sipar69 Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23559605 OK so I don't use Twitter or Facebook, but I get how they work. What I don't get (and I like to think I'm a fairly normal bloke) is why these men got so incredibly angry and vicious towards a woman just because she campaigned to have Jane Austen on a bank note. Apart from the obvious answer - they're morons - what do you reckon causes this sort of behaviour? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevoD Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 (edited) For every reaction theres an equal reaction, she made such a feminist fuss about something that to be honest 95% of people dont really care about (it could have a giraffe on it for all i care still buys me 2 pints either way) the pro-male groups responded, Im sure if pro male groups campaigned against something thats female only, they would get death threats from feminists. Edited August 5, 2013 by StevoD 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spursmaddave Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 I dont post much on twitter but i do follow stuff on there, it is disgraceful what some people think is acceptable to say or do on there, I'm not on facebook but can't imagine it's different.... There needs to be more control and more punishment, it's fine to have an opinion but some of the hate is beyond belief.... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spursmaddave Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 the pro-male groups responded, You would make a good politician Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ekona Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 I couldn't care less either way. Sticks and stones and all that. If someone really intended you harm, they wouldn't put it on Twitter. GQ had the right idea with the Twitter reaction to their 1D covers: Pop them up on the internet and have a laugh at them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flex Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 If there were punishments dished out I think SMD may think twice about what he posts Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AliveBoy Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 A prime example of why there should be an intelligence test for the internet. Or even scrapping free email addresses all together. If you had to pay for your email address, people would be less likely to make fake ones for which to create fake twitter and or facebook accounts etc meaning that trolls would be less common and hate accounts couldn't be made so easily. I reckon that even a one off payment of say £5 would stop a lot of people. Maybe I'm being too short sighted though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flex Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 I agree with your last sentence Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spursmaddave Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 I couldn't care less either way. Sticks and stones and all that. If someone really intended you harm, they wouldn't put it on Twitter. GQ had the right idea with the Twitter reaction to their 1D covers: Pop them up on the internet and have a laugh at them. Yeah I have the same outlook personally but they do need to take some responsibilty for the tweets that the 'publish' by allowing them webspace under their name... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbiscuit Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 I find it funny, I've had people on here threaten to turn up on my doorstep, at which pointed I laughed. Prejudice is usually a sign of a poor education, a lack of intelligence and poor parenting. When I used to date a black girl from the Caribbean I was asked by a bloke on a bus if I felt dirty after sleeping with her? My reply was do you feel dirty after you sleep with your mum? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spursmaddave Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 A prime example of why there should be an intelligence test for the internet. In other news www.350z-uk.com closes after 95% of regular posters are denied access to the internet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spursmaddave Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 I find it funny, I've had people on here threaten to turn up on my doorstep, at which pointed I laughed. Prejudice is usually a sign of a poor education, a lack of intelligence and poor parenting. When I used to date a black girl from the Caribbean I was asked by a bloke on a bus if I felt dirty after sleeping with her? My reply was do you feel dirty after you sleep with your mum? Yep again I have the same attitude, my ex wife was Indian and I had a lot of racism back in the day, but again just because some of us laugh it off doesn't make it ok.... I'm all for freedom of speech yada yada and if I want to tweet Piers Morgan and call him a knob I think I should have that right, but if I tweeted him some vitriol and threatened to kill him & his wife & kids I would expect to de dealt with not laughed off.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbiscuit Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 Agreed....piers Morgan is a nob and also people should be accountable for threatening behaviour Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sipar69 Posted August 5, 2013 Author Share Posted August 5, 2013 For every reaction theres an equal reaction, she made such a feminist fuss about something that to be honest 95% of people dont really care about (it could have a giraffe on it for all i care still buys me 2 pints either way) the pro-male groups responded, Im sure if pro male groups campaigned against something thats female only, they would get death threats from feminists. But isn't that the whole problem? The reaction to her was not equal. I'm no expert on the subject but I don't think feminists are known for threatening to rape and kill people who disagree with them. And as far as I know, she didn't say "all men are rubbish therefore please put a woman on a bank note". She just campaigned for a woman on the back of a bank note. I agree that most people don't really care about it but isn't the sane reaction to not caring about something to do nothing? The only positive thing about this as far I'm concerned is that a lot of men stood up for her. It's possible to be a normal bloke and not assume that all feminists are anti-men. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spursmaddave Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 True Story - last week a member on the Jag forum I joined was banned because he had an argument with me on there over tyres (Ekona would be so proud I was bigging up the MPPS) he just kept saying Jaguar only endorse Dunlop blah blah, so I said well we can agree that I am right and move on.... He started PMing me all sorts of crap, wanting to meet up saying he was a big muscly bloke and would beat me to a pulp etc, apparently had history of it, even said he knew where I live as people in here had told him he got banned of course and I laughed it off, but many a sensitive soul could have been VERY affected by that, which is of course the indended reaction.... p.s. if anyone PMs you asking where I live then it's Aberdeen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sipar69 Posted August 5, 2013 Author Share Posted August 5, 2013 A prime example of why there should be an intelligence test for the internet. In other news www.350z-uk.com closes after 95% of regular posters are denied access to the internet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sipar69 Posted August 5, 2013 Author Share Posted August 5, 2013 I couldn't