Male Violence

[Barbe bleu 826]

3 hours ago, Canary Wundaboy said:

 ...Speaking out is not toxic, speaking out to belittle or dismiss others is. 

....you McCarthyist moron. 

I'm bringing attention to this as i feel you are moderate, thoughtful and well meaning. Its not really about you or this post, rather i use this as an example that won't, i hope, generate a fight.

Its a thread on toxic masculinity on a message board absolutely riddled with posturing and abuse.

I'm  not remotely suggesting that there is anything like an equivalence between the violence that is being widely discussed and the bashing that goes on here but perhaps we all on here need to check  how our speech, actions and attitudes feed into a toxic culture before we comment too much on others?

 

Edited March 12, 2021 by Barbe bleu

[The Real Buh 3,432]

26 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

Except being fundamentally decent in behaviour and rectifying a known toxic brand of such behaviour is not remotely the "death of the individual".

I really struggle to see how a call for some degree of civility in behaviour could ever be construed as collectivism.

There’s someone in the House of Lords calling for all men to be locked up from 6pm every day. Is that civil discourse? Collectivism at it again, the domain of the weak willed.

 

[TheGunnShow 5,940]

7 minutes ago, The Real Buh said:

There’s someone in the House of Lords calling for all men to be locked up from 6pm every day. Is that civil discourse? Collectivism at it again, the domain of the weak willed.

 

That doesn't even begin to explain how the two are linked.

[ricardo 7,395]

6 minutes ago, The Real Buh said:

There’s someone in the House of Lords calling for all men to be locked up from 6pm every day. Is that civil discourse? Collectivism at it again, the domain of the weak willed.

 

At my age and at this time of year I'm seldom out after 6pm anyway but if they tried to make it a law then rain, snow and blizzards couldn't  keep me indoors.

[Herman 9,767]

Just now, ricardo said:

At my age and at this time of year I'm seldom out after 6pm anyway but if they tried to make it a law then rain, snow and blizzards couldn't  keep me indoors.

I don't think Buh is allowed to be out after 6pm whether he wants to or not.😉

[The Real Buh 3,432]

4 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

That doesn't even begin to explain how the two are linked.

This wasn’t some nutter on Twitter, this was a politician in the House of Lords. Suggesting 50% of the population is locked up after 6pm based on their sex.

She also happens to be far left. How surprising...

[ricardo 7,395]

1 minute ago, Herman said:

I don't think Buh is allowed to be out after 6pm whether he wants to or not.😉

I usually have to get permission from Mrs R.😉

[TheGunnShow 5,940]

3 minutes ago, The Real Buh said:

This wasn’t some nutter on Twitter, this was a politician in the House of Lords. Suggesting 50% of the population is locked up after 6pm based on their sex.

She also happens to be far left. How surprising...

Again though, the link with collectivism is really not clear. Without clarification it seems like chucking shibboleths around.

Furthermore, reading about this, she's not being serious with the idea. She's merely throwing it in as a counterpoint to highlight how absurd it is that women have to basically take special attention and ideally not be around on the streets after that time.

To quote: 

When Baroness Jones was asked if a curfew for men would be imposing on men what women have to face - even though it would be self-inflicted she replied: "Exactly. That's my exact point.

"That in fact nobody makes a fuss when, for example, the police suggest women stay home. But when I suggest it, men are up in arms."

Curfew for men: Will UK implement 6pm curfew for men? | UK | News | Express.co.uk

If that is a serious intent, then sure, by all means be enraged - you and me both. However, I am pretty sure that is not remotely her intent.

[Bill 1,788]

17 minutes ago, The Real Buh said:

There’s someone in the House of Lords calling for all men to be locked up from 6pm every day. Is that civil discourse? Collectivism at it again, the domain of the weak willed.

oh dear, poor simple rightie

''Baroness Jenny Jones of Moulescoomb told Sky News that the idea was "not an entirely serious suggestion" and is not party policy."

The point being made, tongue in cheek, was that when there is a spate of attacks on women - they are all advised to stay indoors - rather than all men, though the attacker is known to be a man.

[The Real Buh 3,432]

1 minute ago, Bill said:

oh dear, poor simple rightie

''Baroness Jenny Jones of Moulescoomb told Sky News that the idea was "not an entirely serious suggestion" and is not party policy."

The point being made, tongue in cheek, was that when there is a spate of attacks on women - they are all advised to stay indoors - rather than all men, though the attacker is known to be a man.

I’m sure it’s be received in the same way if a conservative peer says “keep women locked up after 6pm”

 

sounds like backpedaling from a, frankly, dangerously deranged individual who probably shouldn’t be a peer.

But, you’d defend her, of course you would.  She’s far left and you are all in on the collectivism because you are a weak individual. It’s so boringly predictable predicament. What an absolute bore.

[horsefly 4,300]

3 hours ago, Canary Wundaboy said:

I've read some tosh on this forum before but this post is truly despicable.

