On Chivalry and Sexual Violence

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by Tiassa, Jan 9, 2020.

  1. Jeeves Valued Senior Member

    Yee-es... Unless he figures that entitles him to being waited-on and deferred-to and serviced.
    I have known men who took that kind of attitude to assigned roles: I do man's work so I should have my way.
    There are no men's and women's tasks - there's just work needs to get done by whoever is competent to do it.
    I suspect most women would rather take out the garbage than lose their autonomy. ... or even have a casual acquaintance walk into the house and go kidnapping their bin when it's not even collection week. (Anyway, garbage is kids' work!!!)
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. Bells Staff Member

    How do you know who is the evil bastard? Do you expect them to self identify?

    This notion that rapists have to fit into a certain mould is dangerous and places the onus of identifying a rapist on the victim.


    Woman says no. You push until she says yes.

    'Cos that's how you roll.. You know more about what she needs and wants than she does.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. billvon Valued Senior Member

    What is the "real hardline over the top stance?" Is it different than:

    "I see any forced rape or any assault by any person as evil."

    And what is non-forced rape?
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Exactly. "But he was such a nice guy, so we didn't think he could ever do that." (Or "so we didn't make him attend the sexual harassment training" or "so we never talked to him about consent" or "so it was probably just a misunderstanding.") A lot of harm can come from that line of thinking.
  8. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    The real hardline stance as I see it, and as many, both male and female are now seeing it, is the total ignoring of the fact that this whole thing is a two sided coin, and the apparent scene at this time to attempt to sweep the other side of the coin under the carpet, and make it taboo to discuss. But guess what? It does exist. In other words while we certainly have male chauvinist pigs, assaulters and criminals we also have female chauvinist pigs, assaulters and criminals.
    Again no denial from me [just in case someone feels like mentioning it or claims that I'm ignoring it] that in most cases, it is the male at fault. That of course does not excuse the other side of the coin.
    My mistake re "forced rape" obviously all rape is forced.
  9. billvon Valued Senior Member

    I don't think it's taboo to discuss at all; it's just rare.
  10. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    I did answer that last time you raised it....
    Weinstein being both meaning, both male and a rapist/assaulter/sexist.

    What I have said
    So to answer your question or accusation, as a younger man I pushed until I was given an indication of NO, STOP or any displeasure. Now of course being happily married for 42 years, those situations are not sought after nor do they present themselves.
  11. wegs Matter & Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    I stumbled upon a thread on reddit one day recently, discussing the Weinstein case, and quite a few guys were going on about how many women have ''rape fantasies.'' The conversation quickly devolved into men and women going back and forth - men basically telling women what they ''truly want and desire.'' There were a few women who posted that they like being ''dominated,'' and I don't see an issue with that, if it's understood between two consenting adults in a sexual relationship. But, most of the women denied finding the idea of rape being a turn on (me included), because rape isn't about sex, it's about power. Who has the power? Who has control over the situation? Those are the motives behind rape - control, power, degradation, humiliation, etc.

    Rape is not about sex, it's about gaining power and control through sex. It's not some fun fantasy play like BDSM, and it irks me that many men think because a woman enjoys role playing, she must have ''rape fantasies.'' This is likely why most rapists say ''she wanted it.'' Weinstein is still barking ''I didn't rape anyone or sexually assault anyone!'' In his mind, they all wanted it.
  12. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Not sure if rare is an appropriate word, certainly no where near as frequent as when a male is at fault. I gave you one instant re a NRL footballer, and the woman driving her three [or was it four, I forget] into a river or dam. I can search for a link if you require it. And just yesterday inbetween answering you and listening to the news, we had the following....
    "Roxy Jacenko has fled in tears from a court after a bombshell decision rejected her AVO order and described her evidence as “hollow and unimpressive” and “grossly exaggerated”.

