' He knows full well that I'm asking specifically about male rape and the main reason initially was to try and elicit a modicum of empathy with victims of rape - a dismal failure it seems.'

So instead of having a debate and talk about topic in a rational way, you'd rather we discuss our feelings about rape. It may be impossible for you to put your feelings aside when talking about such a topic, which is fair enough. But as I said before, just because people in a debate put the emotive to the side for rational conversation about dry statistics and definitions and such, it doesn't mena they are a cold heartless bastard who doesn't care.

'However, I really would like to see if many of the announcements these men here make to discount the experiences of female victims apply where male victims are concerned.'

I'm sure they would, probably to the same unacceptable (to you) way. See, the mistake you make is that you're the one genderising it. You're looking for a double standard to explain something that has nothing to do with such. One could ask why do YOU assume that because you think the male posters aren't showing enough empathy to women victims, that it's because they're WOMEN, and somehow if we talked about male victims there would be more empathy. The reality is that you're talking to men, who are more likely to stay on the rational and not the emotive when debating a topic. Added to that they're not counselling rape victims every day.

Just like Ginx and yourself thinking Graham dismissed Fractelle because she's a WOMAN.

You guys remind me of a friend of mine who jokes 'It's because I'm black' every time he doesn't get his own way.

Nina: I'm aware of some of the quite ludicrous nonsense that women went through in past? history.
I remain frustrated that little or nothing has been said about the the behaviour of SOME women in recent history. Perhaps we have learned to 'circle the wagons'?, with good reason!
Pynchme: my response to Nina is how I feel.

I guess it has never occurred to the OLO Boys Club that they might be creating some feminists on this site? Glod knows, one really needs to put up a strong defence against Neanderthal thinking!
____________________________

NOW:.....you've just raised the bar a notch Houlles.

"Just like Ginx and yourself thinking Graham >>>>>dismissed<<<<< Fractelle because she's a WOMAN."
Posted by Houellebecq, Monday, 18 May 2009 11:14:46 AM
______

Really? How do you KNOW that?

Because if you DO know it, I would like to know HOW you know it.
And if you don't know it to be a fact. Why state it as a fact?

See;-that's the problem with you blokes. You consistently come up with beliefs, and state them as facts! That is why I don't read any of your- (Neanderthal opinion),-posts in full; I just skim them.

However Mr becq, you could very easily prove me wrong...just let us know: how did you know that?

Ginx

How can Houllie say that I was dismissed? Because that is what he wants to believe. And he is wrong.

I had to make a second request for Roscop to be suspended, because on my first request, Graham claimed that he did not understand what my complaint was about. His manner towards my request was terse and impatient, when I pointed out that I did not appreciate his lack of courtesy , Graham described me as 'difficult'.

I have, of course, retained the emails sent to me from Graham, which confirm all the above.

Now I have a question for Houllie.

Do you think it appropriate for Roscop to demand as evidence that Nina supply photos of herself after her assault?

And if so, why?

>>More on the Sexthing. Very nasty stuff indeed:

“The SAFE Act starts off with this chestnut: “Violence against women has been reported to be the leading cause of injury to women.” That’s a prime example of crackpot science. Because according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the leading causes of injury to women are unintentional falls, automobile accidents, and over-exertion.

The SAFE Act goes on to assert, “According to recent Government estimates, approximately 987,400 rapes occur annually in the United States.” Want to know the real number? Only 90,427, according to the FBI.

The SAFE Act wants us to believe that “each year there are 5,300,000 non-fatal violent victimizations committed by intimate partners against women.” That claim reminds us of the old Yiddish proverb about a half-truth being a whole lie. Because the same survey that reached the 5.3 million number reported a similar number of male victims of physical abuse.

For several of its claims, the SAFE Act cites research by Joan Zorza. Problem is, Zorza is not a researcher. She’s a lawyer and well-known advocate for an assortment of radical feminist causes.”

Yes…the abuse industry is full of their old horny chestnuts.

>>Now to a particular NZ case…put these snippets together:

“He branded their accuser, then a 19-year-old university student who worked at the hotel part time, a liar.”

“… said the woman had crowed to staff about a sexual liaison with two footballers in the men's toilets at the Holy Grail sports bar in the city centre on the Thursday night, the night before the group sex incident.”

“… whose son Nigel built the motel-style unit, said that was not possible. "There's no way you can get through the window," he said.”

“Christchurch police said … there had never been a question of them charging the young woman involved with making a false complaint.”

And therein lies the problem….women accusers can lie with impunity and don’t they know it.
_______

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,25498448-5001021,00.htm

Attagirl Fractelle!
I suspected that was the case, but I did not know it as a fact.

Hollowbeak of course knew all the FACTS! We've been seeing them in abundance. Such credibility!
________________________________

OK. crap: (it's a slow process, but maybe;-just maybe, the echo of an empty cavity will die down enough to process reality).

You have cherry-picked YOUR facts; and placed them here...; what's up son? You don't want to post in the relevant thread. Want to stay close to your hunting ground?.

As I said on the relevant thread: the motel in question does some pretty hefty business with the NRL.

Doesn't-that-suggest-anything-to-you?? No??

Try a little harder to work it out.

Ginx, believe me when I say, that I really do wish I was a neanderthal. To be content with booze, babes and football. How simple life would be, not to think too much.

Come up with beliefs and state them as facts, Mmmmh. Nice try.

When it comes to getting hooked by emotive appeals, I become sceptical, very sceptical, Mainly because it bypasses critical analysis and past experience has shown me that making decision based on emotion, is often wrong in the cool light of day.

Various individuals uses this technique like a lynch mob mentaliy. It can turn normally cool headed individuals into angry raging mob.

Examples in the US show that all it took was for a white woman to accuse a black man of rape, and he would be lynched. In Australia a woman in Melb accused a man who happened to be gay of rape, however it was enough of a provocation for two men to bash this man to death.

The guys are in gaol and the woman, scot free.