This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
'I don't need feminism because...'
Scroll to see replies
Original post by zoologyapp
Actually I will respond now: it'll only be a half-assed, pathetic and inarticulate response because I don't have the time or energy and probably won't get round to it at all if I don't attempt a short half hearted response now. I have a hell of a lot more important things to do than spend time on a thread I regret involving myself in because it's quite obvious that it's not a debate that'll have a conclusion, which would be okay if I had the time but I do not, at all. So anyway; basically whilst it is "not all men" it is still enough to cause fear that should not have to exist. I do not think it is as simple as just teaching men not to rape and so it wouldn't happen - but what the hell, it can't just be something that's accepted and just a perfectly normal thing to exist and happen. I still think preventative measures are important because obviously if men are going to carry on raping something needs to be done, but somehow getting to the problem at the root seems better than just trying to equip people for when it happens? It should not be inevitable. I don't know if the burglary analogy is valid seeing as these are totally different issues with complex different ideas surrounding them - and burglary could arguably have the beginnings of work towards a solution with things like rehabilitation and poverty solutions and all that jazz I don't have time to get into. The circumstances that causes someone to burgle could be tackled. Are you suggesting the reason men rape is some sort of uncontrollable urge that's completely normal and couldn't be stopped in any way shape or form? I'm not in a position to be able to suggest some miracle instant rape-stopping measure, but yes I do feel that it would be helped by tackling a society that does constantly cause bull**** ideas of objectification and entitlement and dehumanisation and yes insignificant little cultural things like 'blurred lines' that may make men feel like it's their right to rape women. If I had the time I could articulate this a hell of a lot better but I don't and that's just going to have to be the end of it, sorry. This turned out to be a long sh*t response instead of a short sh*t response but never mind.
Also, statistics are not always correct, obviously, and if we are talking about an 'irrational' fear of men then we are talking about sexual harassment or any type of violence in general, which is a lot wider than just 'recorded' rape, the issue is much more than that.
I'm not going to come back to this thread, I just genuinely don't have the time for hopeless arguments on a crappy little website and I wish I'd realised that before getting involved but hey ho.
Also, statistics are not always correct, obviously, and if we are talking about an 'irrational' fear of men then we are talking about sexual harassment or any type of violence in general, which is a lot wider than just 'recorded' rape, the issue is much more than that.
I'm not going to come back to this thread, I just genuinely don't have the time for hopeless arguments on a crappy little website and I wish I'd realised that before getting involved but hey ho.
Please paragraph this. I can't be expected to wade through this wall of text trying to find the direction of your argument.
This is a nice read for some of y'all.
Rape myth #6: Rapists are monsters.
Rapists are not monsters. Rapists are people that have done something wrong. Through sexual predator labels and lists we vilify rapists and perpetrators of sexual violence. People want clear categories for the type of person that would do something so horrible and want that category to be clearly different and separate from mainstream society. But, as explained above, most of the perpetrators of sexual violence are people that we know. They are us. The perpetrators of sexual violence are not imagined, crazy perverts, but rather our neighbors, family members, football coaches and religious leaders. To prevent sexual violence we need to honestly confront who is committing these atrocities. To adequately deal with the reality of who is committing these crimes, we need a more complicated approach towards perpetrators that integrates the violence of their acts with the reality of their humanity.
The myth of rapists as monsters gives us a false sense of security. If child molesters are strange, anonymous men driving white vans, then by successfully avoiding strange white vans, we can successfully avoid sexual abuse. But children who are sexually abused are more likely to be abused by a family member than by a stranger. How can we teach our children to avoid sexually abusive parents and uncles? Actually preventing sexual violence is messier and more difficult than our culture has accepted. We perpetuate these myths about rapists to avoid that messy and complicated process.
If only monsters perpetrate sexual violence, what happens when a woman is raped by her husband, who she loves, and who is not a monster? What do you do when you coach does something sexually inappropriate? Or if you think you saw your neighbor touch a child, but you could not imagine her to be that type of person? Vilifying perpetrators silences victims. Because most victims and witnesses intimately know the abuser or rapist, and because the label of abuser or rapist is so extreme, people struggle to speak up about sexual violence. We don't want to label people we know as monsters, even though they've committed monstrous acts. To adequately support the victims abused, raped and molested by the people they know and love, we need a more complicated approach towards perpetrators that integrates the violence of their acts with the reality of their humanity.