    The PR maven waited until Magistrate Allison Hawkins had finished her damning judgment rejecting Jacenko had any real fears from Instagram posts and abusive graffiti, then ran crying from the Downing Centre court leaving behind her entourage of lawyers and supporters."
    "A young woman has been arrested after allegedly setting her own home on fire with a candle following an argument with her partner in Sydney’s north last night."

    Again billvon, I do know that such incidents are "rarer then when a male is at fault, but they are just as distasteful and wrong.
    Some men have had their marriages ended, and lost their jobs because of false accusations.
    None of that compares with the arshole that burnt alive his three children and wife admittedly, and as I already have said, at least in my country, that single terrible incident, alone has awoken this country to the scourge of domestic violence by all perpetrators both male and female and why I came into this thread with the comment...
    Men and women don't rape or commit sexual assault, rapists and assaulters commit rape and sexual assault. [or words to that effect]
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2020
  13. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Not that I disagree, but there are much nicer things to, statistically, talk about.
    paddoboy likes this.
  14. wegs Matter & Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    There are tons of women in prison for the crimes they've been convicted of - so, it's not like anyone is turning a blind eye when a woman is violent in a relationship, etc. I could see your point if women weren't being convicted, and were not held responsible for their crimes. I also believe that women and men who present false accusations of any kind against anyone, should be imprisoned. I believe the courts are turning the corner, in that regard. But, in truth, very few rape allegations (women alleging that men have raped them) are false.
  15. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    No argument from me re the crux of what you say wegs and never has been. But some now are construing some comments made by a top police officer as "inappropriate" and yes, he was taken off the case. This is what he said......
    "But in comments that drew an immediate and angry response from domestic violence advocates, Thompson also said police would keep an “open mind” about Baxter’s motives and wanted to speak to people who knew both families.

    “We need to look at every piece of information and to put it bluntly there are probably people out there in the community that are deciding which side, so to speak, to take in this investigation,” he said.

    “Is this an issue of a woman suffering significant domestic violence and her and her children perishing at the hands of the husband, or is it an instance of a husband being driven too far by issues he’s suffered by certain circumstances into committing acts of this form?”

    In my opinion I simply see what I believe we all would hope for in any democratic justice system. Fairness and unbias.
    Yet in a similar though "opposite side of the coin"case, but nearly as despicable.....
    "Chief Justice Anne Ferguson found Guode’s state of mind was disturbed when she drove into the lake, as a result of the traumatic birth of her youngest child, Bol. Guode underwent life-saving surgery after Bol's birth.

    Guode has already served three years in prison, meaning she could be released in just over a decade, although she faces being deported to her native South Sudan on her release.

    Guode pleaded guilty to two counts of murder, one of attempted murder and one of infanticide."

    As I have mentioned a couple of times wegs, in some ways I'm old fashion...standing up for a much younger woman on a bus for example, but also I am of the opinion that in many cases, that which is old is not necessarily bad, and that which is new, is not necessarily good or desirable.
    Another example, I often shake my head when I read or hear about someone undergoing some sort of trauma or tragedy in their life, and then we are told that they will undergo counselling.
    It's available in this day and age for those that need it, and probably a good thing in many cases.We all have to deal with tragedies and trauma at different stages in our lives, me included. A decade ago I was called up by the Hospital where my Mum was in a coma on life support. I had to give the authority and go-ahead for them to switch off life support...I questioned the medical team involved and reluctantly gave that authority. She was 87 years of age. I had to get my old Rottweiler put to sleep at 13.5 years of age because of cancer in his back leg...the choice was amputation with a 30% chance of not surviving, and the realization that at that age he would have been unlikely to live for another 6 months more anyway. I dealt with that and many other incidents in my 75 years, as most of us do, without counselling.
    Rape and.or sexual assault is a too common scourge in society, as I imagined would also exist in your country as well as mine. How to deal with it is the question, that most of us non rapists and non sexual assaultists would like answered. I don't know how. There is another campaign in my country to reduce the road death toll to zero. It's not going to happen, simple as that...
    I certainly hope you understand where I am coming from wegs.
  16. Bells Staff Member

    And the repeated comments you have made are wrong.