"Take a look at the males calling for the end of “toxic masculinity”, yeah, look at the state of them. Of course they want the end of masculinity look at them."

Toxic masculinity != masculinity. Not all masculinity is toxic. Strength is not toxic, application of that strength to intimidate or cause harm to others is. Speaking out is not toxic, speaking out to belittle or dismiss others is. 

Taking a stand against violence in general and violence towards women specifically is not a bastion of the "hard left", you McCarthyist moron. It should be the bastion of anyone with a shred of decency and compassion, and the ability to look at the statistics and the sheer volume of women speaking out of the last 24-48 hours and realise that there is much we can help do in society to make it a better place to benefit ALL. As for "beware of weak men" that's great advice, how do you identify them in the street? Do they all have a big green neon sign above their heads women should be looking out for? If all the sexual assaulters and rapists had a huge red arrow above them at all times I imagine women would feel a lot safer, it's the fact that you cannot tell who the risks are that means women have to treat ALL men like a potential threat. THAT's the problem. 

Well said CW! Perhaps if more on here had a young daughter like you have they might be more willing to recognise the reality of toxic masculinity and its consequences. How awful it is that already you have to contemplate how you will prepare and protect your daughter from male agression. I find it astonishing that some of the commentators on this thread are less concerned about the indisputable statistics of male agression against women than they are about the possibility that this might look a bit too "woke" for them to recognise as a genuine issue. 

[The Real Buh 3,432]

Just now, horsefly said:

Well said CW! Perhaps if more on here had a young daughter like you have they might be more willing to recognise the reality of toxic masculinity and its consequences. How awful it is that already you have to contemplate how you will prepare and protect your daughter from male agression. I find it astonishing that some of the commentators on this thread are less concerned about the indisputable statistics of male agression against women than they are about the possibility that this might look a bit too "woke" for them to recognise as a genuine issue. 

^ weak individual, all in on collectivism 

 

Every time. Like clockwork.

[horsefly 4,300]

8 minutes ago, Bill said:

oh dear, poor simple rightie

''Baroness Jenny Jones of Moulescoomb told Sky News that the idea was "not an entirely serious suggestion" and is not party policy."

The point being made, tongue in cheek, was that when there is a spate of attacks on women - they are all advised to stay indoors - rather than all men, though the attacker is known to be a man.

I'm afraid it's far too subtle for gamma-brained individual like him to understand. I bet his ideal of manhood is someone like Peter Sutcliffe; he knew how to keep women safe at home (apart from the little "necessary" inconvenience a a few murders of course).

[The Real Buh 3,432]

14 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

Again though, the link with collectivism is really not clear. Without clarification it seems like chucking shibboleths around.

Furthermore, reading about this, she's not being serious with the idea. She's merely throwing it in as a counterpoint to highlight how absurd it is that women have to basically take special attention and ideally not be around on the streets after that time.

To quote: 

When Baroness Jones was asked if a curfew for men would be imposing on men what women have to face - even though it would be self-inflicted she replied: "Exactly. That's my exact point.

"That in fact nobody makes a fuss when, for example, the police suggest women stay home. But when I suggest it, men are up in arms."

Curfew for men: Will UK implement 6pm curfew for men? | UK | News | Express.co.uk

If that is a serious intent, then sure, by all means be enraged - you and me both. However, I am pretty sure that is not remotely her intent.

Because this isn’t about a woman who was murdered, it’s about political power. There is nothing that won’t be co-opted for political capital.

the pages online for the demonstrations in the wake of the murder are all far left and anarchism. “Smash capitalism”

It’s sick, it’s not a solution, it’s co-opting a woman’s death for political gain. 
 

Those involved should be ashamed but that won’t happen

[The Real Buh 3,432]

2 minutes ago, horsefly said:

I'm afraid it's far too subtle for gamma-brained individual like him to understand. I bet his ideal of manhood is someone like Peter Sutcliffe; he knew how to keep women safe at home (apart from the little "necessary" inconvenience a a few murders of course).

Your idea of manhood is Joseph Stalin you freak.

[TheGunnShow 5,940]

4 minutes ago, The Real Buh said:

Because this isn’t about a woman who was murdered, it’s about political power. There is nothing that won’t be co-opted for political capital.

the pages online for the demonstrations in the wake of the murder are all far left and anarchism. “Smash capitalism”

It’s sick, it’s not a solution, it’s co-opting a woman’s death for political gain. 
 

Those involved should be ashamed but that won’t happen

I don't see how this is about political power when it's a completely tongue-in-cheek proposal with the aim of highlighting how absurd the current state of affairs is for most women nowadays. Furthermore, it might well be a woman's death that triggers a dose of soul-searching in how we educate/nurture boys and what we as society expect from them, but this toxic masculinity idea is the tip of the iceberg.

