Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

TSR is a forum where males are more vocal, and abuse/sexism/arrogance is rewarded? Watch

    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by молодой гений)
    lol
    define 'decent society with morals' pls
    The sort where the bloody women are in their rightful place serving 'superior' men like him, no doubt.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by redferry)
    Yeah the original post hit the nail on the head. A lot of outspoken girls have left, its a toxic atmosphere for women and Muslims on this forum.
    Really now?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I will take issue with something being said here

    Some people keep saying that the haters are just sharing their opinion.

    PERSONAL ATTACKS BECAUSE SOMEONE ELSE SHARED THEIR OPINION IS NOT SHARING YOUR OPINION

    This is how most TSR debates end up

    Poster 1 -What do people think of this?
    Poster 2 -I agree with it
    Poster 3 -This is ****ing stupid. POSTER 2 YOU'RE STUPID NO ONE LIKES YOU **** YOU YOU *insert sexist, racist, ignorant term here*

    Every. Damn. Time.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by молодой гений)
    Because where men are disadvantaged, it's because of the same factors which disadvantage women (i.e. gender roles and the whole masculine = strong, macho, provider for the family & feminine = sissy, inferior, stay-at-home mother thing). The divorce courts example you gave is a perfect example of this. Women get an easier deal because women are assumed to be the caretaker, because they are women. Equally, men asking for paternity leave never get taken seriously, because that's considered to be a 'woman's thing'. Or, along a different thread, men (generally) get much more viciously bullied at school if they show any signs of being 'feminine' or not 100% heterosexual, because any digression from being 'masculine' is seen as a weakness, and being 'feminine' is bad. And so on. The idea being that if we lose this whole perception of 'feminine' being inferior to 'masculine', through feminism, then everyone will be better off. I thought this was obvious
    Yes I know, which is why a proper mature alliance between feminists and men's rights types would be a great idea. But if you try to bring up any of these issues with feminists you really have to tread carefully, dress it up in as much flowery pro-woman language as possible otherwise you will be called a misogynist. It's like you're not allowed to advocate for men's rights on their own terms, the goal is not seen as being self-evident like women's rights is.

    I used to think just like you until it became apparent that actually feminists didn't care and the supposed fringe benefits of breaking down gender roles were not going to materialise for men. Not unsurprising, this is identity politics.

    Thankfully some of it is percolating through and there are quiet reforms happening in family law. But it's like it's all a dirty little secret, nobody talks about it, nobody really wants to admit that men's rights are as worthy as women's. It feels like waiting for the wealth to trickle down, you get a few leftovers but you have no control of the process.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 41b)
    It has nothing to do with bashing women.

    It has everything to do with equality.

    We used to live in a world where men recognised that women were weaker, more sensitive and less resilient. In exchange for respect, loyalty and submission, men gave women special treatment.

    Women thought that was some grand conspiracy oppressing them and decided they wanted to be treated equally.

    Well this is what equality is sweetheart. If you say something stupid, you will get called out on it. Your pussy doesn't give you any special rights. Men criticise men for being stupid, you just don't see it, or you don't want to see it. Women wanted equality: well now you have it. Say the kind of silly things you say and people will take you to task for it. No one owes you the kind of undue sensitivity you want.
    Pretty much this. I have some unpopular opinions here too but one soldiers on. I get passionate but hopefully not butthurt, and try not to assume the worst of people. No excuse really, if you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen (or back in, I suppose...)

    Though you are facile about the reasons for feminism, really it was inevitable with three factors: welfare state, consumer goods boom and pill. It would probably be a good idea to properly contextualise this stuff otherwise you come across as a zealot.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by scrotgrot)
    Yes I know, which is why a proper mature alliance between feminists and men's rights types would be a great idea. But if you try to bring up any of these issues with feminists you really have to tread carefully, dress it up in as much flowery pro-woman language as possible otherwise you will be called a misogynist. It's like you're not allowed to advocate for men's rights on their own terms, the goal is not seen as being self-evident like women's rights is.

