Red Ajah IWW: Crimes against women in the Media (Discussion)

[Gudrean]

First let me say that you ASG have come across to me as a fine, honorable man, so I am not in any way addressing you in my earlier example. Next let me say that I DO NOT think women are victims of violence more than men. Actually men/boys are victims of some of the most violent acts I have had the displeasure of witnessing first hand growing up in Florida. However women do have an obvious disadvantage against most men in size and strength which immediately adds a sense of fear when in situations with men we are not familiar with. If these men/boys are further aggressive by nature it just adds to this. For whatever reason, whether it's the over use of this portrayal in media or just a sickness that has lasted for eons in our collective consciousness, men do "know" of their physical dominance over women and this has led to an associated fear in women of violence towards then from men. I do think the media contributes to the idea that it is some how accepted to be aggressive or dominant towards women and then there are the ones who themselves have been victim at some time who then take it out on anyone weaker whether that is a woman or another weaker man/boy/child. My comment earlier was addressed to the young men responding to these threads in ways that say I have a guilty conscious and have done some of these things I'm reading and therefor I feel the need to respond in a defensive manner. If this is not something you condone then it should not offend you in any way. Having said all that I have no interest in calling anyone out. People know what they have said and they know why. Nuff said!

[Gudrean]

Gudrean, I would disagree... what I believe, and perhaps I am wrong, is that Starrik feels that too much attention, coupled with double standards, can negate

a person's position. In our society, for example, we want to place SO MUCH emphasis on racial equality - it's every where you look... yet no white man in the US can get on stage

and make stereotypical jokes about blacks, asians, or hispanics... yet, they (the minority comedians) can joke about and make fun of white people every

time and nothing is said (don't believe me, watch a BET comedy special sometime). Another example - the law says that a drunk woman can NOT give informed

consent to have sex while she's inebriated. Guess what?? Doesn't apply to men. If both parties are drunk, and she cries rape, he goes to prison, period. Even

though it has been proven that a man can be raped, no court EVER assumes the man in this case might be the vicitim.

I agree that our justice system does not treat people fairly whether it is man verses women or in the racial arena. I think out system needs a complete overhaul, so good call on this one Tsuk

[Tsukibana]

 

Now for VaW in Television. 

 

Television examples of VaW:Dexter: Rita, the (now late) wife of the serial killer, was abused and attacked by her first husband. Season 5’s secondary protagonist Lumen Pierce, was kidnapped, raped, and tortured by the primary antagonist with the intent of being murdered. She joins Dexter on a

vengeful rampage of murdering her attackers, leaving to return to a normal life once the primary antagonist is killed.The Sopranos- beatings, violence, murder, rape. 

 

The "Cop Genre"- frequently include episodes involving female victims. 

What place does VaW have in Television? Do we see systematic abuse of women in TV like we see in videogames, music videos, and film?

 

again, my list is not all inclusive. 

 

 

 

I guess I need a primer/summary of the effect or magnitude or frequency of violence against women vs violence in general? Are we saying one is worse, they why? Are we saying one is more likely to be portrayed? If the latter question is, I don't see that with these examples. I think they show violence, and are just as likely to have male victims as female victims, or at least as a reflection of RL. OR are we saying the way violence against women is portrayed is different? If this is what we are focusing on, I would like more examples to support your point. :-) (not antagonistic, just clarifying)

 

statistically, as the majority of murder victims are men, then shows should depict this fact...

 

Some stats:

• Between 1992 and 1994, the number of violent incidents involving a female

  victim averaged 4.6 million a year--nearly 14 million crimes during the 3-year

  period.

• In 1995, women were about two-thirds as likely as men to be victims of

  violence; 20 years ago, they were half as likely.

• In 1994 females represented 23% of all known homicide victims in the United

  States; 9 out of 10 female victims were murdered by males.

          (An estimated 16,692 persons were murdered nationwide in 2005, an increase of 3.4 percent from the 2004figure. http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/offenses/violent_crime/murder_homicide.html

            In 2005, 1,181 women were murdered by an intimate partner.¹ That's an average of three women every day.

            Of all the women murdered in the U.S., about one-third were killed by an intimate partner.² http://www.now.org/issues/violence/stats.html

            Note: this is from a Woman's Rights website; seems presented in a completely non-biased way (*snorts*))

 

• In 1992-93, women were more likely to be victims of nonfatal violence by

  someone they knew (78%) than by a stranger (23%). Male victims were about as

  likely to be victimized by a stranger (49%) as by someone they knew (51%).

