bridge too far Posted 11 June, 2011 Share Posted 11 June, 2011 Of course but that isn't what she said. There was a debate about men in childcare on radio two a couple of days ago. Many comments were good (we have a responsibility to get men in childcare, men are needed just as much as women etc) but Also some staggeringly ignorant comments about why would men want to work with children and that there will always be suspicion there and you have to ask the motives of a man who wants to work with children. Rubbish like this just fuels these idiots. Absolutely there should be more men involved in childcare, either professionally or on a voluntary basis. But, Hypo, when you read about this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-13713147 and this http://www.nurseryworld.co.uk/News/MostRead/1073868/Nursery-worker-admits-child-rape/ you can understand why there can be suspicions. These cases are rare (thank goodness) but it's easy to see why some people jump to conclusions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 11 June, 2011 Share Posted 11 June, 2011 Absolutely there should be more men involved in childcare, either professionally or on a voluntary basis. But, Hypo, when you read about this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-13713147 and this http://www.nurseryworld.co.uk/News/MostRead/1073868/Nursery-worker-admits-child-rape/ you can understand why there can be suspicions. These cases are rare (thank goodness) but it's easy to see why some people jump to conclusions. It's ridiculous sensationalist reporting which causes moral panic. Less than two percent of the work force is male which means that children miss out on so much. No wonder babies and toddlers cry and are fearful when men walk into a room. The Plymouth case involved a woman sexually abusing a child but does that means it's ok to be suspicious of women? I understand there is a need for men to be more careful, I always leave the door open when escorting a child to the toilet or changing a nappy for instance but to have people questioning why a man would want to work in a nursery is deeply ignorant and offensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 11 June, 2011 Author Share Posted 11 June, 2011 sort of depending if she was referring to Brit troops or allied forces. it was british forces..even so that would be the same in saying most muslins are suicide bombers...now, what would the reaction to that one be....? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 11 June, 2011 Share Posted 11 June, 2011 It's ridiculous sensationalist reporting which causes moral panic. Less than two percent of the work force is male which means that children miss out on so much. No wonder babies and toddlers cry and are fearful when men walk into a room. The Plymouth case involved a woman sexually abusing a child but does that means it's ok to be suspicious of women? I understand there is a need for men to be more careful, I always leave the door open when escorting a child to the toilet or changing a nappy for instance but to have people questioning why a man would want to work in a nursery is deeply ignorant and offensive. Well, as the mother-in-law of a male early years teacher, you can only expect me to agree with what you say. Whilst not, in any way shape or form, looking to excuse the Plymouth woman, I believe that such female monsters carry out the abuse not for their own 'gratification' but to placate / appeal to male paedophiles. No excuse - because they know it's wrong and, rightly, they should be punished. But I think I'm right in saying that the greatest percentage by far of abuse of small children is carried out by immediate family / friends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 11 June, 2011 Share Posted 11 June, 2011 it was british forces..even so that would be the same in saying most muslins are suicide bombers...now, what would the reaction to that one be....? Now, I didn't see the programme because I was on holiday. So I only have the currant bun's version. But from what I read in that article, she didn't say MOST British forces were rapists, did she? She said some might be and I guess that's sort of backed up by the links I posted above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 11 June, 2011 Share Posted 11 June, 2011 I thought sexualising a kiss from a daughter to a father was too far. That is the problem with anything radical. Liberal feminism is quite all right, but like all things radical, radical feminists too often relate everything to the central theme that they claim the world is carved around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 11 June, 2011 Author Share Posted 11 June, 2011 (edited) Now, I didn't see the programme because I was on holiday. So I only have the currant bun's version. But from what I read in that article, she didn't say MOST British forces were rapists, did she? She said some might be and I guess that's sort of backed up by the links I posted above. she was asked if the alledged raping of women in libya was true, would that legitimise the use of ground forces by the UK...she went on to say NO. as basically, we would end up raping women also........go on iplayer and look for yourself.... when she went on about fathers flirting with their daughters.....it was beyond belief.. she got off lightly because she is a lesbian, left wing female just look at the reaction the mail hack got..and it nothing as disgusting as what she said..yet he was boo'd etc Edited 11 June, 2011 by Thedelldays Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 11 