Hello all, It has been some time and I feel I may take some heat for this.
I was wondering what people thought on the almost laughable reporting that is currently being put fourth in the media,
Be that mainstream or social spectrums of this particular medium.
My point of contention revolves around one particular politcal/news show on the BBC in the UK by the name of, Saturday Morning Live.
The topic for debate was on misogyny and sexual harrasment, in particular within the city of Nottingham where it is now reported as a crime (this includes cat calling and so fourth).
Now as a women I have been in one very abusive relationship, so I understand the topic and respect it!
It is hell to live with someone you think you love and cannot do without, all whilst they verbally abuse you, control what you wear and occasionally strike you.
However, I think it has been undermined by people trying to squeeze in anything they are offended by and thus belittling or simplyfying something that is close to a lot of women.
The presenter quoted a poll by the university of Nottingham, it was in regards to how many people had experienced and/or witnessed misogyny/sexual harresment.
The result was terrifying, over 90% voted to having being victims and/or witnesses.
This result was constantly pushed as the narrative, "over 90% of people in nottingham experience this".
I found this deeply disturbing, Have we as a species made no progress?
After hearing this I did some digging, and found poll in question! 700 people were polled from a city with a population of roughly 300,000. This made the percentage for those polled, less then 0.25%.
Should this have been mentioned? Should statistics be made clear or at the very least, links to said polls made available?
This shoddy reporting worries me as I have a beautiful little nephew, and he is growing into a society already where he may be made to feel quilty for being white, male, cis-gendered (possibly) and also a possible considered to be bracketed as a sexual harraser off the bat due to a broad brush approach to reporting of analytics.
And it makes me fearful of having my own children one day, especially in the event of having a boy.
Perhaps some perspective is required, and a more common sense approach necessary.
I would consider myself a 2nd wave or an older styled feminist, in that i want equality and fairness but not at the expect at the oppression of others.
Thoughts?
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
OP look hard at any of the big contemporary left agendas, they are all fabrications designed to instill fear to which they alone claim to protect you from. It's good you figured some of this out already.
The left have used words like rape, bigot, nazi, mysogony, islamophobia ......etc to scare, dehumanize, silence and divide people.
The left are a hate cult.
Please Google #walkaway and listen to how it started, what it means and the thousands of former leftists that have woken up to the lies and deception.
Most are regular people with big hearts that realise they have been deceived and manipulated by the leftist leaders.
Sigh, left left left leftist lefty left left left, I have left, as you have nothing left but an obsession with the left, so much so the left is never left alone by you, and we're left wondering if we should have left, as we have no patience left for vapid rhetoric, which seems to be all you have left.
Extremists hold extreme views and peddle them by using rhetoric and pretending they're offering facts, as the story shows. Explain how your rhetoric is any less vapid and objectionable than theirs? People playing the victim as the OP points out devalues the views of people who have been victimised. There is no left wing conspiracy here, just some opportunistic extremists trying to hitch a free ride for their bigotry on the back of the feminist movement. This does not make feminists goals for equality any less valid. You fight extremist views with reason and facts, not with contrary but equally objectionable extremest views.
"The left are a hate cult."
The only hate I'm seeing is coming from you, and I hold and have always held political views that are left leaning, and don't appreciate your constant puerile name calling. Not one word of your hate filled rant addresses anything in the OP or offers anything of value, Just another hate filled extreme right wing rant. Do us a favour and start a thread on how much you hate everyone whose political views differ from your own, and stop hijacking every topic for another of your vapid political rants.
"The left have used words like rape, bigot, nazi, mysogony, islamophobia ......etc to scare, dehumanize, silence and divide people."
That's a truly pathetic and moronic lie.
I don't want to get to drawn into a political debate, It was merely that I found the reporting of this topic to be disingenuous.
But I have seen this from both sides of the political spectrum and I sincerely yearn for a centrist, logical thinking alternative to the 'big two'.
Again, The issue I took was with the media in general and the false (or underhand) reporting of statistics, polls and surveys.
I would really like to see the media be held accountable and perhaps a law that stats clarity must be given in regards to this or at the very least, links to the original documents for further analysis/scrutiny.