    We get it.. #NotAllMen.

    But you are still wrong.

    Any person can be a rapist. There is no set type.

    And once again, you keep changing the subject subtly, because #NotAllMen.

    And if you had paused and looked at what and who I was responding to and context, my comment would make sense to you..

    I will make it simpler for you.. here it is again. And then I want you to take a moment and think about it..

    You then responded with:

    In a discussion about chivalry and sexual violence..

    Woman said no to you. You insisted until she said yes and thanked you, loudly, because you are all about reminding us how you are viewed by women..

    Clueluss was noting just how you, (the man), was able to not take no from a woman and accept her wishes because you knew what she needed better than she did. And you advised that was how you were brought up.

    Obvious now?

    To the one, there is no chivalry in being pushy and insisting despite someone saying no thank you.

    To the other, words matter. And listening to what she had actually said to you before you insisted, matters more.
  17. billvon Valued Senior Member

    They were inappropriate. Imagine police investigating a rape and publicly saying "well, she was a bit of a tart, wasn't she? And she wore a very short skirt that night, and was drinking. Maybe it wasn't all his fault."
    Yes, you keep bringing up examples of how courteous you are and how you made the right calls and you didn't need counseling. Great. But we're not really talking about you (or at least shouldn't be) - we're talking about the issues surrounding sexual assault.
    Here's a top way - don't divide the world into rapists and non rapists, and then proceed accordingly. Assume EVERYONE needs education on consent and communication, even if someone is a totally great guy who gives up his seat on the bus and would never harm a hair on a woman's head.

    (Please don't defend yourself now, because once again WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT YOU.)

    Here in California we do a lot of sexual harassment training. And that training is fairly important, because 99.9% of the people who harass other people do not think of themselves as sexual harassers. They think of themselves as upstanding, honest, funny people who just joke around or talk about people honestly, and are ABSOLUTELY NOT sexual harassers.

    Except many of them are. I've known some of them. And they were as certain of their actions as you are. Turned out many of them really needed some education to learn what was appropriate and what wasn't.
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2020
  18. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Yep, any person can be a rapist, or a sexual assaulter. Oh, and nup, I'm not changing anything subtly or otherwise. So, no I'm not wrong.
    Yep, obvious now Bells. But just as obvious is the wrong slant you have taken on it. Have you not insisted on something, anything when another person has said no? I insisted she take the seat..She was reluctant because she was unfamiliar in this day and age, with such respect and courtesy, learnt when I was young. She remarked loudly so that other younger passengers could hear, about such respect and courtesy.
    Is that clear now Bells?
  19. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    He didn't say that or anything like that. All aspects in any case need to be looked at...that's democracy, that's a fair and equitable system...that is as it should be, and which you yourself would insist on if in a similar situation.
    I'm not defending me. I have no need to. I'm defending my right to have an opinion that is shared by many other men and woman, who agree that most men and women are not criminals, and are upstanding citizens and that in a democracy a person is generally innocent until proven guilty.
    What actions are you referring to? What criminal actions do you perceive me in approving? That rape and sexual assault by both sexes are wrong? Or are you denying that such crimes should not apply to both genders. Or that a head Cop, can not express his desire and the forces desire to investigate a crime thoroughly?
    Or that I should not have stood up for a woman on a bus because you view it as "discriminatory...or sexist?
    Perhaps you need to go back and read all my posts in this thread, because obviously you appear to have the bull by the arse end, by what you are seemingly trying to infer, and as I highlighted in the quote by you.
  20. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    OK, I've said my piece and I certainly believe that piece is unmistakable as to the content.
    And I certainly can see where this is going to lead, so I'm out of this thread, and any further disguised accusations or otherwise, can stand for the nonsense they are. I certainly know where I stand and an increasing majority of others, both men and women. Bye.
  21. billvon Valued Senior Member

    "is it an instance of a husband being driven too far?"