June, 2011 Share Posted 11 June, 2011 ^^^ Why do you say that she's a lesbian? From what I've read she was a rabid heterosexual in her youth and was married but it didn't work out because she had affairs. She's 72 now, I think. She's not left-wing - she's more than that. She's a Marxist Anarchist and, whilst most men will dismiss her without reading any of her books, intellectually she's well regarded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 11 June, 2011 Author Share Posted 11 June, 2011 ^^^ Why do you say that she's a lesbian? From what I've read she was a rabid heterosexual in her youth and was married but it didn't work out because she had affairs. She's 72 now, I think. She's not left-wing - she's more than that. She's a Marxist Anarchist and, whilst most men will dismiss her without reading any of her books, intellectually she's well regarded. that is the vibe she gives off...the mail hack was heckled constantly for far less radical remarks.... either way, she got off very lightly that night..I guess perception is what it is all about..rather than people actually listening to what was said IMO, the two contentious points she made were disgraceful Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revolution saint Posted 11 June, 2011 Share Posted 11 June, 2011 There's no evidence to suggest that Libya is carrying out state sponsored rape - it's a scare story designed to increase support for further military resources. This allegation deflects attention away from what we're doing and why we're doing it. Instead of our media asking questions and investigating they faithfully repeat a demonising mantra; let's invade Libya, why? Because they rape. Let's invade Iraq, why? Because they kill babies, harbour terrorists and have WMDs. It's the same story over and over again. There may well be legitimate reasons for military intervention and I'd probably agree with them but calling the opposing force rapists with no foundation doesn't help the cause. And what does Greer do? She gives credit to the claim by refusing to dismiss it as the falsity it is and discusses it as if it were true. Now when we commit ground troops the general populace will believe it's being waged against evil and rape - a simple argument for simple people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 11 June, 2011 Author Share Posted 11 June, 2011 There's no evidence to suggest that Libya is carrying out state sponsored rape - it's a scare story designed to increase support for further military resources. This allegation deflects attention away from what we're doing and why we're doing it. Instead of our media asking questions and investigating they faithfully repeat a demonising mantra; let's invade Libya, why? Because they rape. Let's invade Iraq, why? Because they kill babies, harbour terrorists and have WMDs. It's the same story over and over again. There may well be legitimate reasons for military intervention and I'd probably agree with them but calling the opposing force rapists with no foundation doesn't help the cause. And what does Greer do? She gives credit to the claim by refusing to dismiss it as the falsity it is and discusses it as if it were true. Now when we commit ground troops the general populace will believe it's being waged against evil and rape - a simple argument for simple people. as you say that..the heckled Sunday Mail hack did just that..he said people should not be hasty in believing this thanks to the WMD claims etc and said the same thing you did....yet he was heckled more so throughout Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revolution saint Posted 11 June, 2011 Share Posted 11 June, 2011 as you say that..the heckled Sunday Mail hack did just that..he said people should not be hasty in believing this thanks to the WMD claims etc and said the same thing you did....yet he was heckled more so throughout Fair enough, I only caught Greer's bit at the end. Surprising of a Mail journo but pleasing all the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kadeem Hardison Posted 11 June, 2011 Share Posted 11 June, 2011 What worse is when she said it there were one or two in the audience who tried to applaud her for it. Yet, as a mod, you are happy with a thread on here where people "applaud" Prince Philip's offensive and racist comments? Which is worse out of those two things? It's probably Greer because she is talking about British soldiers, not "slanty-eyed foreigners". I think that Deppo's ban is fair enough in isolation, but it's this kind of policy that allows racism - implied or otherwise - to go unchecked that makes it seem so ludicrous and clearly defines Baj's/the moderators' warped moral stance: sillyness = bad; racism = fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 11 June, 2011 Share Posted 11 June, 2011 I saw the programme and thought that she said two of the most disgusting things that I’ve seen on QT over the years. One about troops raping, and the other one about girls “flirting” with their fathers. Yet she got off lightly and Hitchin's took a load of stick. Even Dimble couldn’t wait to lay into the Mail on Sunday. Yet Hitchin's had 2 of the best answers, once when the girl asked if he’d ever been to a poor country, he then reeled off a list, shutting her up. But the best moment was when some young leftie was spouting on about a “just” war in Libya. Hitchin's said “you’re about the right age, go and sign up”. Hitchin's is defo a bit strange, but compared to Greer he was completely normal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 11 June, 2011 Author Share