Big Willie wrote:Tony Montana wrote:My response to you is what women face when they report sexual crimes.
And that makes it ok because...
It's called irony...
Sexual Harassment Allegations
And what makes it ironic seeing as I've never asked that question to any woman before. You're barking up the wrong tree mate.
goon wrote:Tony Montana wrote:Not in this thread but in society many people do it and you know it.
Oh ok, I thought you were referring to people in this thread.
That's exactly how i understood this sentence especially the "on here" bit.
"[font=Source Sans Pro]There's outrage on here at how men are treated but when it's women it's basically expected. "[/font]
Big Willie wrote:And what makes it ironic seeing as I've never asked that question to any woman before. You're barking up the wrong tree mate.
Its not just about you. I'm talking about the context of this thread and what women have to go through.
Tony Montana wrote:Bold Tone wrote:Really?
Have you read the thread?
This "outrage", as you exaggerate it, is specific to one of your posts a couple of pages back and your subsequent responses.Outrage from you on the taxi driver comment.
Please explain which part of that comment expressed outrage.
Tony you're just looking for an argument where there isn't one to be had.
Your whole post seemed like outrage to me at the injustice (which it was).
Big Willie wrote:Tony you're just looking for an argument where there isn't one to be had.
Not looking for arguments at all. I don't do that.
Tony Montana wrote:Big Willie wrote:Tony you're just looking for an argument where there isn't one to be had.
Not looking for arguments at all. I don't do that.
You seem be trying your best to come across as the defender of females against all of us misogynists on OMITT.
Big Willie wrote:Tony Montana wrote:Not looking for arguments at all. I don't do that.
You seem be trying your best to come across as the defender of females against all of us misogynists on OMITT.
No I'm pointing out the bias and the arguments.
Sure we have mates who have been accused for something they didn't do. I bet there's more women who have been ignored, doubted, looked down upon and even abused because of stating their victimhood. Then the State or institution essentially agrees and the perpetrators go free.
It's brutal out there.
Tony Montana wrote:Your whole post seemed like outrage to me at the injustice (which it was).
That's another thing you've got wrong about my post.
It wasn't an injustice and the police, licencing committee and CPS were correct in everything they did.
He could have been a rapist who is a danger to the public and they followed the law to the letter.
I highlighted this in my original post by using the words "justified" and "understandably".
I only brought it up as i thought your comment was, in fact, justifying victim blaming.
As someone else (Big Wills or Flobs) replied to you, two wrongs do not make a right.
Tony Montana wrote:Big Willie wrote:You seem be trying your best to come across as the defender of females against all of us misogynists on OMITT.
No I'm pointing out the bias and the arguments.
Sure we have mates who have been accused for something they didn't do. I bet there's more women who have been ignored, doubted, looked down upon and even abused because of stating their victimhood. Then the State or institution essentially agrees and the perpetrators go free.
It's brutal out there.
And who on here argued differently. I think you need to go back and read all the posts again if you took away anything else. Loke I said your tryong to puck arguments with people where there is none to be had.
@[deleted]:
"A better answer is to concede positions of power to women, even those around you, even at your own expense, and for men to learn to be better followers, rather than always trying to lead the way."
How is this implemented practically without becoming what will be termed "reverse sexism"?
Also wouldn't a person who is a bad follower remain so regardless of the leader's gender?
- Respect women in your workplace who are peers or leaders and allow them to do their jobs unimpeded.
- Make sure the junior women in your workplace are supported in their progress.
Over the years I've found my women bosses are often subject to a separate dimension of difficulty based on their gender.
I've also noticed that often women in my teams are reluctant to promote themselves or seek new responsibilities even when they're clearly more competent than their male peers.
It's not really that hard as a guy to avoid contributing to this dynamic, and you don't really take a risk doing it either.
Big Willie wrote:Tony Montana wrote:No I'm pointing out the bias and the arguments.
Sure we have mates who have been accused for something they didn't do. I bet there's more women who have been ignored, doubted, looked down upon and even abused because of stating their victimhood. Then the State or institution essentially agrees and the perpetrators go free.
It's brutal out there.
And who on here argued differently. I think you need to go back and read all the posts again if you took away anything else. Loke I said your tryong to puck arguments with people where there is none to be had.
Again no.
It's not just about what is said by you guys on here but the general tone of society when this happens.
flobaba wrote:@[deleted]:
"A better answer is to concede positions of power to women, even those around you, even at your own expense, and for men to learn to be better followers, rather than always trying to lead the way."
How is this implemented practically without becoming what will be termed "reverse sexism"?
Also wouldn't a person who is a bad follower remain so regardless of the leader's gender?
Why do you fear reverse sexism? That's hardly the biggest thing we should be worrying about.
Burnwinter wrote:Holy crap …
What strikes me in that article is how much of the public persona, the on set loud criticism of performances, insults, just being a general dickhead lines up with other producers and directors. Singer comes to mind immediately and we know he was a sexual predator too. That makes me very suspicious other producers who you hear of acting like that publicly, are they doing the same as Weinstein and Singer in private? I'd honestly be shocked if most of them are not.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-42350064
At least we've finally got one who hasn't denied it.
I'm never sure how to feel about stuff like this. On the one hand fair play to him for recognising he was a shithead and admitting to it. On the other hand maybe if he hadn't been a shit head in the first place he wouldn't have to apologise.