    I used to think just like you until it became apparent that actually feminists didn't care and the supposed fringe benefits of breaking down gender roles were not going to materialise for men. Not unsurprising, this is identity politics.

    Thankfully some of it is percolating through and there are quiet reforms happening in family law. But it's like it's all a dirty little secret, nobody talks about it, nobody really wants to admit that men's rights are as worthy as women's. It feels like waiting for the wealth to trickle down, you get a few leftovers but you have no control of the process.
    Wealth trickling down... men own most of the world's wealth though, don't they?

    I dunno, I mean, for me feminism always meant debunking the whole 'feminine = weak, masculine = strong" thing, from the day I realised 'a girl' or 'a ******' [i.e. someone feminine, basically] was the gravest insult ever for a lot of school-age boys. And yeah, this obviously backfires on everybody who isn't 100% at home in their gender and the gender roles/assumptions that it carries. But equally I'd argue that there's a massive difference between, say, men being laughed at when they cry or show "feminine" traits, and the treatment of women in Saudi Arabia, or domestic violence (largely men beating up women), and so on.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by scrotgrot)
    Though you are facile about the reasons for feminism, really it was inevitable with three factors: welfare state, consumer goods boom and pill. It would probably be a good idea to properly contextualise this stuff otherwise you come across as a zealot.
    Yeah, fair point. I think I remember reading somewhere that unmarried women weren't allowed their own bank accounts and passports and such until the mid-20th century in the US? Which seems mental. And they couldn't graduate from Cambridge until 1948 or 1951 or something.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by scrotgrot)
    Yes I know, which is why a proper mature alliance between feminists and men's rights types would be a great idea. But if you try to bring up any of these issues with feminists you really have to tread carefully, dress it up in as much flowery pro-woman language as possible otherwise you will be called a misogynist. It's like you're not allowed to advocate for men's rights on their own terms, the goal is not seen as being self-evident like women's rights is.

    I used to think just like you until it became apparent that actually feminists didn't care and the supposed fringe benefits of breaking down gender roles were not going to materialise for men. Not unsurprising, this is identity politics.s.
    Its not just that feminists dont care about "men's issues", its that they have actively sabotaged them in many cases. See Erin Pizzey for example, who researched domestic violence against males and started receiving death threats from feminists http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erin_Pizzey

    One of the best recent takedowns of the absurdity of modern internet feminism (and the "feminism helps men" nonsense) is here: http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/01/01/untitled/ . Its very long but definitely worth reading, since it hits most of the major points. An extract:

    Whenever men complain about anything, you say “Oh, things are bad for men? Well, that sounds like a gender role. Patriarchy’s fault!”

    And then the next day you say “Well, since we already agreed yesterday your problem is patriarchy, the solution is take away power from men and give it to women. It’s right there in the word, patriarchy. So what we need is more feminism.”

    Even if in this particular case the feminism is making the problem worse.

    So, for example, we are told that the patriarchy causes male rape. We are told that if we want to fight male rape, the best way to do so is to work hard to promote feminist principles. But once feminism has been promoted, the particular feminists benefitting from that extra social capital may well be the ones to successfully lobbying national governments to keep male rape legal on the ground that if raping men was illegal, they might make false accusations which could hurt women.

    If patriarchy is “any problem with gender roles”, it’s entirely possible, even predictable, that feminists can be the ones propping it up in any given situation.

    Pick any attempt to shame people into conforming with gender roles, and you’ll find self-identified feminists leading the way. Transgender people? Feminists led the effort to stigmatize them and often still do. Discrimination against sex workers? Led by feminists. Against kinky people? Feminists again. People who have too much sex, or the wrong kind of sex? Feminists are among the jeering crowd, telling them they’re self-objectifying or reinforcing the patriarchy or whatever else they want to say. Male victims of domestic violence? It’s feminists fighting against acknowledging and helping them.

    (“But nowadays in 2015 most feminists are on the right side of every gender issue, right?” Insofar as your definition of ‘the right side of a gender issue’ is heavily influenced by ‘the side most feminists are on’, I’m going to have a really hard time answering that question in a non-tautologous way. Come back in 2065 and we can have a really interesting discussion about whether the feminists of 2015 screwed up as massively as the feminists of 1970 and 1990 did.)
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by samba)
    Really now?
    Yup. Since I showed my head above the parapet the insults have started, the following me round the forum has started etc etc.