The hindering effect of vilifying rapists is that it stops the conversation at “rape is wrong”. If we are ever going to prevent rape we need a conversation that goes beyond “rape is wrong and done by bad people”. Categorizing rapists as awful people and separate from us puts a neat ribbon on the whole rape discussion bundle so that we can collectively avoid the more uncomfortable topic. The more uncomfortable topic being: What in our culture and what in ourselves creates this epidemic of sex as violence
Rape myth #6: Rapists are monsters.
Rapists are not monsters. Rapists are people that have done something wrong. Through sexual predator labels and lists we vilify rapists and perpetrators of sexual violence. People want clear categories for the type of person that would do something so horrible and want that category to be clearly different and separate from mainstream society. But, as explained above, most of the perpetrators of sexual violence are people that we know. They are us. The perpetrators of sexual violence are not imagined, crazy perverts, but rather our neighbors, family members, football coaches and religious leaders. To prevent sexual violence we need to honestly confront who is committing these atrocities. To adequately deal with the reality of who is committing these crimes, we need a more complicated approach towards perpetrators that integrates the violence of their acts with the reality of their humanity.
The myth of rapists as monsters gives us a false sense of security. If child molesters are strange, anonymous men driving white vans, then by successfully avoiding strange white vans, we can successfully avoid sexual abuse. But children who are sexually abused are more likely to be abused by a family member than by a stranger. How can we teach our children to avoid sexually abusive parents and uncles? Actually preventing sexual violence is messier and more difficult than our culture has accepted. We perpetuate these myths about rapists to avoid that messy and complicated process.
If only monsters perpetrate sexual violence, what happens when a woman is raped by her husband, who she loves, and who is not a monster? What do you do when you coach does something sexually inappropriate? Or if you think you saw your neighbor touch a child, but you could not imagine her to be that type of person? Vilifying perpetrators silences victims. Because most victims and witnesses intimately know the abuser or rapist, and because the label of abuser or rapist is so extreme, people struggle to speak up about sexual violence. We don't want to label people we know as monsters, even though they've committed monstrous acts. To adequately support the victims abused, raped and molested by the people they know and love, we need a more complicated approach towards perpetrators that integrates the violence of their acts with the reality of their humanity.
The hindering effect of vilifying rapists is that it stops the conversation at “rape is wrong”. If we are ever going to prevent rape we need a conversation that goes beyond “rape is wrong and done by bad people”. Categorizing rapists as awful people and separate from us puts a neat ribbon on the whole rape discussion bundle so that we can collectively avoid the more uncomfortable topic. The more uncomfortable topic being: What in our culture and what in ourselves creates this epidemic of sex as violence
Original post by Birkenhead
Only men can commit rape under current English law. This is probably the fifth time I have had to clarify this on this forum.
To me and countless others this is a bit like saying the Democratic Peoples Republic of (North) Korea seeks the spread of democratic freedoms purely because they include the word in their name. It takes more than stated intention to be recognised as actually pursuing that and for many people feminism today is deleterious to gender equality. It isn't a simple matter of people seeing feminism as filled with man-haters.
There are even plenty of self-describing feminists who openly admit to feminism addressing only women's issues, including in this thread.
To me and countless others this is a bit like saying the Democratic Peoples Republic of (North) Korea seeks the spread of democratic freedoms purely because they include the word in their name. It takes more than stated intention to be recognised as actually pursuing that and for many people feminism today is deleterious to gender equality. It isn't a simple matter of people seeing feminism as filled with man-haters.
There are even plenty of self-describing feminists who openly admit to feminism addressing only women's issues, including in this thread.
I suppose i have to agree with you that under current English law only men can commit rape. I don't agree with that view but it is the law so i have no argument against that. Perhaps i have undermined my point by not checking exactly what, under law, is classed as rape. I looked it up and what i had discussed earlier, a lack of consent, is classed as sexual assault so unfortunately i am incorrect on that point.
Regarding your second point, so you and other people believe that feminism has only widened the gap between the genders? That it only seeks to lessen female inequality but in doing so ignores or dismisses male inequality? Correct me if that's not what you're trying to get across.