care less either way. Sticks and stones and all that. If someone really intended you harm, they wouldn't put it on Twitter. GQ had the right idea with the Twitter reaction to their 1D covers: Pop them up on the internet and have a laugh at them. I agree that the threats probably wouldn't amount to anything but I just don't really get why anyone would feel the need to make them at all - real or not. I can't really see what she did wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docwra Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 Really dont see the big deal, one of the beauties of the internet is freedom of speech IMO, even if it can be hurtful. If youre going to introduce laws then where do you draw the line, Im already seeing a big "famous/non famous" divide developing which isnt right at all. For instance, theres a lot of online media about how much I dislike Mike Brewer, probably with some kind of "ideal world" violence involved, does that mean Im going to get a visit from the rozzers sometime? If he was more/less famous would that affect things? All a load of nonsense if you ask me, no-one ever gets arrested for writing poison pen letters or shouting threats at a football game ......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sipar69 Posted August 5, 2013 Author Share Posted August 5, 2013 Really dont see the big deal, one of the beauties of the internet is freedom of speech IMO, even if it can be hurtful. If youre going to introduce laws then where do you draw the line, Im already seeing a big "famous/non famous" divide developing which isnt right at all. For instance, theres a lot of online media about how much I dislike Mike Brewer, probably with some kind of "ideal world" violence involved, does that mean Im going to get a visit from the rozzers sometime? If he was more/less famous would that affect things? All a load of nonsense if you ask me, no-one ever gets arrested for writing poison pen letters or shouting threats at a football game ......... So to be clear - you don't think there is anything wrong with threatening to rape and kill someone if it's done online? Would you feel the same if the threats were directed to your wife, daughter, mother etc? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ekona Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 True Story - last week a member on the Jag forum I joined was banned because he had an argument with me on there over tyres (Ekona would be so proud I was bigging up the MPPS) You have learnt well, young padawan For instance, theres a lot of online media about how much I dislike Mike Brewer, probably with some kind of "ideal world" violence involved, does that mean Im going to get a visit from the rozzers sometime? Cops would probably hand you the baton themselves, seeing as how it's Mike Brewer I'm as big a keyboard warrior as you're likely to find, but I wouldn't say anything on-line I wouldn't say to someone's face. That generally means that I'll never seriously threaten to injure someone, although context is everything of course. As yet, and I do find this miraculous given my *ahem* outspoken nature at times, I've yet to have been given a threat of violence across the interweb. I have no idea how I'd react, although I suspect I'd laugh it off as often as I do when I get sent insulting PMs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docwra Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 Really dont see the big deal, one of the beauties of the internet is freedom of speech IMO, even if it can be hurtful. If youre going to introduce laws then where do you draw the line, Im already seeing a big "famous/non famous" divide developing which isnt right at all. For instance, theres a lot of online media about how much I dislike Mike Brewer, probably with some kind of "ideal world" violence involved, does that mean Im going to get a visit from the rozzers sometime? If he was more/less famous would that affect things? All a load of nonsense if you ask me, no-one ever gets arrested for writing poison pen letters or shouting threats at a football game ......... So to be clear - you don't think there is anything wrong with threatening to rape and kill someone if it's done online? Would you feel the same if the threats were directed to your wife, daughter, mother etc? No, I thinks its abhorrent to make threats like that to anyone, particularly a girl/lady. However, Im more in favour of keeping freedom of speech than introducing laws that will have to be based on very shaky and probably dynamic definitions. Ive no doubt you are familiar with this case: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-19009344, that pretty much sums it all up for me - guy makes obvious joke, gets arrested on terror charges, banned from airports for life, loses job, loses girlfriend and spends 2 years of his life fighting a ridiculous charge that eventually gets chucked out of court. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevoD Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 (edited) the pro-male groups responded, You would make a good politician im one of them youth types innit. Edited August 5, 2013 by StevoD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbiscuit Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbiscuit Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 (edited) Kind of agree with docwra, there are downsides to FoS but I'd rather put up with it, than lose the right to FoS Edited August 5, 2013 by rtbiscuit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sipar69 Posted August 5, 2013 Author Share Posted August 5, 2013 Really dont see the big deal, one of the beauties of the internet is freedom of speech IMO, even if it can be hurtful. If youre going to introduce laws then where do you draw the line, Im already seeing a big "famous/non famous" divide developing which isnt right at all. For instance, theres a lot of online media about how much I dislike Mike Brewer, probably with some kind of "ideal world" violence involved, does that mean Im going to get a visit from the rozzers sometime? If he was more/less famous would that affect things? All a load of nonsense if you ask me, no-one ever gets arrested for writing poison pen letters or shouting threats at a football game ......... So to be clear - you don't think there is anything wrong with threatening to rape and kill someone if it's done online? Would you feel the same if the threats were directed to your wife, daughter, mother etc? No, I thinks its abhorrent to make threats like that to anyone, particularly a girl/lady. However, Im more in favour of keeping freedom of speech than introducing laws that will have to be based on very shaky and probably dynamic definitions. Ive no doubt you are familiar with this case: http://www.bbc.co.uk...ngland-19009344, that pretty much sums it all up for me - guy makes obvious joke, gets arrested on terror charges, banned from airports for life, loses job, loses girlfriend and spends 2 years of his life fighting a ridiculous charge that eventually gets chucked out of court. Fair enough - thanks for clearing up your view. I don't think that example is the same though. I believe in freedom of speech but freedoms carry with them responsibilities. It's already illegal to threaten people with violence etc and I don't see why being behind a keyboard should be any different. Expressing views is one thing but threatening people is another. I don't think we need new laws but I do think it's worth asking the question (which interestingly not many people have commented on) why people feel the need to behave in this way towards a woman who, as far as I can see, did nothing wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.