    To deny that the views and opinions of women and POC are shouted down on here is just lying. As for non binary/straight people there was literally a threat accusing someone's sexuality (pansexuality) of not being real the other day, and I've seen trans people attacked numerous times.

    TSR is basically Daily Mail comments in forum form.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JokerGirl)
    I will take issue with something being said here

    Some people keep saying that the haters are just sharing their opinion.

    PERSONAL ATTACKS BECAUSE SOMEONE ELSE SHARED THEIR OPINION IS NOT SHARING YOUR OPINION

    This is how most TSR debates end up

    Poster 1 -What do people think of this?
    Poster 2 -I agree with it
    Poster 3 -This is ****ing stupid. POSTER 2 YOU'RE STUPID NO ONE LIKES YOU **** YOU YOU *insert sexist, racist, ignorant term here*

    Every. Damn. Time.
    So, so true.

    Me the other day:
    'I feel bad for Muslims in Europe, it's hard'
    Everyone else 'You Muslim lover you hate women and want to stone people to death you are evil and support people being murdered!!!!! Go and bow to your husband I hope he beats you round the face as your precious book the Qur'an says he should!!!!'
    Me: *leaves*

    And Ivr lost count of the amount of times I've been either called a feminaxi ugly lesbian or 'sweetheart, darling, love' for my opinions on equality.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by молодой гений)
    Wealth trickling down... men own most of the world's wealth though, don't they?
    Heh, don't be facetious, I'm sure you can see the analogy. (And women control 83% of consumer spending, is the statistic...spending their husbands' money on a massive scale clearly!)

    dunno, I mean, for me feminism always meant debunking the whole 'feminine = weak, masculine = strong" thing, from the day I realised 'a girl' or 'a ******' [i.e. someone feminine, basically] was the gravest insult ever for a lot of school-age boys. And yeah, this obviously backfires on everybody who isn't 100% at home in their gender and the gender roles/assumptions that it carries. But equally I'd argue that there's a massive difference between, say, men being laughed at when they cry or show "feminine" traits, and the treatment of women in Saudi Arabia, or domestic violence (largely men beating up women), and so on.
    Yep it can and should mean that, most campus feminists are not zealots and think of it like this. I agree with the breaking down of gender roles which are not necessary in an empire like our own which can afford the luxuries of non physical work and wealth redistribution. What I object to is the narrative that the brave women have broken out from the male yoke when actually before all that stuff the only practical option was the man to be head of the family etc.

    Unfortunately the lobbyists and opinion formers have a much more dangerous view, in my estimation. The feminists writing in national newspapers for example whose career depends on clickbait or the academics whose research grants depend on producing the right result to support a heavy handed political campaign

    Before identifying as feminist I believe one should look past the fancy words at the beam in one's own eye because the actions of those at the top are legitimised by their support. It's like voting UKIP because they say they're different and not part of the establishment when we know all they would do if they got power would be to sell off the NHS and decimate workers' rights.

    I would like to think I'm not too hypocritical about this, I don’t self identify as an MRA because of how it has been polluted by right wing anti-welfare libertarians with a side order of racism and misogyny. And I would like to think when the issue comes up I have quite the same vitriol for them.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by scrotgrot)
    Heh, don't be facetious, I'm sure you can see the analogy. (And women control 83% of consumer spending, is the statistic...spending their husbands' money on a massive scale clearly!)
    Aw, come on now, the 'spending their husbands' money' comment wasn't exactly necessary. Is that stat for somewhere like UK/US or worldwide? That's quite interesting actually

    Yep it can and should mean that, most campus feminists are not zealots and think of it like this. Unfortunately the lobbyists and opinion formers have a much more dangerous view, in my estimation. The feminists writing in national newspapers for example whose career depends on clickbait or the academics whose research grants depend on producing the right result to support a heavy handed political campaign

    Before identifying as feminist I believe one should look past the fancy words at the beam in one's own eye because the actions of those at the top are legitimised by their support. It's like voting UKIP because they say they're different and not part of the establishment when we know all they would do if they got power would be to sell off the NHS and decimate workers' rights.