• For rape, robbery, and assault in 1992-93, female victims experienced 7

  times as many incidents of violence by an intimate (present and former spouses,

  boyfriends, and girlfriends) as male victims.

Source: http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=937

 

A new report from the Parents Television Council, Women in Peril, found a 120% increase in depictions of violence against women on television since 2004. (In the same time period, violence that occurred irrespective of gender only increased by 2%.)

Cumulatively, across all study periods and all networks, the most frequent type of violence was beating (29%), followed by credible threats of violence (18%), shooting (11%), rape (8%), stabbing (6%), and torture (2%). Violence against women resulted in death 19% of the time. Violence towards women or the graphic consequences of violence tends overwhelmingly to be depicted (92%) rather than implied (5%) or described (3%).Even more disturbingly, there has been a 400% increase in the depiction of teen girls as victims of violence

 

Swedish newspaper:http://dvis.humlab.umu.se/2009/11/swedish-stats-on-violence-gender-and-tv/

 

Objective. To examine portrayals of violence in popular music videos for patterns of aggression and victimization by gender and race.

Design and Setting. Content analysis of 518 music videos broadcast over national music television networks, Black Entertainment Television (BET), Country Music Television (CMT), Music Television (MTV), and Video Hits-1 (VH-1) during a 4-week period at randomly selected times of high adolescent viewership.

............................

Conclusions. Attractive role models were aggressors in more than 80% of music video violence. Males and females were victims with equivalent frequency, but males were more than three times as likely to be aggressors. Compared with United States demographics, blacks were overrepresented as aggressors and victims, whereas whites were underrepresented. White females were most frequently victims. Music videos may be reinforcing false stereotypes of aggressive black males and victimized white females. These observations raise concern for the effect of music videos on adolescents' normative expectations about conflict resolution, race, and male-female relationships.

 

Source: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/101/4/669.abstract?ijkey=6c6c021d9f083054b93629793f5b0a8266550e42&keytype2=tf_ipsecsha&cited-by=yes&legid=pediatrics101/4/669

 

SUMMARY: According to a 2010 national survey by the Centers for Disease Control and U.S. Department of Justice, in the last 12 months more men than women were victims of intimate partner physical violence and over 40% of severe physical violence was directed at men.

......................within the last 12 months an estimated 5,365,000 men and 4,741,000 women were victims of intimate partner physical violence. (Black, M.C. et al., 2011, Tables

4.1 and 4.2) ¹ This finding contrasts to the earlier National Violence Against Women Survey (Tjaden, P. G., & Thoennes, N., 2000)(hereinafter NVAWS), which estimated that 1.2 million

women and 835,000 men were victims of intimate partner physical violence in the preceding 12 months.

 

Source: http://batteredmen.com/NISVS.htm

 

Amusing... some of these seem to contradict each other.... hmmmmm.... Why is there no Violence against Men awareness week? Why is there no men's history month?

why is there no white history month? Society seems to have criminalized and de-PCed white men in general. I'm NOT a bigot or mysogonist, yet I get pissed off

at how many of the problems of the world get blamed on white men.

 

• In 2011, an estimated 1,203,564 violent crimes occurred nationwide, a

  decrease of 3.8 percent from the 2010 estimate.

• When considering 5- and 10-year trends, the 2011 estimated violent crime

  total was 15.4 percent below the 2007 level and 15.5 percent below the 2002

  level.

• There were an estimated 386.3 violent crimes per 100,000 inhabitants in

  2011.

• Aggravated assaults accounted for the highest number of violent crimes

  reported to law enforcement at 62.4 percent. Robbery comprised 29.4 percent of

  violent crimes, forcible rape accounted for 6.9 percent, and murder accounted

  for 1.2 percent of estimated violent crimes in 2011.

• Information collected regarding type of weapon showed that firearms were

  used in 67.7 percent of the nation’s murders, 41.3 percent of robberies, and

  21.2 percent of aggravated assaults. (Weapons data are not collected for

  forcible rape.) (See Expanded

  Homicide Data Table 7, Robbery Table 3, and the Aggravated Assault Table.)

Source: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/violent-crime/violent-crime

[Gudrean]

**hugs Tsuk**   well maybe we can change that and put on the 1st annual Mens Appreciation Week!! Will you be a presenter Tsuk?

[Tsukibana]

*awkwardly fends off hug* Not a chance!!