Original post by IronMan97
I suppose i have to agree with you that under current English law only men can commit rape. I don't agree with that view but it is the law so i have no argument against that. Perhaps i have undermined my point by not checking exactly what, under law, is classed as rape. I looked it up and what i had discussed earlier, a lack of consent, is classed as sexual assault so unfortunately i am incorrect on that point.
Regarding your second point, so you and other people believe that feminism has only widened the gap between the genders? That it only seeks to lessen female inequality but in doing so ignores or dismisses male inequality? Correct me if that's not what you're trying to get across.
Regarding your second point, so you and other people believe that feminism has only widened the gap between the genders? That it only seeks to lessen female inequality but in doing so ignores or dismisses male inequality? Correct me if that's not what you're trying to get across.
Going to bed. Will reply tomorrow.
Original post by DiddyDec
Do you really think that there is a significant number of cases in NI to sway the results?
There were 550 reported cases. So the percentage now stands at 0.0008%.
Still of tiny amount.
Stop trying to deny the fact the amount is much smaller than you thought.
There were 550 reported cases. So the percentage now stands at 0.0008%.
Still of tiny amount.
Stop trying to deny the fact the amount is much smaller than you thought.
Stil no source? Let's stop faffing around.
Government statistics released in January 2013 estimated that 85,000 women are raped on average in England and Wales every year, that over 400,000 women are sexually assaulted annually, and that 1 in 5 women (aged 16 - 59) has experienced some form of sexual violence since the age of 16. The same study reported that 28% of women who are victims of the most serious sexual offences never tell anyone about it, and we know from our experience within the Rape Crisis movement that only around 15% of women and girls who experience sexual violence ever report to the police.
http://www.rapecrisis.org.uk/mythsampfacts2.php
http://www.rapecrisis.org.uk/mythsampfacts2.php
Now that wasn't so hard.
Original post by Birkenhead
To me and countless others this is a bit like saying the Democratic Peoples Republic of (North) Korea seeks the spread of democratic freedoms purely because they include the word in their name. It takes more than stated intention to be recognised as actually pursuing that and for many people feminism today is deleterious to gender equality. It isn't a simple matter of people seeing feminism as filled with man-haters.
There are even plenty of self-describing feminists who openly admit to feminism addressing only women's issues, including in this thread.
There are even plenty of self-describing feminists who openly admit to feminism addressing only women's issues, including in this thread.
And ISIS aren't true Muslims too, right?
Wake up. It isn't your decision who is and is not a Feminist. The meaning of a term is in its use, and one of the widest uses of the term 'Feminist' in the West now is as a label to describe those women who believe in the patriarchal conspiracy theory, and 'rape culture', that gender is a social construct, and so much other nonsense.
It would be amusing if it wasn't pathetic how you try to write of critics of Feminism as suggesting that it is full of 'man-haters'. I don't think its full of man haters. I do, however, think it is nonsensical, and undermining due process in America, and undermining efforts to solves the abuse of women and men in the western world, and efforts to solve the abuse of women in the middle-eastern world.
Yes, there are many such Feminists in this thread. There always have been many such Feminists. It's an important part of Feminism, even if it doesn't comprise all of it.
People such as yourself need to learn that the western world has moved on from Feminism. The belief than men and women are (at least politically and morally) equal is ubiquitous to such a degree that nobody even questions it without risking absolute vilification. Egalitarianism is 'where its at' now, and this is a god-send. We can move on from the nonsense Marxist hand-me-downs that have infested Feminism for so long, and start to accept plain old common sense.
Original post by Truths
Now this is well put. People like to justify rape culture with basically "criminals will be criminals". People rarely understand that it's a lot more complicated than that. Criminals are not biologically predisposed to crime, there are social factors to be explored.
No, it isn't 'well put'. Ordinary men don't rape because rapists are not ordinary men. Yeah, men who are otherwise ordinary rape, but only in the same way that Psychopaths who are otherwise ordinary are ordinary. Even if rape was socially caused, why would anybody suggest distinguishing it from other crimes? Are you suggesting that rape just happens to be the only crime that has a social cause, and that we can solve it outright by Feminism? That seems ludicrously improbable. Unless you're suggesting they're all socially caused? In which case, why Feminism, why not just be a normal person and suggest we do whatever we can to prevent crime? That's to ignore the fact that there's no solid evidence for the claim that rape is caused primarily by social factors.
