that courtesy because of an outdated sense of men’s roles.

“Had he arrived at the door first, I would have happily walked through it with a smile and simple thank you.”

Like, c’ mon, politeness is politeness, it seems pretty far fetched to be taking chauvinism so seriously that you won’t even walk through a door because a member of the opposite sex has held it open for you."
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Ahh yes, extremism again, and inane stupidity and yes this time, male chauvinism at its best.

 

OK. What part? Yes, media, particularly entertainments with a heavy content of violence, misogyny and sadism.
Any recommendations regarding that?

Good. So that's another factor we could address through legislation, education and social agencies.

And, again: When? Age 18? 15? 12? 7? Who is qualified to spot the signs? Who is present to do the identifying?
If you're looking for signs of sexual predation, you'll twig too late. The abuser was already a nasty little boy before his testicles descended.

And again, How? Who intervenes, by what means, at which point? What does the intervener actually do? What's the intervener's mandate over the long term?

I didn't think they were in this discussion. I thought it was about battering adult women.

But not all persons sexually attracted to children act on their desire. Something can be done to help a paedophile control/sublimate/suppress his urges before someone gets hurt.

my bold
Here, again, we have the " potential" gap: there is a decision between urge and act.
Increased risk is not a destiny; it simply means everyone is on a scale of 0%-100% probability of doing something. From 11% to 12% is increased risk, and so is 11% to 87%. And even 87% is not yet a certainty. In those gaps, environment, social mores and education can make the difference between happy marriage and burning house.

Eureka!!
Every man is a potential abuser. Yet, 60% do not fulfill that potential.
Equally, every man is a potential gentleman. Yet 30% do not fulfill that potential.
Factors in the environment - other people - encourage one kind of behaviour or another kind of behaviour.
Society has a big, important, decisive part in how the statistics go.

 

Well, how?

 

A shame James that moderators and administrators cannot also be permanently banned James, because all that happened was that I gave as good as I got, after being labelled unjustly. I'm also rather surprised you would raise that issue considering our lengthy PM exchange. But hey, we are of topic are we not?

Have you read all my posts James? Sure some examples are of my own respectful behaviour. Others are not. What do you really object to James?

It's not about me James. It's simply about a general feeling that does appear to be getting bigger and bigger in society, with the view that many men and women are seeing an excessive, over the top movement in the feminist cause.
That isn't doing them any good.
That's my opinion James and based on standards that are universally accepted today. When those standards change to what you and some others may perceive, that they should be [I don't believe that will happen by the way] then perhaps I'll start rethinking my position.
I'm a decent law abiding human being James, respectful of other men and women, just as I assume you are. Don't call me a rapist, or infer that I'm a rapist, or sexual assaulter, and my posts will remain respectful.