[Arez Al'Loke]

If anything, the VaW that is displayed on TV increases my awarness of it, rather than numb me to it

[AesSedaiGuy]

No offense taken at all Gudrean. I was honestly having a discussion, not getting defensive. :-)

I appreciate your comments, and was just clarifying and elaborating. :-)

 

And thanks for the compliment. Much appreciation. I do hope I not only come across fine and honourable, but AM fine and honorable.

:-)

[Moon Sedai]

Darn you dragon mount. I had a whole long Wall of Text posted and I lost it!

 

This has been some pretty good, complete discussion. ASG I thank you for your input. 

 

Perhaps I should clarify what i mean about VaW in television. 

When violence is done to a woman because she is female: perceived to be weaker, an easier target, punished for some crime related to femininity (You didn't make my sandwich, you got pregnant, how dare you let that man look at you), that is what i'm referring to. The special kind of violence that is not a "Victim this week is female, killed in a botched robbery"

 

Violence does occur against men in this manner. Full Metal Jacket's Gomer Pyle is a metaphorical rape victim.(I can prove it but it is a 25 page paper of boring if you aren't a history fan) Deliverance. Pulp Fiction. Green mile. Disclosure. 

These men were not attacked by men who were inherently homosexual.  
They were attacked because the attacker(s) wanted to prove to the victim that they were more manly than the victim. 

I can make you squeal like a pig. I can make you perform a lewd act to me because I have the power and you are just a little.... b***h.

 

When people, man or woman, are sexually assaulted in the media the motive is generally one of power. The attacker does so because they want to assert their power, strength, and masculinity over the other (and sometimes to mete out punishment for one of the aforementioned crimes). 

[Nolder]

I find it interesting and yet disturbing how many males, through-out all these threads have had a negative position towards these conversations. If you have never been a victim, of any kind of violence, in your current lifetime, you have no idea the fear a lot of women live in, not just here in the states, but especially in the rest of the world. I think the responses have proven the point that our saturation of VaW in the media has most definitely made it less apparent or less "violent" in the eyes of society, or at least the eyes of some of our society.  

Not to insult the people organizing this because I think they're just trying to repeat oft mentioned talking points and make event of it but the framework of the discussion comes from a place of victimhood. There are legitimate issues which no one has any gripes with (rape in South Africa for example) and then there's the discussion of lyrics in a song creating a "system of violence" or whatever. As I stated previously I believe that is BS and that there is very little evidence to support such claims.

 

However women do have an obvious disadvantage against most men in size and strength which immediately adds a sense of fear when in situations with men we are not familiar with.

Just FYI men are not all the same size or of equal strength. That's kind of the reason boxing and wrestling has weight classes.

[Gudrean]

 

I find it interesting and yet disturbing how many males, through-out all these threads have had a negative position towards these conversations. If you have never been a victim, of any kind of violence, in your current lifetime, you have no idea the fear a lot of women live in, not just here in the states, but especially in the rest of the world. I think the responses have proven the point that our saturation of VaW in the media has most definitely made it less apparent or less "violent" in the eyes of society, or at least the eyes of some of our society.  

Not to insult the people organizing this because I think they're just trying to repeat oft mentioned talking points and make event of it but the framework of the discussion comes from a place of victimhood. There are legitimate issues which no one has any gripes with (rape in South Africa for example) and then there's the discussion of lyrics in a song creating a "system of violence" or whatever. As I stated previously I believe that is BS and that there is very little evidence to support such claims.

 

>However women do have an obvious disadvantage against most men in size and strength which immediately adds a sense of fear when in situations with men we are not familiar with.

Just FYI men are not all the same size or of equal strength. That's kind of the reason boxing and wrestling has weight classes.

 

I obviously know that men/people come in all sizes and strengths, however, in my life I have only met a few men/boys, no matter their size, that were not stronger than me, of course unless they were much younger. 

[Nolder]

Probably true. Strength comes easier to men. Most men don't have to work out to have some measure of strength.

 

Although it should be noted that when it comes to self defense strength is not everything (even if it can be intimidating). There are many self defense and/or martial arts classes a woman could take if she was worried about ever being attacked by anyone. Or the easier route of buying mace or a gun.

 

A bullet will stop an assault from anyone, man or woman.

[Arez Al'Loke]

A kick to the groin will stop any man. A real hard kick might bloody well hospitalize him..

[AesSedaiGuy]

 

 

However women do have an obvious disadvantage against most men in size and strength which immediately adds a sense of fear when in situations with men we are not familiar with.

Just FYI men are not all the same size or of equal strength. That's kind of the reason boxing and wrestling has weight classes.

