Dubstepforum.com

LACE wrote:

deadly habit wrote:Feminists are an odd bunch, I'd go so far as to compare them to religious parallels like say the muslims in that you have some sensible ones, but you also have some incredibly wacko extremists who get all the attention.

where and who are all these extreme feminists?

On Tumblr. Also, the SCUM manifesto would be a classic example.

I also saw this recently

JBoy wrote:Freedom of speech and expression isn't always right, theres a limit or a line that can be crossed.

And who decides that line? Someone you disagree with? Or should it only fall to someone you agree with? What about the people that disagree with them?

There's no way to cut it fairly, you either have free speech, and people can be offended or not, and agree or not, or you don't.

You can't have a bit of free speech.

deadly habit wrote:

nowaysj wrote:

Kochari wrote:What about nudists?

nudists = visual rapists

Apparently?

Nudists have their own colonies and private land away from the public eye though.
It's like saying religion and prayer should be welcome openly in public schools because it's free speech, you have your rights to your beliefs, just not to impose/force them on others in the public sector.

Maybe I've misunderstood you. Religion and prayer SHOULD be welcomed openly. There's a difference between practising something yourself privately and forcing it on others.

if a woman had taken her top off in front of the crowd it probably would have been interpreted as a sign of support. female-on-female rape victims continue to suffer in silence.

E-F wrote:if a woman had taken her top off in front of the crowd it probably would have been interpreted as a sign of support. female-on-female rape victims continue to suffer in silence.

Same with male on male though, or even woman on male. Rape is just nasty business as it's not so much about just the physical act but the psychological damage.

garethom wrote:

JBoy wrote:Freedom of speech and expression isn't always right, theres a limit or a line that can be crossed.

And who decides that line? Someone you disagree with? Or should it only fall to someone you agree with? What about the people that disagree with them?

There's no way to cut it fairly, you either have free speech, and people can be offended or not, and agree or not, or you don't.

You can't have a bit of free speech.

there's a difference between how some people want free speech to work, and how it actually works though. it's been decided already, in western society it can't be used to incite violence

@collige that vimeo video doesn't embed can you post a url?

edit:oh nm just clicked on it

just google Check your privilege CIS scum and you'll get your extremist feminists, (and also a 4chan meme mocking it)

this guy has clearly done a great thing in raising awareness and discussion considering how deeply you guys are arguing the issue

good job flasher dude, good job.

also I have enjoyed E-F's contribution immensely

I'm just a bit drunk and up for arguing/debating anything atm.

The debate on nakedness is to do with intent surely. Nudists are just nude. Streakers are attention seeing. Some people flash as a form of sexual harassment, some comedy value.

The issue with this situation is that if it is a rally for rape victims to protest at it's just really tasteless to go getting your nob out. I don't think he did it as an aggressive move or anything but it's just going to offend people past the "huehuheuhe I got my nob out in public" point.

Genevieve wrote:
Freedom of speech is expressing the way you want to whomever you want.

is that really what you believe? What about the rights and freedoms of those who make up your audience? people often forget that freedom is a two way street. It is not freedom if your "free speech" tramples my rights. the idea that free speech includes whatever you want and fuck all to the audience is a lie perpetuated by the children of reddit and 4chan. it is an entitled version of the concept that only takes the speakers rights into concern. a fallacy if there ever was one...

at least it was outside and not in a library

people pee outside all the time in public

fractal wrote:

Genevieve wrote:
Freedom of speech is expressing the way you want to whomever you want.

is that really what you believe? What about the rights and freedoms of those who make up your audience? people often forget that freedom is a two way street. It is not freedom if your "free speech" tramples my rights. the idea that free speech includes whatever you want and fuck all to the audience is a lie perpetuated by the children of reddit and 4chan. it is an entitled version of the concept that only takes the speakers rights into concern. a fallacy if there ever was one...

Their rights weren't 'trampled'. You don't have the right to not be offended and you don't have the right to not catch a glimpse of a cock, but if you don't want to look.. look away. Like I said, that's kind of counter to the point of 'freedom of speech'. There's only freedom of speech as a whole, once you forbid 1 thing, you stop having freedom of speech all together.

Society would be a better place if people started to respect this a little more and stopped trying get people to stop saying shit they find offensive, and hide behind 'majority rules' to get it their way. People will think things you don't like and tbh, I'd rather have people express their shitty views in public than keep it a secret. Shows me who I should avoid.

People think stuff you don't agree with and might offend you dude. Taking their right away to express those views so you can live in this bubble where everyone believes stuff you can handle is more offensive than anything they could say.

What if someone stands outside a primary school shouting swear words through the railings with a megaphone? You think it's violating his rights to stop him?

No, but it has nothing to do with the swear words or that they're kids. But that he's infringing on the school's property rights. I don't want someone making noise on my property.

it's not unlikely this kind of shit happens on feminist demos quite a lot. my friend told me the last one he was at a guy turned up and was really blatantly photographing womens breasts and saying really weird shit while they were on the march.

lets be clear, flashing people is illegal, it certainly is here, and if you're a guy going up to an anti-rape demonstration it's reasonable to believe that

1) many of the people there have been victims of sexual violence and
2) many of them will be intimidated by your action.

it's not "speech", it's intentionally intimidating people. people have been triggered into panic attacks etc by far less.

if you really can't find a less damaging way to "politically express" your hatred for women than sexually harassing them while they are on an anti-rape demonstration then yeah, i dont feel bad for you at all son.

free speech my ass.

Genevieve wrote:No, but it has nothing to do with the swear words or that they're kids. But that he's infringing on the school's property rights. I don't want someone making noise on my property.

how about a guy following a kid around shouting sexually explicit things in the street? same deal, no? or does your "property" get protections you wouldn't afford a person? seems a bizarre hierarchy if so.

An antirape protest is an antiviolence protest, wherein the antiviolence protesters beat someone up... surely you have to recognize the irony?

dubfordessert wrote:

Genevieve wrote:No, but it has nothing to do with the swear words or that they're kids. But that he's infringing on the school's property rights. I don't want someone making noise on my property.

how about a guy following a kid around shouting sexually explicit things in the street? same deal, no? or does your "property" get protections you wouldn't afford a person? seems a bizarre hierarchy if so.

Dude, following a kid is just creepy as fuck. Definitely a reason to think the dude could be a danger to them.