Don't trust mass media. Tossing out my television set years ago was my solution to the problem of misrepresented facts, twisted truths and other political agendas that ultimately brainwash people. In my own ideological view,, everyone ditching the established, clearly controlled media giants is the best way to secure everyone's rights of their own opinions. If anything, it only makes me happy, seeing more and more of my acquaintances doing just that.
That said, I understand there are plenty of people who rely on news, whatever their reasons. But in that case, I encourage you to find a source that limits itself to the shortest, most factual reports possible. The longer the message, the more room there is in them for accidental or intentional misrepresentations. I find it's best kept nice and clean, letting me choose for myself what the news actually mean for myself or the world around me. Takes some getting used to, but there are increasingly more sources of information out there. Just take your time and look for one that suits your fancy.
What bothers me more is the domestic violence aspect. I honestly have no clue how common it actually is in the UK, but I find it unacceptable. I understand that it's not always easy to come to an agreement in a peaceful manner, especially if it regards something very close to you. But if it becomes a routine, I don't see a reason to stick together for much longer. Relationships either work out, or they don't. No matter how friendly the breakups I've experienced or seen, it's still over when it's over.
No matter how little I know about your current relationship, doesn't matter. You can be the devil, or he can, it's irrelevant. What I find more important is the actual feelings between you, and whether you find the presence of each other productive and/or acceptable. If you do despite some occasional, limited violence, maybe it can work out. If, however, you see no value in sticking with your mate as is, don't wait for the aggression to wake you up. Cut the ties, move on.
As for the new generation. It's sad, but there's no real way of changing the society's opinion on misogyny or anything else, without relying on the same methods as the media, which creates the problem in the first place. The best you an do, is try and be a good educator, so your nephew or future offspring can acquire a clear mindset. One free of needless biases will hardly ever feel troubled when faced by biases of other people. If anything, it will open up more paths in their future, which, I dare to believe, will prove way more important than whatever misconceptions of other individuals.
Just keep inquiring, both about the truth offered to you, as well as the one in your own feelings. Consult your own values, not just the ones indoctrinated onto you. But keep your mind open to what others have to say as well. People are social creatures, and we can't afford to be 100% egoistical. All we can do is try and find solutions acceptable to all parties, and if we can't, cut ties and look for other people, who hopefully share more of our own values.
Good luck, both with your current/future relationships, as well as bringing up the next generation. And keep skeptical of mass media, if you still feel the need for it. Really, tossing out the television is easier than it seems. Just refrain from tossing it out a five story building, especially without first securing other means of acquiring what you deem reliable information ( ^u^)
Yes I agree with your comments, and thank you for taking the time to reply.
I think we have a large problem in society these days with people happy to take their news 4th or 5th hand from unreliable or bias sources! Furthermore, certain individuals appear to be hair-triggered in response to news and reacting without seeing all the details.
Domestic violence in the UK isn't something I would like to play down or dismiss, having been involved in a bad relationship myself.
However, I only know of a small number of people myself to experience such issues.
I say this though with caution as that is merely anecdotal evidence from a personal perspective and not a true reflection.
So in conclusion it clearly exists, and even one case is one too many! however, I would like to believe it is not endemic across the entire nation. But again, I would always refer to the peer reviewed statistics on these and make my decision in accordance.
That is true in regards to the feelings when in those types of violent relationships, in my case it started with verbal abuse and a controlling nature in regards to what I wore.. at first I found that I couldn't do better and should accept the status quo.
However, it ended up almost being a form of Stockholm syndrome and that I felt compelled to stay.
It was when it begun to get physical I quickly realised that this was wrong and was an awful way to live my life.
Another issue with the misogyny/sexual harassment as it currently stands or is being pushed, is that where are the boundaries and who defines them? similar in a way to offence.
I have seen some online blogs where even an approving glance can be considered to be a form of harassment.
But then I don't particular mind that myself, my boundaries would be more akin to touching/grabbing, being sexually aggressive and not taking 'no' for an answer in regards to unwanted advances.
Hahahaha, thank you for the advice and again for the lovely response, it was great.
