Why is it NEVER a woman&#x27;s fault?

FEMINISM GONE TOO FAR!

You enter a thread with a misogynistic title and find a link to The Dail Mail. Genius. :tsr2:

Reply 2

Alasdair

14

Men do bad things, women do bad things.

But when a man rapes a woman, or when a man beats the crap out of a three year old, it's not a woman's fault. Sure, she might have been able to 'intervene' (but so should've the childs teachers, or social services, or the rest of society), or sure, maybe the guy was drunk, or maybe he did think she was a slut because she was wearing a short skirt.

But that doesn't make it her fault.

Reply 3

*waits for 80 million people to say "URRGH DAILY MAIL! HATE MAIL, MORE LIKE! Guffaw guffaw*
The article makes a good point, but I think it's come too late. I think this attitude already is changing. Perhaps it's due to shows like the Jeremy Kyle (pbuh) Show, where he just has a go at everyone, irrespective of sex, race or, usually, anything resembling guilt. Or maybe it's because of people, both guys and girls, getting fed up of non-economic (ie social, lol) sexism pervading and wanting a change.

Imo the author is making it out to be a bit more of an issue than it is, though like she said, i'm glad to hear that new law has come into place.

Reply 4

Teehar

10

the two times I watched jeremy kyle, and realised how ****ed up society is, he viciously destroyed the man and was all sympathetic to the woman.

Reply 5

DanGrover

*waits for 80 million people to say "URRGH DAILY MAIL! HATE MAIL, MORE LIKE! Guffaw guffaw*

I never gets old though.

Reply 6

Laika

FEMINISM GONE TOO FAR!

You enter a thread with a misogynistic title and find a link to The Dail Mail. Genius. :tsr2:

Aherm, the thread title is the same as the linked article title.... are you going to argue content or sources, here?

Reply 7

6+6=6

the two times I watched jeremy kyle, and realised how ****ed up society is, he viciously destroyed the man and was all sympathetic to the woman.

... two... ?! With all due respect, 6, what the hell have you been doing with your life?! I can lend you the DVD box set, if you want...

Reply 8

DanGrover

Aherm, the thread title is the same as the linked article title.... are you going to argue content or sources, here?

What? Presumably the thread started shares the views of the article ("brilliant article") so I'm laughing at both, I guess. Not that the thread has any content OTHER than the article itself...

Reply 9

Laika

What? Presumably the thread started shares the views of the article ("brilliant article") so I'm laughing at both, I guess. Not that the thread has any content OTHER than the article itself...

Yes, which you have hitherto ignored entirely in favour of bashing the source. I mean, hell, it's an editorial so it's not even like it has any disputable facts.

Reply 10

DanGrover

Yes, which you have hitherto ignored entirely in favour of bashing the source. I mean, hell, it's an editorial so it's not even like it has any disputable facts.

If the editorial actually conatined something of merit then I probably wouldn't have laughed at the source but since all it does is confirm every outrageous stereotype you could possibly have about the Mail I thought fit to comment on this amusing fact.

Reply 11

Laika

If the editorial actually conatined something of merit then I probably wouldn't have laughed at the source but since all it does is confirm every outrageous stereotype you could possibly have about the Mail I thought fit to comment on this amusing fact.

Fantastico. Now **** off out of D&D.

Reply 12

stoney

12

"We know that many - or should that be most? - of these groups which set themselves up as anti-rape and antiviolence are led by militant feminists, whose real agenda is anti-men.

But if they really think that their anti-men propaganda is the same thing as pro-women politics, they are in cloud-cuckoo-land.

Everything they achieve, they do so at the cost of women; at the cost of acknowledging the strength of a woman's determination - and at the cost of allowing a woman the ultimate equality, without which all else will fail: an equal right to make mistakes."

I cannot express how true this is. A good article there DB

Reply 13

DanGrover

Fantastico. Now **** off out of D&D.

I must confess that my self-esteem is so crushed by your condemnation that in order to redeem myself in your eyes I shall now give a response that is up to the standards of the usual irrelevant drivel spouted on this waste of space.

