David Moyes Slap

[StringerBell]

28 minutes ago, Paul71 said:

This advert has been banned for being sexist. I dont know, i must just be easy going, and yes i know im male but it realy seems far too over the top. Its almost like people to just hang around looking for something to complain about, and be offended over.

 

 

The everydaysexism thing was set up by somebody who lies about rape stats. I'm more concerned about that than someone who doesn't buy into the 'gender roles are bad' argument. 

 

 

[PistoldPete2]

On 4 April 2017 at 15:08, GboroRam said:

Unfortunately some people are too interested in their own perceived injustices and don't want to acknowledge real ones that don't affect them.

Well maybe. I would guess there will be unreported sexual crimes,  but if they are not reported how do we know how many there are ? And how do we know how many rapes don't result in a conviction? If there's no conviction then it isn't rape.

really the stats are pretty meaningless, although I guess there is a problem both with people being too scared to report a sexual crime and with securing a conviction when it's one person's word against another . No easy answer to the latter, but hopefully the former is changing... It certainly seems to be with child abuse cases. 

[PistoldPete2]

On 4 April 2017 at 14:49, Lambchop said:

If you bothered to look at the evidence you would see that the figures are for sexual violence.

You would also see that only 15% of rapes get reported and of those that are, just over 5% result in convictions. 

I'm not going to argue the point because the figures speak for themselves. In all likelihood the real figures will be higher, given the low reporting rate. 

The government stats say 1 in 5 women aged 16 to 59 say they have been the victim of sexual offences... Including unwanted touching.

well I've been the victim of unwanting touching, getting my bum pinched etc. Maybe it's worse for women cos they feel more threatened or invaded or whatever. 

in my case I wouldn't think to report such a thing or feel threatened, just a bit shocked perhaps especially at my age  but maybe it's different for women. 

[Anon]

3 hours ago, Paul71 said:

This advert has been banned for being sexist. I dont know, i must just be easy going, and yes i know im male but it realy seems far too over the top. Its almost like people to just hang around looking for something to complain about, and be offended over.

 

 

This is sexist in my opinion. Surely it's easier to put "child" on the advert. Specifying "daughter" doesn't even make sense from an advertising perspective, since you've just wiped out 50% of your potential sales for no reason.

[McRainy]

15 hours ago, PistoldPete2 said:

 Maybe it's worse for women cos they feel more threatened or invaded or whatever. 

There's a different power relationship. Did you ever feel that someone was potentially going to force, hurt or even kill you if you didn't do what they wanted? I imagine not, and therein lies the difference. 

As for the egg advertisement, how can assuming that it's the female's job to do the washing up not be sexist?

[McRainy]

15 hours ago, PistoldPete2 said:

The government stats say 1 in 5 women aged 16 to 59 say they have been the victim of sexual offences... Including unwanted touching.

The figure drops as you increase the age range. For the under 25s it's 31%, as previously stated. 

[PistoldPete2]

28 minutes ago, Lambchop said:

The figure drops as you increase the age range. For the under 25s it's 31%, as previously stated. 

Isn't that odd... Wouldn't older people have had more years exposure to the risk . on your comment about the Easter egg ad I agree it's sexist.

[McRainy]

2 minutes ago, PistoldPete2 said:

Isn't that odd... Wouldn't older people have had more years exposure to the risk . on your comment about the Easter egg ad I agree it's sexist.

I think it reflects the fact that younger, presumably more 'attractive', women are more likely to be targeted. 

[Stive Pesley]

Not been following this, but it gives you a headache doesn't it?

Meanwhile elsewhere on the social media I saw a friend being accused of racism because he jokingly commented on a thread from another friend ranting about the stupidity of homeopathy that he "needs to sort his chakra out"

Apparently this is racist because chakra is an indian spritual concept and to joke about it amounts to laughing at Indians. Therefore racist.

Sometimes my fellow SJWs bring me great shame

[PistoldPete2]

7 hours ago, Lambchop said:

I think it reflects the fact that younger, presumably more 'attractive', women are more likely to be targeted. 

Yes of course, but older people were young once, weren't they targeted when they were younger. Or have I just misunderstood the stat? surely an older person has had more sexual experiences , including unwanted ones? 

[Sith Happens]

 

19 hours ago, StivePesley said:

Not been following this, but it gives you a headache doesn't it?

Meanwhile elsewhere on the social media I saw a friend being accused of racism because he jokingly commented on a thread from another friend ranting about the stupidity of homeopathy that he "needs to sort his chakra out"

Apparently this is racist because chakra is an indian spritual concept and to joke about it amounts to laughing at Indians. Therefore racist.

Sometimes my fellow SJWs bring me great shame

Its gives me a headache..its like the easter egg ad, i personally dont see its sexist, i get what people are saying as it suggests washing up is a womans job, but then every washing powder ad etc seems to have a woman talking over it or on it...are they sexist too? Look at adverts and you could find sexist ones all over the place if you wanted.

This is a new ad for the new mini, is it sexist suggesting a mini is a womans car?

I feel so sorry for my mum and dad, it must be so hard for them nearing their 80's to know if something is sexist, racist or whatever...i struggle to keep up.

[McRainy]

12 hours ago, PistoldPete2 said:

Yes of course, but older people were young once, weren't they targeted when they were younger. Or have I just misunderstood the stat? surely an older person has had more sexual experiences , including unwanted ones? 