I would hypothesise that, due to prevailing cultures for boys, poorer academic performance to poorer conduct (this notion of "sucking it up / being a man" is, as I have said before, been a real problem in men's mental health) are all linked to the same antiquated norms held for boys which may well be holding them back.

It just happens to be that in some cases women are the tragic victims. 

[The Real Buh 3,432]

2 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

I don't see how this is about political power when it's a completely tongue-in-cheek proposal with the aim of highlighting how absurd the current state of affairs is for most women nowadays. Furthermore, it might well be a woman's death that triggers a dose of soul-searching in how we educate/nurture boys and what we as society expect from them, but this toxic masculinity idea is the tip of the iceberg.

I would hypothesise that, due to prevailing cultures for boys, poorer academic performance to poorer conduct (this notion of "sucking it up / being a man" is, as I have said before, been a real problem in men's mental health) are all linked to the same antiquated norms held for boys which may well be holding them back.

It just happens to be that in some cases women are the tragic victims. 

Does any of this education by chance involve teaching them to submit to collectivism and abandon being a strong individual? I suspect it is.

maybe we should just continue to heavily medicate boys from a young age? That probably won’t be a disaster

[A Load of Squit 5,164]

1 minute ago, The Real Buh said:

Does any of this education by chance involve teaching them to submit to collectivism and abandon being a strong individual? I suspect it is.

maybe we should just continue to heavily medicate boys from a young age? That probably won’t be a disaster

He's obviously speaking from experience.

 

[horsefly 4,300]

This letter sent to Harriet Harman demonstrates all you need to know about the attitude of the deniers of toxic masculinity:

 

[The Real Buh 3,432]

3 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

He's obviously speaking from experience.

 

I defined you, collectivist.

cry for me harder

[TheGunnShow 5,940]

6 minutes ago, The Real Buh said:

Does any of this education by chance involve teaching them to submit to collectivism and abandon being a strong individual? I suspect it is.

maybe we should just continue to heavily medicate boys from a young age? That probably won’t be a disaster

How does being civil around women mean "submitting to collectivism and abandon being a strong individual" here?

At most, the point about toxic masculinity is about examining previously held assumptions that may not have had much purpose and certainly have not been questioned. If anything, it's asking men to take a good look at themselves and see what - they - can do to be better. No state / no collectivism in there at all.

If anything, I think it's asking for the polar opposite. To me it looks like it's asking we should be taking responsibility for our conduct and indeed ourselves.

[The Real Buh 3,432]

4 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

How does being civil around women mean "submitting to collectivism and abandon being a strong individual" here?

At most, the point about toxic masculinity is about examining previously held assumptions that may not have had much purpose and certainly have not been questioned. If anything, it's asking men to take a good look at themselves and see what - they - can do to be better. No state / no collectivism in there at all.

If anything, I think it's asking for the polar opposite. To me it looks like it's asking we should be taking responsibility for our conduct and indeed ourselves.

You sound like a Human Resources department. Look, I’m making a wider point here about collectivism and the evils it’s caused. It’s clearly hit a nerve with you, because its defined you, it’s never to late to turn your back on fringe politics and collectivism.

individuals should conduct themselves in a civil manner, not because of some collectivist threat.

[TheGunnShow 5,940]

Just now, The Real Buh said:

You sound like a Human Resources department. Look, I’m making a wider point here about collectivism and the evils it’s caused. It’s clearly hit a nerve with you, because its defined you, it’s never to late to turn your back on fringe politics and collectivism.

individuals should conduct themselves in a civil manner, not because of some collectivist threat.

How is asking for people to take responsibility for their own conduct tantamount to collectivism?

[The Real Buh 3,432]

6 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

How is asking for people to take responsibility for their own conduct tantamount to collectivism?

#TooManyMen

[TheGunnShow 5,940]

Just now, The Real Buh said:

#TooManyMen

Again, there's nothing re. collectivism in there. Personal responsibility, by its very nature, is very much the polar opposite. And "too many" men still seems better than "not all men".

Maybe those who are triggered by this are among the "too many"?

[The Real Buh 3,432]

2 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

Again, there's nothing re. collectivism in there. Personal responsibility, by its very nature, is very much the polar opposite. And "too many" men still seems better than "not all men".

Maybe those who are triggered by this are among the "too many"?

If you’ve got something to say about me then put your copy of the guardian down and say it, soft lad.

[TheGunnShow 5,940]

Did you just admit you were triggered?

[The Real Buh 3,432]

4 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

Did you just admit you were triggered?

Does your wife’s boyfriend know you are on the internet this late?

[TheGunnShow 5,940]

Just now, The Real Buh said:

Does your wife’s boyfriend know you are on the internet this late?

Some more incorrect assumptions there. Not everyone cares for the notion of marriage. Or indeed partnership.

[sonyc 5,519]

1 hour ago, ricardo said:

I usually have to get permission from Mrs R.😉

Real men make jokes.

Like it Ricardo 😉