This is woefully and deliberately obtuse, in my opinion. As a rule, women tend to have less upper body strength and are smaller in size than women. OF COURSE there are always exceptions. No one is saying there aren't.

 

Also, it strikes me as uniquely condescending for you to say:

They're just trying to repeat oft-mentioned talking points and make an event of it ...

First, you are condescending to the developer of the thread, in this case, I assume Moon.

Second, if the issue still exists and is a problem, it bears repeating ... And repeating, and repeating.

 

You seem to speak with disdain of this topic, which I do not think is warranted. I am not going to attack or address you personally as the poster, however, your perceived tone and line of argument appears to be one if dismissiveness of not just the examples, but of the existence of the issue. Is that the case?

[Nolder]

This is woefully and deliberately obtuse, in my opinion. As a rule, women tend to have less upper body strength and are smaller in size than women. OF COURSE there are always exceptions. No one is saying there aren't.

The exceptions (of which there are many considering there are ~7 billion people on the planet) weren't mentioned, so I mentioned them. 

 

First, you are condescending to the developer of the thread, in this case, I assume Moon.

Moon, as far as I know, is just trying to promote a discussion. I said before I'm not trying to insult her or the other organizers of this event. Considering the theme of their event they're just presenting the most common talking points out there. That isn't their fault. As I said before there are legitimate issues and then there are things that I think are non issues. Am I not entitled to my own opinion in that regard? Was this meant as a closed discussion? If not then I'd think a dissenting voice would be welcomed otherwise the whole conversation devolves into an echo chamber.

 

Second, if the issue still exists and is a problem, it bears repeating ... And repeating, and repeating.

I'm not a fan of echo chamber conversations. They're boring.

 

You seem to speak with disdain of this topic, which I do not think is warranted. I am not going to attack or address you personally as the poster, however, your perceived tone and line of argument appears to be one if dismissiveness of not just the examples, but of the existence of the issue. Is that the case? 

Yes. I've said that multiple times already. I don't believe violence in media negatively effects mature and mentally capable audiences. I don't believe it normalizes violence, causes a "system" or anything like that. It's not just about women, I don't believe it hurts anyone.

[Arez Al'Loke]

Was this meant as a closed discussion?

 

This whole discussion is very tabu, nuff said. So in essence, yes, it's a closed discussion. Because anyone who offers another perspective will be looked down at as a female "hater".

Or atleast that's how the thread is comming of as.

[Gudrean]

 

This is woefully and deliberately obtuse, in my opinion. As a rule, women tend to have less upper body strength and are smaller in size than women. OF COURSE there are always exceptions. No one is saying there aren't.

The exceptions (of which there are many considering there are ~7 billion people on the planet) weren't mentioned, so I mentioned them. 

 

>First, you are condescending to the developer of the thread, in this case, I assume Moon.

Moon, as far as I know, is just trying to promote a discussion. I said before I'm not trying to insult her or the other organizers of this event. Considering the theme of their event they're just presenting the most common talking points out there. That isn't their fault. As I said before there are legitimate issues and then there are things that I think are non issues. Am I not entitled to my own opinion in that regard? Was this meant as a closed discussion? If not then I'd think a dissenting voice would be welcomed otherwise the whole conversation devolves into an echo chamber.

 

Second, if the issue still exists and is a problem, it bears repeating ... And repeating, and repeating.

I'm not a fan of echo chamber conversations. They're boring.

If they are boring then why spend so much time and energy on them? just curious.

 

 

You seem to speak with disdain of this topic, which I do not think is warranted. I am not going to attack or address you personally as the poster, however, your perceived tone and line of argument appears to be one if dismissiveness of not just the examples, but of the existence of the issue. Is that the case? 

Yes. I've said that multiple times already. I don't believe violence in media negatively effects mature and mentally capable audiences. I don't believe it normalizes violence, causes a "system" or anything like that. It's not just about women, I don't believe it hurts anyone.

the problem with this is not all of the audiences are mature and mentally capable

[Gudrean]

it is not a closed discussion, but there are ways to express ones opinions without appearing rude, condescending, or a woman hater. it's called couth, 

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/couth

 

I believe several men have shared their opinions on ALL the threads pertaining to this subject and have not come off as rude, condescending, defensive, ill-toned, or a woman hater.

 

just be polite and share your opinions with respect to the women who this subject pertains to

[WildTaltos]

Probably true. Strength comes easier to men. Most men don't have to work out to have some measure of strength.