    In other words, is it the husband's fault - or the wife's? Very similar to asking "is it the fault of the rapist - or the victim?" Very inappropriate.
    Absolutely. And had he said "we are going to look at all aspects of this case" no problem at all.
    Great! Then will we stop hearing about how nice you are to women?
    Apparently not.
    Of course. No one is saying that anyone should be prosecuted for any crime unless they did it. It would be a very good idea to support education so they do not (inadvertently or otherwise) BECOME criminals.
    None. You are certain that all your actions are correct - and likely are. Other people are exactly as certain that all their actions are correct - and some are not. So to say "we will just stop the evil criminals who commit such crimes" is pretty incomplete, because from an outside perspective, they look like you (or me) before they commit those crimes.
    I will repeat in a larger font.

    Please don't defend yourself, because once again WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT YOU.
  22. Bells Staff Member

    Can I ask, why are you constantly changing the subject of this thread?

    What does this thread have to do with a man setting his wife and children on fire and the police officer wrongly suggesting that he may have been driven to it by circumstances - when one considers that he was an abuser and raped his wife when they were still together, he then stalked her, kidnapped one of their daughters, she had to obtain an AVO against him, he refused 50/50 custody of the children (abusers like to win, not get 50/50), and then he accosted his ex wife and their children as she was driving them to school, doused them in petrol and then set them alight in the car... What does this have to do with this thread? Are you seriously trying to suggest that someone can be driven to setting one's children on fire and watching them burn? What that police officer said was not only wrong, but it was also dangerous and provided the killer with an excuse, an out, and shifted the blame to the victim, and given the context of his murderous intent - he was the abuser - it gives little comfort to other people in abusive relationships who may wish to go to the police, when said police are on TV suggesting that someone setting his own kids on fire may have been driven to it. Given that on average, 1 woman is murdered a week by her current or former partner, his ridiculous comment was horrendous. And it has absolutely nothing to do with this thread.

    Just as what does a woman driving her car full of children into a lake in a murder suicide bid and the rescuers who launched a desperate attempt to save them had to watch them drown, has anything to do with this thread.

    You introduced them into this thread to provide an out because #NotAllMen and to again argue that women are also killers and abusers.. Because again #NotAllMen. There are no two sides to what this man did to her and their children. He set them on fire and watched them burn and tried to threaten people to stop them from helping them.. Nothing can drive someone to do something like that. That is why that police officer was removed from that case. Because he was feeding the #NotAllMen narrative that tries to shift the blame for violent and murderous actions onto the victims when he alluded that something may have driven him to doing it or "driven too far" when it was literally about a man who was unable to accept his wife had left him.. The blame was shifted onto her immediately when that police officer uttered those words.

    And then, to top it off, because #NotAllMen, you paint yourself as that top notch "bloke" who doesn't take no for an answer from a "sheila" (along with the folksy Aussie slang that only comes out when you are ridiculously trying to assert your dominance) and gives her his seat, because 'see, not all men are rapists'..

    It is insidious and pathetic.

    I didn't take a wrong slant.

    You admitted you didn't take no for an answer and demanded she take your seat, because apparently that has something to do with this thread and not all men are rapists or something something.

    Clueluss rightly pointed out that you refused to take no for an answer because you knew what was right for her all along and you responded and said that was how you were brought up. That was what I was responding to.

    You put this poor woman in a bind to begin with and ensured she had no actual recourse when you kept pushing after she said no... Because that's how a man treats a lady, right?

    Man sets wife and children on fire after dousing them with petrol, after she had escaped their abusive relationship and had to seek an AVO for his stalking and violent behaviour. What do you think would have driven him to setting her and the children on fire? Given, you know, the history of domestic violence and violent and stalking behaviour because he could not accept that she left him. Now, pause for a moment and think about what that police officer was saying in regards to circumstances that might have "driven him" to setting them on fire in light of the fact that this man was a known abuser, had an AVO against him for his violent and stalking behaviour because she left him..