    I would like to think I'm not too hypocritical about this, I don’t self identify as an MRA because of how it has been polluted by right wing anti-welfare libertarians with a side order of racism and misogyny. And I would like to think when the issue comes up I have quite the same vitriol for them.
    Whose career depends on clickbait... you're not thinking of Jessica Valenti for the Guardian, by any chance?

    Yeah, that's my issue with the MRA movement, basically. Their sole reason for existence seems to be bickering with women on the internet rather than actually organising and lobbying for stuff, like wider availability and acceptance of paternity leave, more counselling services for male rape victims, etc. But they don't, do they
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by redferry)
    Yup. Since I showed my head above the parapet the insults have started, the following me round the forum has started etc etc.

    To deny that the views and opinions of women and POC are shouted down on here is just lying. As for non binary/straight people there was literally a threat accusing someone's sexuality (pansexuality) of not being real the other day, and I've seen trans people attacked numerous times.

    TSR is basically Daily Mail comments in forum form.
    You seem to have a hard time distinguishing between "other people have views I do not agree with", and "other people are personally attacking me"
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by молодой гений)
    Yeah, fair point. I think I remember reading somewhere that unmarried women weren't allowed their own bank accounts and passports and such until the mid-20th century in the US? Which seems mental. And they couldn't graduate from Cambridge until 1948 or 1951 or something.
    Yes, this is due to coverture, women had few property rights as we all know. The flip side was men were responsible for everything their wife did. Leading to a culture of wife beating because if they went out and spent all the money or committed some stupid crime the man would be the one in prison, and public shaming for men who couldn't control their wives.

    Gender roles in terms of division of labour were usually essential in the working class. Women couldn't haul hods of coal around, you had about 8 kids to keep fed and clothes washing took all day. Leading to oppression of single mothers and absconding fathers, as they couldn't support themselves, and thus the popularity of the marriage contract

    Where real pointless misogyny occurred was in the middle class (smaller and more exclusive than today), whence your observation about Cambridge. Thus most women's movements down the centuries have come from the chattering classes. Even today with social security and contraception feminism suffers image problems from this And is not broadly supported among working class or minority ethnic women who need familial power/support structures to survive
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by poohat)
    You seem to have a hard time distinguishing between "other people have views I do not agree with", and "other people are personally attacking me"
    Yup clearly calling me ugly and deluded is just another persons view and in no way a personal attack!

    How could I have been so ditzy! Oh damn that sill woman brain of mine!
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by redferry)
    Yup. Since I showed my head above the parapet the insults have started, the following me round the forum has started etc etc.

    To deny that the views and opinions of women and POC are shouted down on here is just lying. As for non binary/straight people there was literally a threat accusing someone's sexuality (pansexuality) of not being real the other day, and I've seen trans people attacked numerous times.

    TSR is basically Daily Mail comments in forum form.
    TSR is crap yes. But the OP was also crap, and to agree with it is ridiculous because it's literally racist and sexist in itself.

    s. arrogant, narcissistic, self-centered, 'logical' and judgmental opinions. They are always male, always white, usually heterosexual. It's almost like a mental illness a lot of them have. I say white because most people in UK are white, and most users are from UK, and many of them have photos of themselves. But not always white(!).

    I mean what? Then you have the holoucaust denial, jew hating, and extremist muslim brigade running rampant 24/7 - Hardly a toxic atmosphere for Muslims, who always give as good as, if not worse than they get.

    As for women, how are their opinions shouted down? sure some people do, but then some women shout down men too. I don't see it myself, and once more, I think painting a picture of men oppressing women is sexist itself. If a few individuals do because they are trolls, that is not a 'man' vs 'woman' thing.