Speaking only to the statistics, that is a reasonable sample size for that population, if you are willing to tolerate a +/- 4% at a 95% confidence (with some standard assumptions).
It's a bit counter-intuitive, but the size of the population doesn't matter much so long as it is not ridiculously small.
You are correct, and for conformation, I have no issue with sample size.
700 - 3000 Would appear to be quite a reasonable sample size for me.
However, It is the reporting of these polls in media, as previously stated.
It would have more sincere to have reported, "a poll of 'x' number of people in Nottingham, shows 'y' percentage have experienced.."
rather than, "Over 90% of the residents of Nottingham stated in a poll to have experienced.."
Most people are not aware of standard sample sizes, and the polls are not accurately reflected by the media.
Yes it's pretty easy to twist and turn statistics, and push your agenda through them. It should be mandatory for news proadcasters to explain how the statistic was made, why it was made, who the people are that make up the poll and what all the terms mean in the context of the statistic. A term like violence today can be pretty broad, from punching to cursing to a careless freudian slip. I don't think a single poll of anything is pretty usefull, since they just portray a single dicotomy.
This is why people love Jordan Peterson. He explains various polls and their meaning in his lectures so deeply at times, that it makes your mind blown.
I was surprised the poll didn't conclude 99+%.
Try this very un-scientic poll: ask every adult you meet today if they have EVER witnessed an act misogyny/sexual harassment.
Anyone here want to claim they've NEVER witnessed it?
You've hit the nail on the head for me, the problem is less with the statistics used than with not properly defining what they consider misogyny which a broad term, basically covering everything from making a puerile sexist joke in male only company to deeply pernicious behaviours that victimise people and do lasting harm. Again and as the OP shows, what we need to avoid are extreme views if we are pursuing equality, striking a balance in changing attitudes is key if we want to change things for the better.
This I concur with.
Like offence, it is subjective.
I have been in my gym or spin class and sometimes a guy may approvingly look and/or smile in a suggestive way i.e. they like what they see.
This I don't see much of an issue with this as oppose to grabbing, touching or being a bit too explicit.
But we are all different, this is what makes the subject very interesting but equally dangerous.
Almost everyone has experience with at least one such act, not to mention the many situations seen affecting others.
Sure, humans are mean to one another as is, doesn't always mean it's fair to make the issue appear more serious than it actually is. Else you'd be forced to imprison every child for them having their sibling and kindergarten fights...
Yes; perhaps a more pertinent question would be: have you witnessed what you think was a serious incident in the last X years?
Since we have discarded news, and left with only personal experiences, hrmm...
Yeah, that would definitely make a much better poll :D
Just pointing out an obvious fact about polling. The statistics only work if the sample was random. Many polls flunk this test for a variety of reasons. Many political polls published in the US purposely bias their samples to manipulate the poll's conclusions. Not saying that happened here, but I never trust a poll unless I understand how they did their sampling.
To be honest (and only read OP), I stopped watching the news about 30 years ago when I finally realized it is an entity that is much like that monster in the Bible. Unscrupulous. Uncaring. Cruel. Heartless. Petty. Capricious.
rmfr
...and it craves your constant attention and approbation. You may be onto something.
LOL. Good point.
rmfr
lol beautiful!
oh my, I should have heeded that advice! how could I have forgotten this?! lol
News is a business. News channels each have their own niche shares of the market peddling alarmism, because bad news attracts more attention than good news. It's all entertainment with a bit of the real world mixed in. The more you waste your time at 24/7 news, the better for the channel.
But at the same time it's disconnected snippets of information, telling stories about Billy-Joe Whomevers, who drove their car down a cliff and survived by drinking their own urine or what ever, just to later tell you about how the DOW got up 10 points. What does that have to do with anything? Why should I know the colour of Kylie Cardashian's lipstick in some gala or what ever?
The sociologist Neil Postman wrote Amusing Ourselves to Death some 30 years ago on how the medium of tv destroyed the news format, and it's just excelerated since. News used to be in the paper format a logical argument. Now it's just who can make the most noise in their 2 minute segment.