 

Although it should be noted that when it comes to self defense strength is not everything (even if it can be intimidating). There are many self defense and/or martial arts classes a woman could take if she was worried about ever being attacked by anyone. Or the easier route of buying mace or a gun.

 

A bullet will stop an assault from anyone, man or woman.

Taht works gret if yuo have mony or acess for self-defnse or wespons, whih soem women dont, especily in les-devloped countries.

 

You seem to speak with disdain of this topic, which I do not think is warranted. I am not going to attack or address you personally as the poster, however, your perceived tone and line of argument appears to be one if dismissiveness of not just the examples, but of the existence of the issue. Is that the case?

Yes. I've said that multiple times already. I don't believe violence in media negatively effects mature and mentally capable audiences. I don't believe it normalizes violence, causes a "system" or anything like that. It's not just about women, I don't believe it hurts anyone.

So yur esentialy admiting you aer not only speking with disdain bt also bein desmisive/belittling of the entir topic (in whch case it bogles me why you are stil talkin abuot it if its beneth your notice) aftre several diferent peple expresed concrn of your rudeness? Youve got evry right to explin why yuo dont htnk it hurts anyoen (althogh now seem yuor contradictin yuorself becuse you agred earlir it can hurt childrn at lest) and provid this or taht evidence to suport it but not doin it in away taht multipl peple are agreing comes off as ofensive. If yuor not capable of keping deferential tone at al on this subject, refain from posting. 

[Arez Al'Loke]

I find it interesting and yet disturbing how many males, through-out all these threads have had a negative position towards these conversations. If you have never been a victim, of any kind of violence, in your current lifetime, you have no idea the fear a lot of women live in, not just here in the states, but especially in the rest of the world. I think the responses have proven the point that our saturation of VaW in the media has most definitely made it less apparent or less "violent" in the eyes of society, or at least the eyes of some of our society.  

 

Tal, Lets not talk about "diferential tones"

 

As you can see from my quote.

First of all, she interprets our comments of "I don't think media has a noticeable effect on people (with different ways of saying it)" as disturbing and negative?

 

Then she says we have to be essentially, beaten or raped. to be allowed to share our opinion on the matter?

 

And because of this, we don't have an idea of the "fear" women live with.

 

Have you even considerd where these women live? I can SWEAR to you, and probably even find proof, that in Sweden, Norway, Denmark, women aren't afraid of ANYTHING.

Yett you throw out all of these generalizations, saying we have no clue about the matter at hand.

 

Then she boldly claims that we are "allowed" to share whatever thoughts we have on the subject? Please.

 

So Tal, everyone has their own right to express themselves. You choose to interpret Nolder's words as insulting, and so did every other person that shares your opinion on this.

But I choose to interpret it as it was meant to be, simply a statement that he doesn't bloody think that media has an affect on people.

Arguing schemantics is beyond the point of this thread.

[Nolder]

If they are boring then why spend so much time and energy on them? just curious.

I wouldn't say I spend a lot of time or energy on echo chamber conversations.

 

the problem with this is not all of the audiences are mature and mentally capable

This is true. In the case of children this is entirely the fault of parents. In the case of mentally ill people...that's a completely different issue in my mind. We can't make a blanket statement that the mentally ill are banned from viewing media, owning guns, driving cars, working, etc because there are varying degrees of mental illness. It's a tough call and I personally don't know what to do about it if anything.

 

just be polite and share your opinions with respect to the women who this subject pertains to

I don't believe I've been disrespectful to anyone. Disagreeing with people and asking for sources is not disrespect.

 

And I believe the subject of crime effects everyone.

 

 

Taht works gret if yuo have mony or acess for self-defnse or wespons, whih soem women dont, especily in les-devloped countries.

In western countries woman have as much right as anyone else to stay fit and work out which costs nothing. In non western society it's a different story of course.

 

So yur esentialy admiting you aer not only speking with disdain bt also bein desmisive/belittling of the entir topic (in whch case it bogles me why you are stil talkin abuot it if its beneth your notice) aftre several diferent peple expresed concrn of your rudeness? Youve got evry right to explin why yuo dont htnk it hurts anyoen (althogh now seem yuor contradictin yuorself becuse you agred earlir it can hurt childrn at lest) and provid this or taht evidence to suport it but not doin it in away taht multipl peple are agreing comes off as ofensive. If yuor not capable of keping deferential tone at al on this subject, refain from posting. 