Posted 11 June, 2011 That's right, hitchin was saying we should stay out of Libya and deffo not put ground troops in. That young lad was all for it.... See his face when hitchin said he should sign ip then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 11 June, 2011 Share Posted 11 June, 2011 I find it strange the change in student attitudes over the years. In the 60’s they were against wars and yet nowadays a lot of young people seem to want us to get involved in Libya. It’s very easy to say we should go in and protect civilians, when it’s not their brothers, sisters and relatives coming home in coffins. Hitchins was right, in dealing with that nipper on QT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revolution saint Posted 11 June, 2011 Share Posted 11 June, 2011 I find it strange the change in student attitudes over the years. In the 60’s they were against wars and yet nowadays a lot of young people seem to want us to get involved in Libya. It’s very easy to say we should go in and protect civilians, when it’s not their brothers, sisters and relatives coming home in coffins. Hitchins was right, in dealing with that nipper on QT. I can remember being a student during the first gulf war and being passionately pro-war, even to the extent of wanting to sign up for it (I doubt they would have had me though). I remember going to a debate about it and we discussed the bombing of a baby milk factory which it was claimed by the allies to have been manufacturing weapons and everyone of us there believed it. Except for one bloke who was virtually laughed out of the hall. He was right though. It was only later that I realised that we'd been lied to about a lot of things. I'm not sure here in Britain we've ever had much of a student demonstration culture though. The US had Vietnam and the French had '68 but we've not had much to mirror that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 11 June, 2011 Share Posted 11 June, 2011 I find it strange the change in student attitudes over the years. In the 60’s they were against wars and yet nowadays a lot of young people seem to want us to get involved in Libya. It’s very easy to say we should go in and protect civilians, when it’s not their brothers, sisters and relatives coming home in coffins. Hitchins was right, in dealing with that nipper on QT. It often appears to me that those who are the keenest for our forces to get involved are the least likely to be ones at the sharp end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperMikey Posted 11 June, 2011 Share Posted 11 June, 2011 There is substance in her comments, but perhaps Question Time wasn't the right forum. There have been rape allegations against most forces deployed by the West into the Middle-East, and I am 100% certain that there are British troops that are serving or have recently served over there that have raped while they were deployed. She's not saying that all of the British troops abroad are slathering uncontrollable rape-machines, however much the red-tops would like to think so. It seems that you can't say anything but massive praise for British troops without getting absolutely shot down. I was more taken aback by Peter Hitchens saying "What is the purpose of sex education other than taking away the innocence of our children?" and then a few seconds after "The more sex education we get, the more sexually transmitted diseases are about and the more teenage pregnancies there are". THAT should be the headline story, that blinkered fools such as him are at the forefront of our national press... it's shameful really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 11 June, 2011 Author Share Posted 11 June, 2011 (edited) There is substance in her comments, but perhaps Question Time wasn't the right forum. There have been rape allegations against most forces deployed by the West into the Middle-East, and I am 100% certain that there are British troops that are serving or have recently served over there that have raped while they were deployed. She's not saying that all of the British troops abroad are slathering uncontrollable rape-machines, however much the red-tops would like to think so. It seems that you can't say anything but massive praise for British troops without getting absolutely shot down. I was more taken aback by Peter Hitchens saying "What is the purpose of sex education other than taking away the innocence of our children?" and then a few seconds after "The more sex education we get, the more sexually transmitted diseases are about and the more teenage pregnancies there are". THAT should be the headline story, that blinkered fools such as him are at the forefront of our national press... it's shameful really. riiiight....so most forces are raping people then..? do you have any idea what you are on about..? tell me mikey...super dupa mikey..seeing as you are 100% CERTAIN my comrades are raping people in the gulf...tell us all what your experiences are of being over there or anywhere deployed for that matter...? Edited 11 June, 2011 by Thedelldays Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 11 June, 2011 Share Posted 11 June, 2011 riiiight....so most forces are raping people then..? do you have any idea what you are on about..? He's well able to answer for himself but I suspect he means 'forces from most countries deployed in the Middle East' rather than most British forces. Again, I refer you to the four links I posted earlier. I also think there have been a number of US soldiers tried and convicted of rape in the ME. But, of course, the vast, vast majority of