I don't agree with the Donald on his policies, but on calling mainstream media "fake news", he is not that far off the mark.
It's not the left that is to blame, it's mostly capitalism and the nature of tv as a medium that is to blame for the shortcomings of news today.
@Peurii
And I know all that. That is why I can say all news media outlets are "like that monster in the Bible. Unscrupulous. Uncaring. Cruel. Heartless. Petty. Capricious." Thus, the reason I ain't watched them in 30 years.
@TheBlindWatchmaker: The result was terrifying, over 90% voted to having being victims and/or witnesses.
About 30 years ago someone on a TV program in New Zealand presented the statistic that one in three girls are sexually molested by their fathers before the age of 12. That sent shock waves through the country. My daughter was around 9 at the time, and I was on the PTA of her school. So every time we had a meeting, I could see all the fathers looking at each other trying to figure out which ones among us were guilty.
The statistic was later revealed to have been a lie invented to push a certain agenda. But it had a lasting effect on society. Fathers became nervous around their daughters. Sexual molestation of children suddenly became a common grounds for divorce.
Statistics can be very useful, but I don't think the average person has the skills to evaluate their credibility. If I say atheists are cruel to animals, that would be laughable, but if I say 86% of animal cruelty is committed by atheists, it sounds a lot more credible. And that makes 99% of statistics very dangerous in the wrong hands.
Oh my, That is truly awful!
This is exactly what worries me, Because I work with a lot of men and they are lovely and fun.
To think by taking the polls literally as reported that many would be misogynists or sexually abusive is somewhat unfair.
Clarity is certainly required.
@Algebe
Ain't that the truth. Especially here in America, and maybe other countries, it used to be that all it took to utterly ruin a man's life was to simply accuse him of molesting his children. Even if it could be proven beyond any shadow of a doubt that it could NOT have happened, say the father was literally 15,000km away when it was to have happened, JUST the accusation automatically assumed he was guilty no matter what was proven in the court of law. And literally, that man's life was so utterly ruined, no matter his education, experience, etc., he'd be lucky to get a job washing dishes in a restaurant.
Of course, that has lightened up quite a bit in the last 15+ years, but it can still happen.
And yes, statistics are a very nasty weapon in the hand of monsters.
rmfr
@arakish: statistics are a very nasty weapon in the hand of monsters.
Indeed. Nine out of ten psychopathic totalitarian dictators recommend statistics. And statistics also prove that five out of ten virgins are foolish.
Blimey, this is tough subject, but it's nice to see it rationally discussed.
News reporting is shoddy at best these days, so we can't expect much better.
As for the subject matter, perhaps schools should touch on this, so to speak...
If they can teach sex education from a reasonably age, why not discuss social education.
Why not teach, it's not right to touch a person in certain ways without their express consent... And cat calling being the marker for people with an IQ of a golf ball.
I am not sure how one would go about bringing this into education, or for that matter at what age, but it appears to be a good idea.
@Random
As for the subject matter, perhaps schools should touch on this, so to speak...
If they can teach sex education from a reasonably age, why not discuss social education.
My thoughts exactly. And I can only feel happy that some of our teachers understand the holes in the educational system and take it upon themselves to teach what's missing. Like explaining that they CAN indeed do whatever they want. But boy, better they be ready to face the consequences. A furious female is not something I want to experience, among other things.
My only argument would be that teaching people critical thinking would take priority. Because once you start to see the world in that way, the question about acceptable behavior towards the opposing sex should be dealt with by the individual itself. Not saying social ed wouldn't be needed afterwards. But it would certainly require much less indoctrination than we are receiving currently.
And yes, the matter is indeed tough. Though I'm rather convinced that by the time people learn how to make their own arguments, the problem will have mostly disappeared. Just hoping that in our rush to fix the existing issues, we don't commit some other grave errors.
Man, bad idea, every other special interest group wants their special interest taught in schools all thinkin it's the most important issue for kids to learn.
Parent's need to stop outsourcing parenting to teachers andet teachers focus on the plummeting literacy and numeracy levels.
Parent's need to parent really.... governments are verified incapable of parenting.
Pages