Wow, am I really seeing #CurfewForMen trending on Twitter

[[GSV]Trig]

I mean, really?
There will always be bad components that can be attributed to black people, gay people, men, women, religious nuts and so on, all these militant feminists jumping all over this, maybe I'm just not woke enough...

[Jonj1611]

It will never happen, even the lady in parliament who suggested it says she wasn't being serious

[ik9000]

yes, yes you are, and it's a poorly argued angry flame of a thread. Anyone who points out the folly of such an arugment gets flamed down with "this is what it's like for women" which while I sympathise, it isn't. They seem unable to see the irony in their own arguments and woe betide anyone who, for example, points out that it is their choice to take a taxi at night, to not walk down a certain road, etc. The same things I personally choose to do, as a man, quite often, and for largely the same reason. There are streets in town, and rough pubs I know to avoid due to their reputation (and ever-present blue-lights outside etc). Banning all men won't stop late night violence etc. I've seen feral women fight outside of kebab shops, and over the stupidest of things too.

The best was a "women get told they can't wear XXX, go down certain streets, or be alone after dark. #curfewformen so we can not have to worry and live how we want." Firstly there is no such law saying they can't do certain things and the answer is not therefore to cufrew men even if they have been told that. They have a choice what they do. No-one has banned them from anything. They might feel unable to do something due the concern they feel at a perceived risk. That is the same for men who also do their own risk assessment. I would have loved to have told the non-mask-wearing oaf in the petrol station to put one on. You just had to look at his attitude and how he behaved to know that would not have been a wise idea. It's probably why the shop assistant didn't say anything either.

I'd also expect an insurer to tell someone who had left all their doors and windows wide open, only to burgled, that "no sorry, you didn't take appropriate steps and you're not covered. You didn't act according to the risk". It doesn't excuse the burglar, nor justify the crime. The answer though is not introduce a curfew so "I can do what I want, how I want." Don't misunderstand me, that's not condoning the fools who say "she was asking for it", "She dressed for trouble" - that is not correct and does not wash. But i fail to see how a curfew for men relates to that, and why people keep bringing it up in the twitter feed. It seems to boil down to "i feel unsafe - get rid of men and I'll feel safer". Well people say the same about <take your pick>

• groups of teenagers on street corners/in parks
• people of different races/appearance
• people who drive faster than them and aren't afraid to overtake etc
• football fans
• beggars in underpasses
• etc etc

shall we just curfew everybody then?

There is no curfew on women, it's not illegal to be out after a certain time/in a public place. That people feel unsafe is an issue, but maybe the focus should be on why we allow a society where lawlessness is increasing, people are not taught responsibilty and civic duty, there is no concept of working for a collective good/doing one's bit anymore; we have pursued greed and selfishness and reward it, do not be surprised when that bites. This latest #curfewformen is just another example of that greed. I don't like X so let's ban others so I can benefit. Yeah, great idea. Let's see how far that line of reasoning gets us all in the long run.

[kalniel]

I think it's rather more a provocation to encourage discussion than a serious suggestion, and to that end, seems to be effective.

Too often people start a discussion only imagining things from their own viewpoint - that's entirely natural - but I think the point of saying 'curfew for men' is that at the moment, women feel like there is a curfew for them, for their safety. To understand that viewpoint, and thus be able to engage better in discussion, perhaps men should try and imagine what a curfew for men would feel like.

Then, once we do understand the feelings, we can do something about addressing it - and it is about feelings, since the stats bear out women are very much less likely to be attacked than men are.

[g8ina]

watching

[[GSV]Trig]

I think it's rather more a provocation to encourage discussion than a serious suggestion, and to that end, seems to be effective.

Absolutely, if that was the actual intent than that's fine, but there does seem to be a lot of the fringe feminists jumping on it like its actually a great idea, all men are to blame and that we should do it...

[ik9000]

watching

don;t watch twitter, it's not good for your blood pressure. Nor IQ for that matter.

[kalniel]

Absolutely, if that was the actual intent than that's fine, but there does seem to be a lot of the fringe feminists jumping on it like its actually a great idea, all men are to blame and that we should do it...

Twitter contains all sorts of posts and people, best not spend any energy on the nutters and don't let them derail what could be a useful discussion.

[ik9000]

Absolutely, if that was the actual intent than that's fine, but there does seem to be a lot of the fringe feminists jumping on it like its actually a great idea, all men are to blame and that we should do it...

Those would be the ones I read last night I think. I encountered some of those types in a past stage of life. Unreasonable to the point of being unbearable, lest anyone think i have a problem with equality, it's the intransigent stance that oppressing others (in this case men) to justify making it better for others (in this case women) as means to "beating [perceived] oppression" is ok. It isn't. It never is. If the problem is some kind of oppression the answer is not to oppress!

[[GSV]Trig]

Yeah, beating oppression, by oppressing the oppressor, makes perfect sense lol

I only commented because I was looking for something else on Twitter and noticed it on the trending list, couldn't quite believe some of the stuff I was reading..

[badass]

don;t watch twitter, it's not good for your blood pressure. Nor IQ for that matter.

Nail smashed on head from orbit it's such an accurate hit!

[wazzickle]

Oh stop complaining. It's not actually going to happen, and you know it. You fully have the option of not participating in the discussion if it offends you. You are not the oppressed minority. What a surprise that the first and only thread on this forum about the subject is about you and mens rights rather than what happened to her. Get over it.

[Ttaskmaster]

Yeah, beating oppression, by oppressing the oppressor, makes perfect sense lol

Beating oppression means beating the oppression out of them!!

[[GSV]Trig]

Oh stop complaining. It's not actually going to happen, and you know it. You fully have the option of not participating in the discussion if it offends you. You are not the oppressed minority. What a surprise that the first and only thread on this forum about the subject is about you and mens rights rather than what happened to her. Get over it.

And so it begins..

I wasn't complaining, nor did I say I was offended, I've only been offended once today, and it wasn't by this, it was simply to start a conversation, but before you fall off your high, presumptive horse I'll just wait for @g8ina to lock the thread...

[[GSV]Trig]

Beating oppression means beating the oppression out of them!!

Through education rather than physical violence I presume lol

[Ttaskmaster]

Through education rather than physical violence I presume lol

If they're oppressing the oppressors, I would presume they're perhaps in education (currently or recently graduated), but likely lack the education with which to wield that education as a weapon... And if it were on social media I'd outright dismiss it as someone who didn't even know which way their weapon was pointing!