Are you sure criminals aren't biologically predisposed to crime?
Original post by Truths
Stil no source? Let's stop faffing around.
Now that wasn't so hard.
Now that wasn't so hard.
Estimated? I don't work with estimates, I work with facts and facts alone.
Original post by tomfailinghelp
Wake up. It isn't your decision who is and is not a Feminist. The meaning of a term is in its use, and one of the widest uses of the term 'Feminist' in the West now is as a label to describe those women who believe in the patriarchal conspiracy theory, and 'rape culture', that gender is a social construct, and so much other nonsense.
It would be amusing if it wasn't pathetic how you try to write of critics of Feminism as suggesting that it is full of 'man-haters'. I don't think its full of man haters. I do, however, think it is nonsensical, and undermining due process in America, and undermining efforts to solves the abuse of women and men in the western world, and efforts to solve the abuse of women in the middle-eastern world.
Yes, there are many such Feminists in this thread. There always have been many such Feminists. It's an important part of Feminism, even if it doesn't comprise all of it.
People such as yourself need to learn that the western world has moved on from Feminism. The belief than men and women are (at least politically and morally) equal is ubiquitous to such a degree that nobody even questions it without risking absolute vilification. Egalitarianism is 'where its at' now, and this is a god-send. We can move on from the nonsense Marxist hand-me-downs that have infested Feminism for so long, and start to accept plain old common sense.
Was this intended to be in response to me? You've liked one of my other posts and this seems to agree with everything I've been saying. I'm guessing it was in response to the feminist poster who said that some self-describing feminists aren't true feminists.
Original post by Truths
Stil no source? Let's stop faffing around.
Now that wasn't so hard.
Now that wasn't so hard.
Ironically, this investigation supports what a large number of your opponents are saying.
Sexual victimisation rates were higher for females who reported visiting a pub atleast once a week (4.3 per cent) or a night club one to three times a month (5.6
per cent). Those who visited a night club at least four times a month had the
highest victimisation rate of any characteristic covered by the CSEW (9.2 per
cent).
per cent). Those who visited a night club at least four times a month had the
highest victimisation rate of any characteristic covered by the CSEW (9.2 per
cent).
The best way to stop sexual assaults from happening maybe is to go clubbing less often?
Original post by tomfailinghelp
No, it isn't 'well put'. Ordinary men don't rape because rapists are not ordinary men. Yeah, men who are otherwise ordinary rape, but only in the same way that Psychopaths who are otherwise ordinary are ordinary.
No, it isn't 'well put'. Ordinary men don't rape because rapists are not ordinary men. Yeah, men who are otherwise ordinary rape, but only in the same way that Psychopaths who are otherwise ordinary are ordinary.
If only monsters perpetrate sexual violence, what happens when a woman is raped by her husband, who she loves, and who is not a monster? What do you do when you coach does something sexually inappropriate? Or if you think you saw your neighbor touch a child, but you could not imagine her to be that type of person? Vilifying perpetrators silences victims. Because most victims and witnesses intimately know the abuser or rapist, and because the label of abuser or rapist is so extreme, people struggle to speak up about sexual violence. We don't want to label people we know as monsters, even though they've committed monstrous acts. To adequately support the victims abused, raped and molested by the people they know and love, we need a more complicated approach towards perpetrators that integrates the violence of their acts with the reality of their humanity.
Original post by tomfailinghelp
Even if rape was socially caused, why would anybody suggest distinguishing it from other crimes? Are you suggesting that rape just happens to be the only crime that has a social cause, and that we can solve it outright by Feminism?
I think most people acknowledge that most street crime can be traced down to social and economic reasons. Hopefully people will soon realise that sex crimes are also due to social reasons.
Original post by tomfailinghelp
Are you sure criminals aren't biologically predisposed to crime?
Seeing as law to begin with is a social construct, I'm fairly certain
Original post by Birkenhead
Was this intended to be in response to me? You've liked one of my other posts and this seems to agree with everything I've been saying. I'm guessing it was in response to the feminist poster who said that some self-describing feminists aren't true feminists.
