David Icke's Official Forums (https://forum.davidicke.com/index.php)
-   Awakening The World - Every Heart Makes A Difference (https://forum.davidicke.com/forumdisplay.php?f=67)
-   -   Responses welcome (https://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=320569)

mannybash 29-01-2018 04:11 PM

Responses welcome
 
I had been exchanging emails with a mens rights supporter for about a year. She is well known and a professor who has got many videos on you tube explaining her position and the awful position of mens rights in Canada at the moment. Then in a recent video she mentioned something about George bush senior. Apparently he was accused of some kind of minor affront towards a woman. She seemed to suggest that the accusation was unwarranted. I decided to send her an email pointing out what George bush has been accused of and to take the stance that she was taking may be detrimental to her male rights activity. I didn't get a reply. Later on I sent another email saying that it would be important for us to maintain contact. Still no reply. I would like to know what others think of this and whether I was sensible in sending the email

elshaper 29-01-2018 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mannybash (Post 1062995174)
I had been exchanging emails with a mens rights supporter for about a year. She is well known and a professor who has got many videos on you tube explaining her position and the awful position of mens rights in Canada at the moment. Then in a recent video she mentioned something about George bush senior. Apparently he was accused of some kind of minor affront towards a woman. She seemed to suggest that the accusation was unwarranted. I decided to send her an email pointing out what George bush has been accused of and to take the stance that she was taking may be detrimental to her male rights activity. I didn't get a reply. Later on I sent another email saying that it would be important for us to maintain contact. Still no reply. I would like to know what others think of this and whether I was sensible in sending the email

I don't know who this is but there is a possibility that she may not be what she seems e.g. a true activist. A controlled opposition?

mollymag4 29-01-2018 11:23 PM

I wonder what she would do with the information about George Bush senior in the book The Trance Formation of America by Cathy O'Brien. That might give her pause and hopefully spur her on to her own research about who people like Bush really are. Beyond the smoke and mirrors she is presently dealing with.

I think you were right in emailing her your information. Without it, her argument is flawed as it doesn't have anywhere near the whole story.

Seeingithowitis 21-03-2018 01:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mannybash (Post 1062995174)
I had been exchanging emails with a mens rights supporter for about a year. She is well known and a professor who has got many videos on you tube explaining her position and the awful position of mens rights in Canada at the moment. Then in a recent video she mentioned something about George bush senior. Apparently he was accused of some kind of minor affront towards a woman. She seemed to suggest that the accusation was unwarranted. I decided to send her an email pointing out what George bush has been accused of and to take the stance that she was taking may be detrimental to her male rights activity. I didn't get a reply. Later on I sent another email saying that it would be important for us to maintain contact. Still no reply. I would like to know what others think of this and whether I was sensible in sending the email

I don't know about men's rights in Canada, could you tell us more about why men's rights are putting men in an "awful position" in Canada at the moment?

About the email you sent, you were right to do so. She is probably ignoring you as she doesn't want to hear anything that doesn't fit with her world view and agenda. Sometimes you just have to let it go with people like that, leave them to it.

The whole men/women equality thing is just another divide and rule/distraction and in fact isn't even real.

Sabrina 21-03-2018 09:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mannybash (Post 1062995174)
I had been exchanging emails with a mens rights supporter for about a year. She is well known and a professor who has got many videos on you tube explaining her position and the awful position of mens rights in Canada at the moment. Then in a recent video she mentioned something about George bush senior. Apparently he was accused of some kind of minor affront towards a woman. She seemed to suggest that the accusation was unwarranted. I decided to send her an email pointing out what George bush has been accused of and to take the stance that she was taking may be detrimental to her male rights activity. I didn't get a reply. Later on I sent another email saying that it would be important for us to maintain contact. Still no reply. I would like to know what others think of this and whether I was sensible in sending the email

Yes I think you were right as it isn't a minor thing when a man gropes you - same for if a women gropes a man - I've seen men enjoy this and encourage it but I've also seen a famous gay man on stage get really upset when a woman from the audience grabbed his butt - we should have equality in this world for both sexes. That means keep your hands off peoples private parts. I've automatically slapped a guy for grabbing my butt once - and I shouted out what he did so everyone knew. He was a stranger in a club - it happens a lot especially when you try to get drinks at a busy bar - once a few years ago I had my boobs and butt groped and I had to leave the club I was so distressed. So I think it's a good thing that people have been given boundaries.