The article makes a good point, but I think it's come too late. I think this attitude already is changing. Perhaps it's due to shows like the Jeremy Kyle (pbuh) Show, where he just has a go at everyone, irrespective of sex, race or, usually, anything resembling guilt. Or maybe it's because of people, both guys and girls, getting fed up of non-economic (ie social, lol) sexism pervading and wanting a change.

Do you honestly think Jeremy Kyle has even a miniscule impact on cultural attitudes to sexism or is even a fitting example of a wider trend in people's attitudes? There is absolutely no grounds to claim that women have been free from blame in terms of crime; in fact the opposite is much more profoundly true. Take for example any example of a female murderer or accomplice (Myra Hindley or Maxine Carr being the two biggest examples); subject to much more disproportionate media condemnation and public outrage than their male accomplices. To say that women escape blame is so unfathomably false that I can't even begin to think how anyone could have come to such a ridiculous conclusion.

Familial homicide has more to do with the ethical problems of acting and ommiting to act than it has anything to do with issues of sexism.

pathetic article

For years, scarcely has a month gone by without some hideous story coming to light about a child being physically assaulted, sexually abused and even murdered by his father or, more usually, his stepfather (aka 'Mummy's new partner').

Yet instead of asking, as we sensibly should, where Mummy was while all this was going on

Yes, a child is being beaten by her father our first response should be 'How can be blame the mother for this?' The implication on this quote that the woman is somehow responsible for having a violent husband is absolutely pathetic and the most blatant example of sexist double standards I have ever witnessed. Need I point out the glaring irony in an article titled 'Why is it NEVER a woman's fault' repeatedly excusing or overlooking male acts of aggression and focusing on how women might have intervened.

On this basis, some women quite literally get away with murder. The woman who lies in wait for a louse of a husband who has battered her for years, then stabs him through his heart, is hailed as a heroine by today's appalling apology for a women's movement.

Women make mistakes for all manner of reasons. Because they risked a bet, because they fell for the wrong man

Is there any real justification for such a revolting argument as this? The women is to blame for her partner being an abusive thug?

Our response to them, at least while most of them were men, has included anger, scorn, contempt and - from the exceedingly generous - a measure of pity.

But it's all changed now that newly released figures show that the fastestgrowing group of people hooked on this dangerous sport are women.

Indeed, the British Medical Association is suddenly demanding that their indulgence should be promoted to a proper illness

So we might pity the men who have destroyed their families lives with gambling addictions but to consider it a mental illness is just pure insanity! I mean, we have nothing other than the vague implication of this author to draw a link between the medical status of addiction and the number of female gamblers; but of course, that's irrelevant isn't it? It's not at all relevant that the revision of gambling laws also benefits male gamblers.

I could go on but you get the point.

Reply 14

Tyler Durden

17

DanGrover

Fantastico. Now **** off out of D&D.

Why? He's right. It's a stupid article written for, frankly, a stupid audience. I don't really understand the point of the article; it's all over the place, makes pathetic claims and uses Sun-esque rhetoric to back them up.

The article begins by saying that a mother whose husband killed their child should be locked up for life. No consideration of what it must have felt like for a mother to come home to find her dying kid or of the shock it would plunge a person into. I mean what if it had been the other way round - say the mother had killed the kid and the dad stayed and watched and not acted. The article implies that the man would have done a life sentence and the woman would have been let off! :rolleyes:

After all, it's NEVER a woman's fault. :rolleyes:

But ok... that at least has some relevance because it relates to a current case.

Then though - "gambling is a big problem, there are female gamblers, it's not an addiction - it's a choice, women are pathetic if they need help with gambling" (note that I am sure help is afforded people with addictions no matter of their sex). Oh and don't forget the holier than thou - "I once gambled, won a lot for charity and then (shine that halo) never did it again for fear of addiction." So what? There are male gamblers and female gamblers, male heroin takers and female heroin takers - all are given help if they need it.

Reply 15

Zoecb

11

There is no excuse to put up with this stuff.

If you suffer because you have an abusive partner, you press charges, you don't stay, you take vulnerable children away from said abuser. It's very very simple.

Reply 16

Tyler Durden

17

Zoecb

It's very very simple.

For an outsider to say, yes.