Yes, sorry
Original post by DiddyDec
Estimated? I don't work with estimates, I work with facts and facts alone.
Facts and no source? Interesting.
And they are estimates because obviously not all rape victims report their crimes.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by DiddyDec
Go and look at the Law. To commit rape one needs a penis.
No one is going around mutilating men? Ever heard of circumcision?
You should do some research before spouting nonsense.
No one is going around mutilating men? Ever heard of circumcision?
You should do some research before spouting nonsense.
As i replied to someone else i realise i'm wrong on what the law classes as rape. So sorry about that, i did not check my facts on that point.
There is a massive difference between curcumcision and fmg. Ok you can argue circumcision is mutilation (lack of consent if it is performed on a baby), i'm not arguing that. I don't think i got my point across very well beforehand. Curcumcision does not have a big number of problems after it is carried out, if any though i'm sure someone has suffered a problem, fgm on the other hand almost always has problems! Urinary problems i believe as it us not unusual for a female's vagina to be sewn partly. That is why it is more of an issue. Fgm is nearly always harmful & used as a way to control women, curcumcision is almost never harmful and us not used as a means of control.
Original post by Truths
Facts and no source? Interesting.
And they are estimates because obviously not all rape victims report their crimes. I mean, I hope you're just joking.
And they are estimates because obviously not all rape victims report their crimes. I mean, I hope you're just joking.
Even using your estimates it is still a mere 0.002% of the female population.
Still a tiny proportion. It is still therefore irrational fear.
Northern Ireland (http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/sex-crime-reports-up-11-in-northern-ireland-after-jimmy-savile-case-30545513.html)
Scotland (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-28419575)
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by Truths
If only monsters perpetrate sexual violence, what happens when a woman is raped by her husband, who she loves, and who is not a monster? What do you do when you coach does something sexually inappropriate? Or if you think you saw your neighbor touch a child, but you could not imagine her to be that type of person? Vilifying perpetrators silences victims. Because most victims and witnesses intimately know the abuser or rapist, and because the label of abuser or rapist is so extreme, people struggle to speak up about sexual violence. We don't want to label people we know as monsters, even though they've committed monstrous acts. To adequately support the victims abused, raped and molested by the people they know and love, we need a more complicated approach towards perpetrators that integrates the violence of their acts with the reality of their humanity.
I think most people acknowledge that most street crime can be traced down to social and economic reasons. Hopefully people will soon realise that sex crimes are also due to social reasons.
Seeing as law to begin with is a social construct, I'm fairly certain
I think most people acknowledge that most street crime can be traced down to social and economic reasons. Hopefully people will soon realise that sex crimes are also due to social reasons.
Seeing as law to begin with is a social construct, I'm fairly certain
Are you saying that some men who rape are not monsters?
I beg to differ. If a man rapes somewhat, and he is not otherwise rendered irresponsible, he is a monster. Seriously I'm so confused by what you just said. The way we should solve rape is by treating people who rape like they aren't doing anything too
wrong? You are insane. Rapists are evil people, evil people deserve punishment. It is this simple.
I don't care what 'most people acknowledge', I care what is the truth. You cannot divorce a person from their social or economic circumstances and then decide what is social and what is not. This is something I was wrong about in that post. Whether the cause of rape is social or not, rapists are wrong to do what they do, and should be punished regardless, so long as they are not otherwise rendered irresponsible.
You do realise that we're never going to reduce all crimes to social reasons? That would just be to reject any notion of responsibility. Good luck creating any working system which denies responsibility.
Um, just because the law is a 'social construct' (Though it isn't, it is a political and legal one), it isn't the case that violations of it can't have biological causes. Obviously they do at least sometimes, for instance when someone dependent on heroin buys heroin, they're breaking the law, and the cause of biological.
It might be difficult to believe that I'm sitting here, having to explain to someone who pretends to see the importance of human rights, that rapists are responsible for their actions. Sadly, Feminists cease to surprise me, they're mired in a relativism that they will probably never escape from.
I don't need feminism because a disproportionate number of the feminists I've attempted to engage in calm, reasoned debate with have responded with personal attacks and needless hostility.
Original post by IronMan97
As i replied to someone else i realise i'm wrong on what the law classes as rape. So sorry about that, i did not check my facts on that point.