If she is sticking up for someone that gropes women and then and went silent on you - that is an admission of guilt as she knows she's wrong but can't admit it.

She will either take a long time to think up a good response or run away and hide as you won the argument and she can't take it.
Either of these outcomes prove she is not interested in debating only in lecturing and forcing her opinions on others.

If however she gets back to you soon and acknowledges your viewpoint - she might be worth listening to.

It sounds like she is only interested in men's rights and pushing an agenda and not in equality.

mannybash 21-03-2018 09:51 AM

This is everything seems to have started. Discrimination in the workplace. Clearly touching a girls behind was sexist. I'm sure it went too far probably in the '50's and men felt it was just some of prank but clearly it can go too far. The opposite is also true though slightly different. Men welcome a little cheekiness but in just the same way it can go too far and some rake offence as they have every right to do so. We have respect each others spaces

mollymag4 21-03-2018 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mannybash (Post 1063009291)
This is everything seems to have started. Discrimination in the workplace. Clearly touching a girls behind was sexist. I'm sure it went too far probably in the '50's and men felt it was just some of prank but clearly it can go too far. The opposite is also true though slightly different. Men welcome a little cheekiness but in just the same way it can go too far and some rake offence as they have every right to do so. We have respect each others spaces

In the fifties, and before that, men felt they could do what they wanted in the workplace. Any butt touching etc. was about power over someone else and may or may not have had anything really to do with sex itself. Power over, and humiliating someone, made those men feel more powerful. At least we can hope that we have progressed from those Neanderthals. That behavior back then was far more than sexist --it was hurtful and degrading and made the men doing it (with impunity) assholes--the women had no one to step in and stand up for them. It was de rigueur for the times.

At least women now have people listening.

mannybash 22-03-2018 12:27 PM

Getting back to my original post. It seems clear that George bush senior is much more than sexist. This woman reacted badly when I merely mentioned that it could jeopardise her male rights activity. This clearly needs to be addressed. The problem in Canada is that there is such anti male feeling that it is beyond reason. It is being used as an excuse to put women in powerful positions where they may not be the right person for the job. There are I am sure situations existing where are vulnerable but the main objection at the moment seems to be university campuses and a few words uttered by professors which seems to be in the wrong area.

hayed joe 22-03-2018 12:35 PM

Despite Iraq and 9/11 on Bush Jnr's watch, there are far more damaging allegations about Snr that should have made him unfit to stand in the first place.
Would it have carried on if the other Bush didn't lose to Trump? (Answer: Well, yes!)

tinfoil hat 22-03-2018 12:36 PM

Putting folk in power who haven't earned that position is a bad idea.

We now have both women and coloured men in positions based solely on gender and/or skin colour alone.

Seeingithowitis 22-03-2018 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mannybash (Post 1063009291)
This is everything seems to have started. Discrimination in the workplace. Clearly touching a girls behind was sexist. I'm sure it went too far probably in the '50's and men felt it was just some of prank but clearly it can go too far. The opposite is also true though slightly different. Men welcome a little cheekiness but in just the same way it can go too far and some rake offence as they have every right to do so. We have respect each others spaces

I don't think it was just in the "50s". It's been going too far up to today and well before the "50s" as well.

However, all of that men's/women's rights thing is an illusion of the matrix.

Btw, did you see my post in the thread above? I asked about what is the "awful position" of men's rights in Canada you mentioned. Did some Googling and can't find anything showing Canadian men's right are being abused, in what way? I'd like to know more about this Mannybash. :)

Seeingithowitis 22-03-2018 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mannybash (Post 1063009571)
The problem in Canada is that there is such anti male feeling that it is beyond reason.

That is only your perspective. I have asked for some evidence and you haven't actually posted anything except opinion, which you keep stating as if it is fact. Opinion is fine but you are implying constantly that all of your perceptions are fact when they aren't.