    And for gays/lesbians/pansexuals - they should sort out their attitude towards trans/whatever folk etc. It's not 'straight people are prejudice, and lgbt people aren't' - they are in many ways worse.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by scrotgrot)
    Pretty much this. I have some unpopular opinions here too but one soldiers on. I get passionate but hopefully not butthurt, and try not to assume the worst of people. No excuse really, if you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen (or back in, I suppose...)

    Though you are facile about the reasons for feminism, really it was inevitable with three factors: welfare state, consumer goods boom and pill. It would probably be a good idea to properly contextualise this stuff otherwise you come across as a zealot.
    I don't know. The technological (washing machines) and social aspects are important, but women chose to give up traditional relations. These external factors enabled them, but they still made the choice.

    Have a look at this article for example: http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/mal...-ruined-lives/ It shows that they adopted the Maoist way of thinking at a time of unprecedented prosperity and opportunity for them.

    I am not a historical materialist. People make choices and their choices are enabled by concurrent conditions, but it is too much to say that feminism was inevitable with the advance of security and technology. Women were free and they wanted more. They didn't care if they destroyed their families, their societies and their men. They wanted more for themselves.

    I think feminism is hence concurrent and enabled by technological and social factors, but not caused by them.

    This has happened before in similar conditions: Sumer, Rome. Security was achieved for the middle/upper class women - they wanted more. They pushed for no fault divorce and the rise of feminist laws. The birth rate collapsed and the countries were invaded and destroyed.

    I think it would be fairer to say that human history is cyclical and women are biologically driven, like all mortals, to self-interest, and men are driven, like most males of most species, towards chivalry. But humans are not entirely driven by our biology: we have the capability of conscious choice. The fact that this has happened many times before in similar conditions suggests two possibilities. The first is that women are not capable of conscious choice and pursue their self-interest at all costs, and it is the responsibility of men to stop them. The latter is that women are capable of conscious choice and use the advantage of chivalry to pursue courses of action that are damaging to themselves and to society. In this case they should suffer the consequences. I side with the latter view, and I am glad that technology today (for example, the artificial womb) will allow us to supercede the effects of social catastrophe by separating selfish women from the reproductive process.

    Having said that, if we go back in history, we can see during the catholic years that the animalistic, evolutionary and capitalistic aspects of human nature were curtailed quite successfully. Technological progress, science and material-based competition were generally suppressed in favour of faith. Surplus went towards building churches, rather than investing in weapons. Men were forced to stick with one woman and women were forced to suppress their alpha-male seeking instincts. In this respect I really value the pre-enlightenment zealotry because by suppressing women's hypergamy and men's promiscuity, it allowed social stability and some kind of greater love between people. Something more than evolutionary self interest.

    Paradoxically, this suppression might have allowed social stability for long enough to allow technology and knowledge to progress to a level where natural constraints (population) became progressively less relevant. To the point where technology could by and large replace population; or enhance the population's productivity to the extent where serious deficiencies in the population's productivity were not problematic. (The serious deficiencies I am talking about are older, workaholic women giving birth to defective children (this is supported by the scientific literature)). Even though Copernicus disproved geocentrism hundreds of years ago, and technological competition began in earnest, religious dogma was so deeply ingrained that until recently social conservatism and technological growth (that enabled women) were not misaligned. So I think that women had the choice not to be traditional to greater degrees as technology progressed, and the effect of social conservatism was to delay that choice by a while.

    The technological progress I refer to, about science overcoming the deficiencies caused by stressed out women giving birth is: mass medicine, medical augmentation, and rigorous education. By allowing deficient children to live, improving the most deficient's lives through augmentation and educating everyone to the level where even the stupid can be productive, the stress and age problems of working women giving birth has been ameliorated to a great degree.

    It's much deeper I think than the three three factors you mentioned. Human biology, the nature of our planet and the history of civilisation show that there are factors more fundamental which are responsible. If you're interested, this 2 hour video talks about these things quite well, while ostensibly dealing with a different topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTX740ZEA3Q
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by молодой гений)
    Aw, come on now, the 'spending their husbands' money' comment wasn't exactly necessary. Is that stat for somewhere like UK/US or worldwide? That's quite interesting actually
    Yep I know, there is obv a lot behind that stat, unfortunately I have tried to find out about it before with no luck.