There is a massive difference between curcumcision and fmg. Ok you can argue circumcision is mutilation (lack of consent if it is performed on a baby), i'm not arguing that. I don't think i got my point across very well beforehand. Curcumcision does not have a big number of problems after it is carried out, if any though i'm sure someone has suffered a problem, fgm on the other hand almost always has problems! Urinary problems i believe as it us not unusual for a female's vagina to be sewn partly. That is why it is more of an issue. Fgm is nearly always harmful & used as a way to control women, curcumcision is almost never harmful and us not used as a means of control.
There is a massive difference between curcumcision and fmg. Ok you can argue circumcision is mutilation (lack of consent if it is performed on a baby), i'm not arguing that. I don't think i got my point across very well beforehand. Curcumcision does not have a big number of problems after it is carried out, if any though i'm sure someone has suffered a problem, fgm on the other hand almost always has problems! Urinary problems i believe as it us not unusual for a female's vagina to be sewn partly. That is why it is more of an issue. Fgm is nearly always harmful & used as a way to control women, curcumcision is almost never harmful and us not used as a means of control.
I wasn't denying it wasn't happening nor that it was a problem. I was merely pointing out that you were wrong.
Original post by IronMan97
As i replied to someone else i realise i'm wrong on what the law classes as rape. So sorry about that, i did not check my facts on that point.
There is a massive difference between curcumcision and fmg. Ok you can argue circumcision is mutilation (lack of consent if it is performed on a baby), i'm not arguing that. I don't think i got my point across very well beforehand. Curcumcision does not have a big number of problems after it is carried out, if any though i'm sure someone has suffered a problem, fgm on the other hand almost always has problems! Urinary problems i believe as it us not unusual for a female's vagina to be sewn partly. That is why it is more of an issue. Fgm is nearly always harmful & used as a way to control women, curcumcision is almost never harmful and us not used as a means of control.
There is a massive difference between curcumcision and fmg. Ok you can argue circumcision is mutilation (lack of consent if it is performed on a baby), i'm not arguing that. I don't think i got my point across very well beforehand. Curcumcision does not have a big number of problems after it is carried out, if any though i'm sure someone has suffered a problem, fgm on the other hand almost always has problems! Urinary problems i believe as it us not unusual for a female's vagina to be sewn partly. That is why it is more of an issue. Fgm is nearly always harmful & used as a way to control women, curcumcision is almost never harmful and us not used as a means of control.
Have you ever considered that having a bit of your penis cut of is itself a problem?
Original post by Birkenhead
Misogyny and misandry are as present as each other on society.
No one's justifying rape, what we're saying is that there are always going to be rapists. We already have the threat of stiff custodial sentences, social disgrace and ruined employment prospects for people who rape - the people that do so anyway aren't going to be dissuaded by anything else. It is not more complicated than this. What exactly do you propose we do to prevent more rapes?
No one's justifying rape, what we're saying is that there are always going to be rapists. We already have the threat of stiff custodial sentences, social disgrace and ruined employment prospects for people who rape - the people that do so anyway aren't going to be dissuaded by anything else. It is not more complicated than this. What exactly do you propose we do to prevent more rapes?
I have skimmed through this thread and I am going to make the assumption that you are most certainly not a feminist.
Considering you have said that misogyny and misandry are as present as each other, would you say rather, that you are simply just a supporter of gender equality.
I was a feminist until I realised how many feminists out there weren't feminists at all, simply misandrists or people who hopped on the bandwagon under the misconception that it is about privileges for women, rather than equality of the sexes. My idea of feminism was just gender equality but I think the meaning has been lost and manipulated in this movement.
Even those feminists that believed in equality of the genders still focussed on women more.
The first definition for feminism that comes up is this:
feminism
the advocacy of women's rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes.
This just proves that there is a definite focus on women in the feminist movement.
Therefore, I would hate to be associated with a movement that puts women on the pedestal when the fact is that men have issues too. You cannot compare, as the severity of the problems faced by the genders is subjective, and so it is impossible to say that either gender has it worse.
To separate myself from this association, rather than identifying myself as a feminist, I simply say I am a strong supporter of gender equality. The real feminists shouldn't see the difference.
I would like to see your view on this, please, if possible.
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
