Jenny, Zooo can you set RCP's fevered mind at rest.
Do you ladies all have a big meeting and plot against us chaps?
I read the news today oh boy! Page 1,513
Yes. Plus we hate all men, duh.
Quote: Renegade Carpark @ 10th April 2014, 7:24 PM BSTIt's all about gender. If it was pictures of men eating food on the Tube, no one would give a flying monkey, but because it's women, who are naturally the 'victims' in all and everything, then action must be taken.
See, to me, it's odd that the original group targeted women in particular. If I was going to accuse anyone of any kind of bias, it would be the original group for some weird kind of misogyny.
Quote: zooo @ 10th April 2014, 7:30 PM BSTYes. Plus we hate all men, duh.
Damn it RCP was right, what a scary thought what else was he right about....
Quote: Raymond Terrific @ 10th April 2014, 7:36 PM BSTIf I was going to accuse anyone of any kind of bias, it would be the original group for some weird kind of misogyny.
It is a weird kind of gender bias, but that's the way it is with all things.
I'm still waiting to see a special episode of 'You've Been Framed' featuring nothing but women getting hit in the vagina - that's not misogyny by the way, it's equal rights.
I'm guessing there was one entirely about men getting hit in the nutsack or something? Yeah, gender biases work both ways but they don't cancel out and make everything ok.
Quote: Raymond Terrific @ 10th April 2014, 7:43 PM BSTI'm guessing there was one entirely about men getting hit in the nutsack or something?
In Renegade's fevered imagination.
Quote: Raymond Terrific @ 10th April 2014, 7:43 PM BSTI'm guessing there was one entirely about men getting hit in the nutsack or something?
Let's see, by rough calculations, men hit in the groin makes up roughly 25% of each episode. Say 16 episodes a year, times 5 years, that's a lot of damage.
1 x 30 minute episode of non-stop 'c**t busting' wouldn't even come close to equality, but it would be worth watching.
Do you ever wonder why the paradigm is that in adverts men, comedy etc men especially dads are buffoons, clowns and hapless victims.
Comedy and fantasy are about reversing and subverting the norm.
Up until the 60s or 70s raping your wife or beating her and your kids was all to intents legal. Certainly the man was the earner and head of the house.
We're amongst the first generations for this not to be the case.
No wonder in most comedies the dad is the hapless, victimised fool, it's wish fulfillment.
Quote: Renegade Carpark @ 10th April 2014, 7:48 PM BST1 x 30 minute episode of non-stop 'c**t busting' wouldn't even come close to equality, but it would be worth watching.
Now now that's trawling.
Also testicles are rather more sensitive than vaginas, so it probably wouldn't be as entertaining.
Quote: Renegade Carpark @ 10th April 2014, 7:48 PM BSTLet's see, by rough calculations, men hit in the groin makes up roughly 25% of each episode. Say 16 episodes a year, times 5 years, that's a lot of damage.
1 x 30 minute episode of non-stop 'c**t busting' wouldn't even come close to equality, but it would be worth watching.
Oh so there wasn't... Anyway, it just seems like a weird reaction to a Facebook group that specifically targets women, and uses photos of them without their consent, to say "oh but that show that shows clips people have actually sent in and given permission to use has lots of men featured in it, so this is fine" ... or something, I know you didn't actually so it made it fine but you are acting like it makes it ok.
*shrug*
Quote: Renegade Carpark @ 10th April 2014, 4:39 PM BST'The event organisers, Goldsmiths students Lucy Brisbane Mckay and Alexis Calvas, both 21, hope to highlight their opposition to the 'stranger-shaming' online forum.'
This 'stranger-shaming' is a relatively new concept, are people not allowed to feel shame anymore? Must every selfish act that shows no consideration for others be re-classified as a human right?
I remember watching a news programme featuring a story about residents on a street complaining about revellers from a nearby club urinating in their doorways and against cars. The news people had no problems showing the faces of the perpetrators who were mostly men.
Quote: sootyj @ 10th April 2014, 7:52 PM BSTAlso testicles are rather more sensitive than vaginas, so it probably wouldn't be as entertaining.
Maybe have a few clips of birds getting punched in the tits to liven it up?
Quote: Raymond Terrific @ 10th April 2014, 7:54 PM BSTAnyway, it just seems like a weird reaction to a Facebook group that specifically targets women
As opposed to no reaction over a Facebook group that specifically targets men?
Honestly, is eating on the tube that big a deal? Is it really affecting other people so much? Comparable to pissing on their car?
And unless you're suggesting that the news programme wouldn't have shown their faces if they were women, I think that just shows men are more likely to piss on people's cars when drunk.
Quote: Renegade Carpark @ 10th April 2014, 8:01 PM BSTAs opposed to no reaction over a Facebook group that specifically targets men?
I'll say it a third time, two wrongs don't make a right.
Quote: Raymond Terrific @ 10th April 2014, 8:06 PM BSTAnd unless you're suggesting that the news programme wouldn't have shown their faces if they were women, I think that just shows men are more likely to piss on people's cars when drunk.
I think it was because the women squatted down and the camera couldn't get them. Look at you, suggesting men pee more then women - you sexist monster! 
Quote: Raymond Terrific @ 10th April 2014, 8:06 PM BSTI'll say it a third time, two wrongs don't make a right.
And I'll say that pointing out reverse sexism isn't something I should be criticised for.
I will say we're better at it, that's for sure.
Quote: Renegade Carpark @ 10th April 2014, 8:10 PM BSTAnd I'll say that pointing out reverse sexism isn't something I should be criticised for.
That's not what I'm criticising you for though, also sexism doesn't become "reverse" sexism when it's against men, same as racism isn't "reverse" racism when it's against white people.
The reason the group targeted women was because it is still socially unacceptable for women to be seen to be "out of control" when it comes to food.
It is why we have size zero models, secret binge eating and "all you can eat" competitions populated almost entirely by men.
Eating is somehow seen as unfeminine and eating in a public place is the very epitome of that.
You haven't looked at the group, RCP, but I have. The majority of the people posting and commenting are men. The comments are entirely negative - they either openly make fun of the woman or make inappropriate comments about what she is wearing or the way she is eating (the banana girl got the worst of all).
Even worse, if a woman has the temerity to eat and actually be overweight then she receives all out vitriol.
RCP has made several comments about women always "sitting around stuffing their faces".
He may have been joking, he may not - but the fact is, that attitude is prevalent in our society. Think how many photos the Daily Fail publishes of women who have dared to put on a few pounds.
Of course, we don't like fat men either - but it is more socially acceptable for a man to gain weight, because being "big" is synonymous with traditional masculinity. So on a date, men will order whatever they want to eat, whereas women often feel compelled to have a salad.
"Fat is a feminist issue" is an excellent book on the subject.
The problem with this group is that people eating on the tube shouldn't be a big deal. The fact it is shows why our society is f**ked up.
Quote: sootyj @ 10th April 2014, 7:27 PM BSTJenny, Zooo can you set RCP's fevered mind at rest.
Do you ladies all have a big meeting and plot against us chaps?
Oooh... a BCG Wimmin's Group. What an excellent idea. 