Deuc,
your well pointed post is appreciated. I don't get the massechusets bit thought, the GB was speaking about New Orleans.
You rightly point out that the 'sodomite' areas were not so badly hit, and as you probably also noticed, I couched my comment as a question, not a statement (sorry spendo :)

Recalling my former post was also good, and my position remains the same, but I still raise the theological 'question'. I guess by the 4th or 5th plague on Egypt they thought less about 'inconvenient climatic events' and more about 'Is the God of the Israelites saying something'?

Laurie.. check 'bigoted' in the dictionary please.

COL I see where ur coming from, but one must also have a socially responsible attitude to allowable behavior. If such behavior is likely to re-inforce attitudes which are detrimental to others, and the community as a whole, the "Social cohesian" thing.

I would rather think 'blokesworld' could be shamed into insignificance, and Tim has a point about it all being 'marketing' for $$$.

As far as I'm concerned, the idea that we as a community don't send a rather strong message out against drunk men drooling over women and vice versa, we can expect the appropriate social reward of increased debauchery.

We are all fragile in some ways, and justifying it with 'consent' is a bit of a cop out, we are still a society, a community, and what we allow reflects on us all.

ENAJ social/cultural reinforcement of gender roles is practiced world wide. I fail to see this as 'wrong'. If it is, on what grounds ? And more importantly, on what authority ?
I wonder what the divorce rate and family breakdown rates are in such places compared with our 'enlightened' approach. Would you make all the team members 'full forward' ?

The girls mag thing isn't relevant here: they're read by young insecure women who believe they need to look, think and behave in a certain way to be accepted by men (and other women), so they more play on women's insecurities and not objectify men as sex toys (sorry timkins). Taking spendocrat's point, maybe blokesworld is more about playing on men's need to be accepted by other men as being un-emotional and well, blokey.

ps..Sneekeepete I'm glad I'm not the only one who wondered about the stimulated-while-buying-a-sandwich thing. Thank goodness I can keep wearing my latex mini skirt and 4" stilettos down george street at lunchtime

You guys crack me up! the people behind blokesworld are laughing all the way to the bank. All this ranting and raving has done nothing but generate massive publicity for the event. I'm in the advertising game and I can tell you, all you men and women who have attacked them on the morality of their event has done nothing more than create a 'taboo' event ... and that my friends means more dollars in their pocket. It takes years to create brand recognition - blokesworld has become an international brand overnight and if the people running the event are smart, they will capitalise on it and convert all this media into ticket sales. I think blokesworld will have the last laugh! As for the victory celebrations for closing them down ... I don't think it will last long ... word is they have found another venue and are up and running in a few weeks. You will never close them down because from what I understand, everything in their event is totally legal. As for me, I really don't care. I'm a grown adult and capable of making my own decisions. I know for a fact that if I see a good looking woman in a pillow fighting competition, I'm sure as hell not going to run out and rape someone (apparently that's what us blokes do) Give me a break. Are we all that stupid!

Exactly Reggy!

Rant and rave about an event of such calibre, and you give it the best publicity money can buy, without the organisers paying a cent. I have seen Blokesworld a few times on Channel 31, and I just laughed at it. I honestly thought it was hilarious. Yes I am male, no I am not very "blokey".... I don't tend to hang out at strip shows, nor do I watch endless hours of porn or go dirt biking, couch racing or whatever. Blokesworld maybe tacky, puerile and sexist, but I fail to see how this type of thing can be exclusively linked to the sort of terrible things Melinda is talking about. As someone said "don't watch it". Don't go to the festival, especially if is probably going to go ahead anyway. This type of thing will always be around... trying to ban it may make it even worse.

Cheers

SM

DAvid BOAZ “COL I see where ur coming from, but one must also have a socially responsible attitude to allowable behavior. If such behavior is likely to re-inforce attitudes which are detrimental to others, and the community as a whole, the "Social cohesian" thing.”

“socially responsible attitude” – pure "subjective judgement" David – I would suggest that, as thinking individuals, we all deserve the right and respect to make up our own minds – I again use “blue poles” (in no phallic sense) as an example. Whether such a purchase reflected a “socially responsible attitude” depends on ones point of view – same for “blokes world” reading cosmo, going to strip clubs, buying porn or any other pursuit which challenges other peoples “sensibilities”.

It starts with tell everyone what events should be banned and ends with the State dictating what music will be played (Stalin), what is good art and what is degenerate (Nazis' famous exhibition of 1937). I personally do not like Kandinski’s paintings much – but that does not mean they should be banned or discouraged. I leave those who do appreciate such things to decide for themselves – and I ignore them –

Just as those like Big Al 30 , sneekeepete, enaj and ruby – you do not possess the right to tell me what is dangerous, moronic or harmful in matters of sexuality of adult indulgences. You do, however, have the right – as I said Melinda Tankard does – to ignore it.

– Fascism is an insidious process. I prefer to stop it in its tracks.

(- Now must not miss next viewing of "the man show" on channel 25)

This is such an amusing article and thread, that it's hard to know where to start with it. While I suppose some people will celebrate the cancellation of the event and others will bemoan it, I agree with those who suggest that the worst thing about the event and TV show is that they are so tastelessly boring!

As a 'bloke', I'd be worried about any other 'bloke' who'd bother attending such an execrable array of activities, let alone shelling out $25 for the privilege - but that's their choice, I guess. Mind you, one wouldn't want to speculate too much about the quality of their relationships with women... I get this image of a few sad losers lining up to get their vicarious jollies the only way they think they can. I suppose one of advantages of the proposed venue was its proximity to the working girls of the Valley, who might have picked up some extra trade if any of the "Blokes" were still sober enough to get an erection after a day out with the other losers.

Who'd need to write anything that demeans men as a category, when the fact that there is apparently a market for this kind of crap says it all, really? As for the ridiculous comments about blokes being distracted from their lunchtime sangas by erotically clad office girls... you don't want to know the images that spring to mind with that one!!

I'd actually like to read an article that intelligently articulates the 'men's rights' agenda, but it seems that advocates for that sorry position are neither intelligent nor articulate enough to present their case positively in an OLO article.