    The circumstance was that she left him. He did not set her and the children on fire in that car because she was still with him. He did it because she would not come back. Do you understand how it was blaming the victim? Do you understand now how stating this a day or two after this horror occurred was horrific, given how many women are killed by their intimate (former and current) partners in Australia? Do you understand how and why domestic violence victims might see that and then not seek help from the police, given the lead detective investigating this murder basically came out on TV and said that they needed to see if the violent abuser was 'driven to doing it' by circumstances, when the circumstances were that he could not accept his wife leaving the abusive relationship?

    I mean, you don't quite understand this? At all? You aren't capable of making that connection?

    Or are you simply refusing to because #NotAllMen?

    Yes, because a week after a man sets his estranged wife and kids on fire, you have to get out there and spread the word that most men and women are not criminals and you refer to this off topic tragedy multiple times to do so and make sure to set yourself apart because 'yo, I demanded a woman take my seat on public transport even after she said no'...

    And if you are going to try to argue the point now that "in a democracy a person is generally innocent until proven guilty" in the context of a discussion that includes a man setting his wife and kids on fire and then whining that a police officer was dumb enough to tell the media that they had to investigate if he was driven to it by "circumstances" - which were that his wife left the abusive relationship and he stalked, threatened and harassed her before killing them, then you are more insidious than even I gave you credit for. The police officer uttered the words "driven too far".. When those circumstances involve a woman having to escape an abusive household, his words gave every appearance of blaming the victim for leaving him and driving him too far apparently.


    Phrasing matters and on the issue of domestic violence and murder, it matters greatly.
    I'm more interested in the fact that you didn't take no for an answer and possibly put this woman in an uncomfortable position where she felt compelled to just say yes and sit down and then have to say thank you loudly so you'd back off..

    But the initial point still stands. She said no. You kept insisting until she said yes.

    I don't think you want us to go back and read your posts in this thread.. For example:

    And then you went on to tell us how great a man you were because you pushed a woman to take a seat you offered her on a crowded bus..

    Because #NotAllMen! And then you went on to reference off topic murders to whine about because #NotAllMen..
  23. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    OK, I find it necessary to straighten a couple of things out...or if you like, I lied!!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    No, that maybe how someone with an agenda may interpret it. More then likely he was just conveying the facts that....
    Nothing to do with being nice to a woman....or a man for that matter....simply an act of respect.
    And again, I have no need to defend myself, I'm simply stating what I and many believe, and giving examples of that.

    I'm not. It's all relevant to the view of many men and woman, that the feminist movement or whatever branch of it you like, is tending to take things a bit too far in their quest.
    No, Bells, I introduced it to show that this woman's state of mind, was considered, and yet you criticise a senior cop for rightly suggesting that all facts will be looked at including his [the murderer that set his family alight] state of mind.
    Actually its your lack of interest in the facts re my personal example, that is of real interest. Otherwise you would have noticed that she spoke loudly with regards to my respect and decency in offering her a seat, and me being an old fart to boot. In other words to shame some of the young folk that were within ear shot and stayed on their big fat clackers.
    No point at all Bells, except good old fashion respect and decency, and as recognised by the woman involved.
    Thanks anyway for your attempt at womansplaining it to me.
    The explanation is though far more truthful, realistic, simple and valid, as I mentioned in the first sentence above.
    My folksy Aussie slang???

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Ahh that's funny Bells, and others have noted it in other threads, with far more humouress intent and less vindictivness Bells. Perhaps because I'm an Aussie? Perhaps because I spent a part of my young life in Wallerarang and Lithgow? Not sure really, but what you see is what you get!!
    Last edited: Feb 28, 2020

Share This Page