British forces are decent, law-abiding citizens - of that I have no doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperMikey Posted 11 June, 2011 Share Posted 11 June, 2011 riiiight....so most forces are raping people then..? do you have any idea what you are on about..? You can't deny that there haven't been rape allegations against a lot of Western forces in the Middle-East. I know you're a service-man so you've obviously got responsibilities and view-points, but seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 11 June, 2011 Author Share Posted 11 June, 2011 You can't deny that there haven't been rape allegations against a lot of Western forces in the Middle-East. I know you're a service-man so you've obviously got responsibilities and view-points, but seriously. you have not got clue mate...yet you are 100% certain...briliant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperMikey Posted 11 June, 2011 Share Posted 11 June, 2011 He's well able to answer for himself but I suspect he means 'forces from most countries deployed in the Middle East' rather than most British forces. Again, I refer you to the four links I posted earlier. I also think there have been a number of US soldiers tried and convicted of rape in the ME. But, of course, the vast, vast majority of British forces are decent, law-abiding citizens - of that I have no doubt. He conveniently didn't highlight the few words after the bit of my post which came under scrutiny where I said "forces deployed by the West", not British forces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperMikey Posted 11 June, 2011 Share Posted 11 June, 2011 you have not got clue mate...yet you are 100% certain...briliant BTF posted 4 links showing links between Western forces and rape allegations, care to read them before you just completely dismiss what I have to say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 11 June, 2011 Share Posted 11 June, 2011 There is a world of difference between a member of the forces raping someone and rape being used as a weapon of war as it has been in areas of Africa, especially the Congo. Greer, or as I understood her, was using the later argument and not the former. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 11 June, 2011 Author Share Posted 11 June, 2011 BTF posted 4 links showing links between Western forces and rape allegations, care to read them before you just completely dismiss what I have to say? 4 cases...have not looked..were they all proven...? like saying 4 muslims tried to blow us up and me saying I am certain most muslims are plotting to kill me....what would you say to that..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperMikey Posted 11 June, 2011 Share Posted 11 June, 2011 4 cases...have not looked..were they all proven...? like saying 4 muslims tried to blow us up and me saying I am certain most muslims are plotting to kill me....what would you say to that..? No smoke without fire mate. You're inferring that I think a lot of British/Western troops are rapists - I don't think that at all. It's stupid to just say that there hasn't been anything of the sort going on though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted 11 June, 2011 Share Posted 11 June, 2011 greer has brought a whole new meaning to the 'british troops should pull out' campaign Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 11 June, 2011 Author Share Posted 11 June, 2011 No smoke without fire mate. You're inferring that I think a lot of British/Western troops are rapists - I don't think that at all. It's stupid to just say that there hasn't been anything of the sort going on though. oh no smoke without fire...so that applies everything then..its all fair game.....will remember that the next time you get on your liberal soap box not as if the press have completely fabricated stories before against british forces....oh, they did Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperMikey Posted 11 June, 2011 Share Posted 11 June, 2011 oh no smoke without fire...so that applies everything then..its all fair game.....will remember that the next time you get on your liberal soap box Sorry Dune. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperMikey Posted 11 June, 2011 Share Posted 11 June, 2011 not as if the press have completely fabricated stories before against british forces....oh, they did I'm not sure that the likes of the Guardian are the sort who will make this kind of thing up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 11 June, 2011 Author Share Posted 11 June, 2011 I'm not sure that the likes of the Guardian are the sort who will make this kind of thing up. nope...press would never do that...yet was it proven...? I guess completely making stuff up is resigned for the back pages then..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperMikey Posted 11 June, 2011 Share Posted 11 June, 2011 nope...press would never do that...yet was it proven...? I guess completely making stuff up is resigned for the back pages then..? The gutter press are more prone to making stuff up, as shown by Piers Morgan and the Abu-Ghraib debacle. I can't remember any recent fabrications by the Guardian or Independent, whereas the likes of the Mail, Express, Mirror, Sun, Star, NOTW etc make stuff up continuously and have been proven to do so on multiple occasions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revolution saint Posted 11 June, 2011 Share Posted 11 June, 2011 (edited) crap joke removed Edited 11 June, 2011 by revolution saint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now