    Whose career depends on clickbait... you're not thinking of Jessica Valenti for the Guardian, by any chance?
    Heh maybe... I find it strange how feminists say they have no voice but there are entire sections for it in mainstream left-leaning media

    that's my issue with the MRA movement, basically. Their sole reason for existence seems to be bickering with women on the internet rather than actually organising and lobbying for stuff, like wider availability and acceptance of paternity leave, more counselling services for male rape victims, etc. But they don't, do they
    Yep and I am guilty of that too, it's much easier to argue against someone online than to lobby for political change. It is hard to organise, there are no patronage networks and can you imagine some kind of minister for men or gender studies department focusing on men's issues. I don't think feminism helps at all though with its myths about men all being evil, prissiness about saying the right thing and how we are damned if we co-operate and damned if we go it alone

    Prior to the incursion of the same extreme libertarians who have infested everywhere since the financial crisis MRA was more Fathers 4 Justice than anything else. The libertarians are more likely to say you should work till you drop and force your woman to stay at home and that male rape victims should shut up whining and hit the gym so it doesn't happen again
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by xMr_BrightSide)
    I'd be very wary in generalising the way you do in the OP. This is an internet forum, with a high level of anonymity, populated by people who are still developing their ideas and views towards the world. Conflicts are inevitable, and should be expected.

    The problem is when people take vocal disagreements to be a sign of 'misogyny' (a term which has become completely nonsensical due to misuse) and other hyperbolic terms, as well as when (as you do in the OP) generalisations start to be made in terms of posters being white, male, british or whatever. Engage and debate with the posts they make, rather than judging them solely on who they are as a person (a factor they can't help!).

    Similarly, if you start assuming the forums are hives of misogyny and abuse, then your confirmation bias will inevitably 'prove' you right when you see any vocal disagreements. Don't develop a victim complex.

    If a post is truly abusive, misogynistic or whatever, then report it. The moderators will decide whether you're right or not.
    Completely agree with this.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by samba)
    TSR is crap yes. But the OP was also crap, and to agree with it is ridiculous because it's literally racist and sexist in itself.

    s. arrogant, narcissistic, self-centered, 'logical' and judgmental opinions. They are always male, always white, usually heterosexual. It's almost like a mental illness a lot of them have. I say white because most people in UK are white, and most users are from UK, and many of them have photos of themselves. But not always white(!).

    I mean what? Then you have the holoucaust denial, jew hating, and extremist muslim brigade running rampant 24/7 - Hardly a toxic atmosphere for Muslims, who always give as good as, if not worse than they get.
    Wait did you seriously just say that?

    I don't think having nutty jew hating Muslims running round makes the vast majority of Muslims on this forum feel any better.

    'I'm having a *insert normal everyday muslim problem here eg boy troubles, family troubles, they accidentally drank alcohol, I don't know*'
    Everyone on forum: Stupid muslim why are you muslim you probably want to stone us all to death denounce your religion now/You are juffar and Allah hates you.

    Yeah really helpful for them...

    As for women, how are their opinions shouted down? sure some people do, but then some women shout down men too. I don't see it myself, and once more, I think painting a picture of men oppressing women is sexist itself. If a few individuals do because they are trolls, that is not a 'man' vs 'woman' thing.

    And for gays/lesbians/pansexuals - they should sort out their attitude towards trans/whatever folk etc. It's not 'straight people are prejudice, and lgbt people aren't' - they are in many ways worse.
    Well I have been attacked repeatedly since being on this forum for no other reason than voicing my views on gender eqaulity (men and women should be equal, it is hard if you don't fit the cis stereotype, etc). A lot of other users left because of similar things and girls rarely speak out about it these days. I left because of it and probably will do so again.

    See these type of comments:

    Stop painting yourself as a continual victim. It is utterly pathetic.
    which are constant by the way. Women should not be voicing opinions. If they do they should be prepared for attacks that steadily get more and more personal.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: April 4, 2015
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brexit voters: Do you stand by your vote?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.