Worst of Social Justice

[mellenORL]

I'm confused, UP. What is the thing that "people cannot control" in re curfew? That they are male? Or, did you shit on your shoes by accident, because as that sentence reads in context with your quotes and comments there, it seems like you're saying men can't control themselves (which is of course completely fallacious).

[Askold]

I'm confused, UP. What is the thing that "people cannot control" in re curfew? That they are male? Or, did you shit on your shoes by accident, because as that sentence reads in context with your quotes and comments there, it seems like you're saying men can't control themselves (which is of course completely fallacious).

I think he means that people are not in control of whether they are men or not. The curfew is suggested as sentence for any person who just happens to be a man.

[Ultimate Paragon]

I'm confused, UP. What is the thing that "people cannot control" in re curfew? That they are male? Or, did you shit on your shoes by accident, because as that sentence reads in context with your quotes and comments there, it seems like you're saying men can't control themselves (which is of course completely fallacious).

I think he means that people are not in control of whether they are men or not. The curfew is suggested as sentence for any person who just happens to be a man.

Bingo.

[davedan]

UP what about the idea that all women are afraid to be out at night (I hope this isn't true and I suspect it depends on where you are) because of the actions of some men. Until the 'good' men start to bring the 'bad' men into line then no men are allowed out at night.  Which seems to be the basis of the article. You say it is silly to prevent people going out at night because of something which they have no control over, that is being male. However the author notes that people are afraid to go out at night because of something of which they have no control over, being women who are harrassed by men

I think there are several things wrong with it, but I suspect the problems I have a different to yours. Firstly the idea that 'good' members of a loosely associated group should have to control the other members of the group is silly. It's like saying all catholics are responsible for paedophile priests. Or all muslims are responsible for ISIS. Secondly curfews are generally a pretty shit idea. Thirdly who would enforce the curfew? Finally I suspect that most women aren't actually continually afraid to go out at night in most places in big western cities.

However I also find it extremely hard to take seriously, and therefore take umbrage over, an article which addresses men as 'bepenised ones'. Although to be fair, mine is a weapon.

[pyro]

I admit that that phrase in the article makes it seem like a Poe; a little context would help verify or disprove that notion.

But I get the feeling some of the lukewarm response to the quote is strictly because UP posted it.

[Ultimate Paragon]

Well, here's another article she's written:

http://www.feministcurrent.com/2010/05/28/freedom-bad-knees-and-push-up-bras/

I am so freakin sick of white, Western women going on and on about how sad and oppressed brown women in the East are. Are you that self-absorbed and brainless that you actually believe that the ‘freedom’ to wear stilettos and get giant, cartoonish breast implants is actually emancipation?

[davedan]

So she wrote another article 5-6 years ago. She seems to think that US culture isn't inherently superior to other cultures. Well I'm outraged.

[pyro]

Sounds to me more like she's equating "executed for attending college" with "attractiveness correlates with income." Note that both are sexist, but one is enforced through income inequality and the other is enforced with police action.

Edit: reading the whole article makes me significantly more aware of the point the writer is making. I still stand by the claim that there's an important difference in the enforcement methods, but she's right about the fact that sexist standards of beauty = sexist standards of beauty.

[Sigmaleph]

Yeah, let's restrict the rights of people because a tiny percentage of them are at a higher risk of crime. Surely this policy cannot have any negative repercussions or set dangerous precedents. Jesus fucking Christ.

[pyro]

After reading the first article, it's pretty much exactly as UP made it sound. Men in general have earned the curfew, according to her. The best interpretation I can find in this thing is a policy that old school teachers used:

I don't know who did it, and none of you are coming forward, so you're all punished. And if you don't think it's fair, well, life isn't fair. Maybe next time you won't cover up for the perp.

The worst interpretation, of course, is that men are all actually guilty of this kind of thing.

[Ghoti]

Trolling? Mislead? Actually that fucking dumb? You decide!

[davedan]

Indeed people get stressed so why shouldnt mothers be given thalidomide.

Fuck it 13 year olds should be made to read everything they wrote when they are 18, 25 and 30.

[dpareja]

Indeed people get stressed so why shouldnt mothers be given thalidomide.

Fuck it 13 year olds should be made to read everything they wrote when they are 18, 25 and 30.

You do realize that a disturbingly high percentage of them would, when they're 30, likely say, "Yeah, that makes perfect sense. I still think that," right?

[davedan]

Dpareja that is simply too depressing for words.

[Ultimate Paragon]