I'm not sure how the stats were collected tbh, but if people were asked about experiences in the last year, for example, that would explain the higher incidence rate for younger women.

They're the official government figures, so I think it's safe to assume they're as accurate as possible, unless you have evidence to the contrary. 

[McRainy]

1 hour ago, Paul71 said:

i personally dont see its sexist, i get what people are saying as it suggests washing up is a womans job, but then every washing powder ad etc seems to have a woman talking over it or on it...are they sexist too?

Er, yes they are. 

[StringerBell]

10 minutes ago, Lambchop said:

I'm not sure how the stats were collected tbh, but if people were asked about experiences in the last year, for example, that would explain the higher incidence rate for younger women.

They're the official government figures, so I think it's safe to assume they're as accurate as possible, unless you have evidence to the contrary. 

Well, it's not conclusive and there are stats being derived from estimates. 

You've provided links to dodgy stats in this thread, whether knowingly or not, including that 85,000 women are raped every year. This is derived from the government survey you've linked to, but it's also untrue. It is propaganda.

A sceptic might say that fear mongering might potentially monger fear, but I won't do that as  thats not allowed on this forum (unless we're talking about Muslims as there's a different set of rules there). But that's fine, because all that does is shed light on the existence/effectiveness of the

 

[McRainy]

2 minutes ago, StringerBell said:

You've provided links to dodgy stats in this thread,

What is your evidence that the official government statistics are 'dodgy'?

[StringerBell]

37 minutes ago, Lambchop said:

What is your evidence that the official government statistics are 'dodgy'?

The government stats themselves aren't necessarily. Just as long as, say, a survey is taken for what it is - a survey. The particular stat about the 85,000 is the uppermost number in an estimated range. Ranging from in the low 50,000's to 85,000. And once again, this is an estimate.

For organisations such as rapecrisis.org to present it as a fact that 85,000 women are raped each year is just scaremongering. And yes, I believe it's possible that young women, particularly those at university might have heightened sensitivity to sexual assault based on such propaganda. Also, see the concept 'rape culture' pushed by academics.

The number of actual recorded rapes from a few years ago is something like 22,000. Probably more in reality, but we can't say it's 85,000 as though it's a fact.

I wouldn't dispute that women are more likely to be raped than men (as long as you don't include the prison population - where the term 'rape culture' derives from) and probably more likely to be sexually assaulted as well. But you and Pistolpete2 were having an interesting chat about why women and men perceive sexual assault they have been subjected to differently. I don't personally see why the consequences of feminist propaganda should be off the table when conjecturing about what possible reasons might cause this difference in attitudes. There will be different reasons and I think this is one of them.

 

[Sith Happens]

1 hour ago, Lambchop said:

Er, yes they are. 

Ok but how far does it go?

Like the magnet kitchen advert, a couple obviously have a new kitchen and it portrays them marvelling over their new kitchen but he is just stood having a coffee and the woman is sat with a baby feed it...sexist?

Another washing powder ad with a kids party all getting messy and ending with a smiling woman putting clothes in a washing machine...so sexist i guess.

And what about the diet coke advert with a group of girls sat laughing and eyeing up the male gardener who opens a diet coke and spills it on his shirt and has to take it off showing his abs...who is that sexist too? the girls for eyeing him up, the guy for being an object?

My Mrs and me must both be sexist as when it comes to jobs around the house, yeah she does the washing and ironing, and i wash the cars, do the lawns etc....very stereotypical roles...are we wrong?

[jono]

A joke .. Nothing more and the delivery was entirely humorous and taken as such by everyone involved. 

What a pity we aren't so sensitive and morally outraged when it comes to explaining away objectionable behaviour by other parts of society, as "cultural differences" 

 

[Sith Happens]

20 minutes ago, jono said:

A joke .. Nothing more and the delivery was entirely humorous and taken as such by everyone involved. 

What a pity we aren't so sensitive and morally outraged when it comes to explaining away objectionable behaviour by other parts of society, as "cultural differences" 

 

Im start to wonder if because as a man i find women attractive i am not only sexist because i enjoy how a woman looks, but maybe because i find women attractive that also makes me homophobic because i dont fancy men.

Im trying to work out why im racist too, im sure by the end of the day i will come up with it.

[SillyBilly]

The hysteria this has kicked up around Moyes and a 12 page thread on here indicates just how far down the road we are in this PC utopia. Every single event like this provides another reason to stick to absolute safety in everything you say in a public domain. Why risk being absolutely hammered and professionally destroyed for a lame joke or a misplaced comment these days? I know my filter is on literally every time I step out at the house, I won't give an opinion on anything at work these days. Not worth the aggro. Mouth firmly shut. My boss talks openly about how intellectually challenged and racist Leave voters are...quite offensive to me but I have to sit there and take it as I hold the non-PC view and therefore have zero protection. It is taboo (in my experience) to even broach many subjects now, the gender pay gap being a classic example. The damage of making a comment or expressing the opinion far exceeds the satisifaction of being able to speak ones mind. So why make it? I think the "benefits" of supressing anything which could be offensive will have far more serious repercussions in time. Have to let it play out though as even that opinion may soon be unspeakable.

The next generation snowflake may not even know what its like to have a firmly held belief challenged...any challengers are either muted, mentally ill, marginalised from society completely or in prison for being extremists . And that already applies on many of the campuses of our leading universities...City Univeristy of London has banned extremist material such as the Sun and Daily Mail .