Without having a go at you specifically, I find it really frustrating when people who have no idea about the problems some people face in their daily lives pass judgement.

For example, is it very very simple for a woman with, say, two children, no immediate family nearby, no job because she is a full-time mum and an abusive and controlling husband just to walk away? The husband might hit her and shout at/hit the kids, but he is the reason that she and her children have a roof above their heads at night, he is the reason she sees her children rather than have them taken by social services etc. It's not as easy as you make it out.

I know two family friends where the husband has treated the wife like utter crap and once the woman has taken the step to walk away things have become even worse: no money (one has been waiting for years for the courts to make her husband pay-up but the costs of the legal wrangling currently counters any progress made), no life - work/kids make sure of that, still get abusive calls/visits from the husband etc. Oh and the husbands? Both are very well off, one of them has recently married a Thai-bride and the other moved to the US. No strings attached.

What I am trying to say is that these things are not clear-cut. And even if, from an objective point of view, it seems obvious that walking away is the best option you must remember that those involved are not looking at it objectively. It's why you find women who are abused but still half in love with their husband.

Now, before I get jumped at, I am sure there are abusive wives whose husbands look after the kids all day and thus don't have a job and are the ones who find it harder to make the break, but let's face it, mostly it's the woman in that position.

Reply 17

cottonmouth

11

Zoecb

There is no excuse to put up with this stuff.

If you suffer because you have an abusive partner, you press charges, you don't stay, you take vulnerable children away from said abuser. It's very very simple.

There is such thing as Battered Wife Syndrome, look it up. It is not at all simple for women in abusive relationships to leave. If it was, then they clearly would. There must be reasons why they stay, and i suggest you look for them instead of making sweeping statements about the ease of getting out of a type of relationship i'm assuming you've never been in for a long period of time.

Reply 18

dyslexic_banana

OP

Laika

: There is absolutely no grounds to claim that women have been free from blame in terms of crime; in fact the opposite is much more profoundly true. Take for example any example of a female murderer or accomplice (Myra Hindley or Maxine Carr being the two biggest examples); subject to much more disproportionate media condemnation and public outrage than their male accomplices. To say that women escape blame is so unfathomably false that I can't even begin to think how anyone could have come to such a ridiculous conclusion.

Women tend to receive lower sentences than men, for similar crimes. Female murderers may receive disproportionate media coverage, simply because female murderers are more rare a breed than are male murderers. I don't agree at all with your examples given, but there's no way I can disprove their validity, either.

Laika

Yes, a child is being beaten by her father our first response should be 'How can be blame the mother for this?' The implication on this quote that the woman is somehow responsible for having a violent husband is absolutely pathetic and the most blatant example of sexist double standards I have ever witnessed.

The author of the article never stated that it was all the woman's fault; merely that she should've done more to stop it. Oh, and we all bear a small amount of responsibility, at least, for relationships that turn bad. Just as, if I have a girlfriend who turns out to be a bitch, I accept some responsibility for picking her. The article doesn't excuse blame from the man, at all; it merely doesn't entirely alleviate it from the woman, as, it is argued, many would.

Laika

Need I point out the glaring irony in an article titled 'Why is it NEVER a woman's fault' repeatedly excusing or overlooking male acts of aggression and focusing on how women might have intervened.

No, you needn't, 'cause this article never did this.

Laika

Is there any real justification for such a revolting argument as this? The women is to blame for her partner being an abusive thug?

You're missing the point. She may not be to blame so much for this, but for not doing more to protect the child; there's a difference.

Laika

So we might pity the men who have destroyed their families lives with gambling addictions but to consider it a mental illness is just pure insanity! I mean, we have nothing other than the vague implication of this author to draw a link between the medical status of addiction and the number of female gamblers; but of course, that's irrelevant isn't it? It's not at all relevant that the revision of gambling laws also benefits male gamblers.

I could go on but you get the point.

Yes, but the article suggests that such measures only came in, after the number of female gamblers increased.

Zoecb

There is no excuse to put up with this stuff.

If you suffer because you have an abusive partner, you press charges, you don't stay, you take vulnerable children away from said abuser. It's very very simple.

Glad someone understands what the author was trying to say......

Reply 19

dyslexic_banana

OP