I've tried googling this and all I find is more people spouting their perceptions. Where are the unfair laws you speak of? Link to the pages that state what those laws are and explain how they are unfair to men. If you have any evidence it would be great to see it. If there is a problem with men's rights in Canada I would like to know so tell us more detail and link to facts so we can discuss this. I have spoken to some male friends in Canada and they had no idea about this so please provide evidence so we can all look into this more.

As an aside you often find that women who are professional rights campaigners for men have father issues. This should be noted is from personal experience and therefore my opinion.

Quote:

It is being used as an excuse to put women in powerful positions where they may not be the right person for the job.
What evidence is there for this? Do you have a problem with women taking less powerful positions from men, or is it just the powerful ones that concern you?

Employment rights laws simply don't function that way. There aren't any laws stating that women are to be given a boost to get a particular position. For example, 100% of applicants with a PhD are up for a University position, lets say 40% are women and 60% are men, but when you look at the University campus only 5% are women for that University position. Do you think that is fair? What would you suggest be done about that to make it fair?

Quote:

There are I am sure situations existing where are vulnerable but the main objection at the moment seems to be university campuses and a few words uttered by professors which seems to be in the wrong area.
Can you explain that more as I don't understand what your point is.

And talking of unfairness to women at university. The right not to be raped or sexuality assaulted comes high on the list of gender rights wouldn't you agree? Well look at these statistics showing the evidence that the position of women on campus is actually more than pretty awful when it comes to the basic right of not being assaulted by men.

Quote:

"Among undergraduate students, 23.1% of females and 5.4% of males experience rape or sexual assault through physical force, violence, or incapacitation."

David Cantor, Bonnie Fisher, Susan Chibnall, Reanna Townsend, et. al. Association of American Universities (AAU), Report on the AAU Campus Climate Survey on Sexual Assault and Sexual Misconduct (September 21, 2015)


mannybash 23-03-2018 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seeingithowitis (Post 1063009613)
I don't think it was just in the "50s". It's been going too far up to today and well before the "50s" as well.

However, all of that men's/women's rights thing is an illusion of the matrix.

Btw, did you see my post in the thread above? I asked about what is the "awful position" of men's rights in Canada you mentioned. Did some Googling and can't find anything showing Canadian men's right are being abused, in what way? I'd like to know more about this Mannybash. :)

There are several channels on you tube that I have come across. One is Karen straughan or girl writes what I can particularly recommend her as she gives a logical and thorough treatment. Diana davison us most familiar with actual cases of this type. She is not a lawyer but helps people prepare their cases. Janice fiamengo is a professor at the university of ottowa. I am sure that you have heard of Dr. Jordan peterson. I am not a lawyer but you only have to see a few of these videos to realise the shocking situation where some one does not know what he is chared with. This is at a university hearing not a court and effectively does not have a right of innocence. One case of a 14 year old boy being sexually abused went to jail for two years and had to pay for the upkeep of the child born without his consent. The situation here is not great either I was speaking to a teacher in my library here in london and he explained how problematic it was

mannybash 23-03-2018 05:14 PM

Let me further add that yes I know that sexual problems have existed for a very long timeI merely used the '50's as an example

mannybash 23-03-2018 05:23 PM

With reference to what was previously mentioned above about the incidences of sexual acts against women on campuses. I have no way of validating these figures but the description of the sexual crime appears to have widened considerably. If the figures quoted are accurate then it is clear that the acts are thoroughly reprehensible and should be addressed. Equally though can you expan the high incidence of male suicide and why this is occurring?

Seeingithowitis 23-03-2018 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mannybash (Post 1063009927)
Let me further add that yes I know that sexual problems have existed for a very long timeI merely used the '50's as an example

Fair enough.

It's good to clarify though. :)

Seeingithowitis 23-03-2018 11:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mannybash (Post 1063009928)
With reference to what was previously mentioned above about the incidences of sexual acts against women on campuses. I have no way of validating these figures

You can validate them by going to the research document I posted the reference to. Did you miss it? It is in my post under the quote for the statistics.

I'm curious why you say you believe videos on the internet, and build your beliefs on them, when videos on the internet give you no way of validating them.

Quote:

but the description of the sexual crime appears to have widened considerably.
You appear to be implying that the sex crimes reported were not in fact sex crimes? How so?

Rape and sexual assault are just that. What *description* would you say isn't really sexual assault or rape when the person (male or female) did not consent?

You are implying rape and sexual assault is okay under some other *description* when in fact they are not okay at all.

Quote:

If the figures quoted are accurate
They are accurate. I posted the reference to the research study that complied the research.

Quote:

then it is clear that the acts are thoroughly reprehensible and should be addressed. Equally though can you expan the high incidence of male suicide and why this is occurring?
How is male suicide related in any way to rapes of males and females in university (or anywhere else for that matter)? Explain your point and how they are connected.

Also, could you quote some actual figures on male suicide rates (and female) by age, demographic and location and post the references and links you got those figures from so I can have a look at them. Otherwise it's just throwing around rumours that may or may not be true.

But as this is an interesting discussion I'll add this about male suicides. It is sexist attitudes BY men that have increased suicide rate in MALES due to the pressure on men to conform to the macho stereotype that most of the men's right males are still pushing on them. It is the men's rights push of anti feminine traits that make expressing emotions a no no for so many men and they end up killing themselves. Men's rights attitudes are involved in increasing the rate of male suicide by suppressing so called female qualities in men.

tinfoil hat 24-03-2018 01:07 AM

Steven Crowder on YouTube has debunked the AAU report.

As have many others on there.

The international bureau of justice reckons its one in fifty two women who get assaulted, which is way off the 25% chance of getting raped the AAU was trying to push.
Plus the widening of the term 'assaulted' which can include wolf whistles and other harmless crap.

the tealady 24-03-2018 01:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mannybash (Post 1062995174)
I had been exchanging emails with a mens rights supporter for about a year. She is well known and a professor who has got many videos on you tube explaining her position and the awful position of mens rights in Canada at the moment. Then in a recent video she mentioned something about George bush senior. Apparently he was accused of some kind of minor affront towards a woman. She seemed to suggest that the accusation was unwarranted. I decided to send her an email pointing out what George bush has been accused of and to take the stance that she was taking may be detrimental to her male rights activity. I didn't get a reply. Later on I sent another email saying that it would be important for us to maintain contact. Still no reply. I would like to know what others think of this and whether I was sensible in sending the email

She might be a front, or she might be looking into it.

Seeingithowitis 24-03-2018 01:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tinfoil hat (Post 1063009992)
Steven Crowder on YouTube has debunked the AAU report.

You mean the right wing FOX Network lackey Steven Crowder who has been described as "glaringly trite" and "homophobic".

Well, if a loud mouthed and paid by the FOX Network 'shock jock' comedian says so it must be true. :rolleyes:

Have you got anything from a neutral person who isn't just making a buck off his loud mouthed and paid for views?

And can you explain how he has debunked it? Not just that he disagrees with it just because it makes his paying public happy.

Quote:

As have many others on there.
Names? Evidence? Argument? Vague rumours or generalisations do not make for good, or rational, discussion.

Quote:

Plus the widening of the term 'assaulted' which can include wolf whistles and other harmless crap.
So if your 13 -18 year old daughter gets wolf whistles from blokes on the way to school or when at bus stops (where she has to wait) you would be okay with that and you think that it is harmless? Or your sister at University aged 20 gets asked out by a guy who won't take no for an answer and he 'just happens' to be hanging around outside her hall of residence later in the evening and starts touching her, which he says is 'only flirting', and you think that is okay? You're okay with sexual intimidation and threats (those are harmless to you)? What about exposure of erect male genitalia while he says to the woman (or man) "come on you know you want it"? In fact that last one happened to a 15 year old son of a friend of mine when the boy was coming home from football practice and the gay man also made comments about his "sexy shorts". You okay with that? What do you think about these examples, are they okay with you?

What exactly are you saying a man is saying when he wolf whistles? What is he trying to say to the woman (or man)?

What would you describe as "harmless crap" when it comes to unwanted sexual behaviour? Examples?


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:25 AM.