You're misreading my response. I said "yes" to the last question posed to me by ASG which was " I am not going to attack or address you personally as the poster, however, your perceived tone and line of argument appears to be one if dismissiveness of not just the examples, but of the existence of the issue. Is that the case?" He's kind of framing it in a way in which I can't help but answer yes to the dismissive accusation but what I was saying yes to is that I don't believe there is an issue here. I don't believe it's dismissive just to state that. I'm not unwilling to hear arguments to the contrary.

[Arez Al'Loke]

 

Taht works gret if yuo have mony or acess for self-defnse or wespons, whih soem women dont, especily in les-devloped countries.

In western countries woman have as much right as anyone else to stay fit and work out which costs nothing. In non western society it's a different story of course.

 

I think it's very important to state where these problems occur. As I said in my previous post, there are several countries where violence against women is a "thing of the past". Any violence being done there is being done equally between both genders.

[Gudrean]

 

 

Taht works gret if yuo have mony or acess for self-defnse or wespons, whih soem women dont, especily in les-devloped countries.

In western countries woman have as much right as anyone else to stay fit and work out which costs nothing. In non western society it's a different story of course.

 

I think it's very important to state where these problems occur. As I said in my previous post, there are several countries where violence against women is a "thing of the past". Any violence being done there is being done equally between both genders.

I'm sorry but VaW is not a thing of the past in ANY country on this planet. 

[Gudrean]

 

I find it interesting and yet disturbing how many males, through-out all these threads have had a negative position towards these conversations. If you have never been a victim, of any kind of violence, in your current lifetime, you have no idea the fear a lot of women live in, not just here in the states, but especially in the rest of the world. I think the responses have proven the point that our saturation of VaW in the media has most definitely made it less apparent or less "violent" in the eyes of society, or at least the eyes of some of our society.  

 

Tal, Lets not talk about "diferential tones"

 

As you can see from my quote.

First of all, she interprets our comments of "I don't think media has a noticeable effect on people (with different ways of saying it)" as disturbing and negative?

 

Then she says we have to be essentially, beaten or raped. to be allowed to share our opinion on the matter?

 

And because of this, we don't have an idea of the "fear" women live with.

 

Have you even considerd where these women live? I can SWEAR to you, and probably even find proof, that in Sweden, Norway, Denmark, women aren't afraid of ANYTHING.

Yett you throw out all of these generalizations, saying we have no clue about the matter at hand.

 

Then she boldly claims that we are "allowed" to share whatever thoughts we have on the subject? Please.

 

So Tal, everyone has their own right to express themselves. You choose to interpret Nolder's words as insulting, and so did every other person that shares your opinion on this.

But I choose to interpret it as it was meant to be, simply a statement that he doesn't bloody think that media has an affect on people.

Arguing schemantics is beyond the point of this thread.

My post was a straight forward sentence with no emotional connotation to it, just because you add bold and italics to the words you resonated with does not make my statement "differential". If I had meant it to sound like an attack it surely would have. I can have a conversation with out attcking a person directly, as in calling the thread they are running and are probably very passionate about equated to BS. Like I said earlier, your opinions can be given in polite and respectful manners and no one would have ever questioned them. There is no mistaking the emotion that was attached to each and everyone of yours and Nolders posts in these threads.  

[Nolder]

As you said Gudrean if I wanted to make impassioned or emotional posts there would be no mistaking it.

As I said before disagreeing with an opinion and asking for a source is not disrespectful.

Calling the subject BS is also not disrespectful to the thread maker. I am talking about the subject not the poster.

[WildTaltos]

 

I find it interesting and yet disturbing how many males, through-out all these threads have had a negative position towards these conversations. If you have never been a victim, of any kind of violence, in your current lifetime, you have no idea the fear a lot of women live in, not just here in the states, but especially in the rest of the world. I think the responses have proven the point that our saturation of VaW in the media has most definitely made it less apparent or less "violent" in the eyes of society, or at least the eyes of some of our society.

1.)Tal, Lets not talk about "diferential tones"

 

As you can see from my quote.

First of all, she interprets our comments of "I don't think media has a noticeable effect on people (with different ways of saying it)" as disturbing and negative?

 

Then she says we have to be essentially, beaten or raped. to be allowed to share our opinion on the matter?

 

And because of this, we don't have an idea of the "fear" women live with.

 

Have you even considerd where these women live? I can SWEAR to you, and probably even find proof, that in Sweden, Norway, Denmark, women aren't afraid of ANYTHING.

Yett you throw out all of these generalizations, saying we have no clue about the matter at hand.

 

Then she boldly claims that we are "allowed" to share whatever thoughts we have on the subject? Please.

 

2.) So Tal, everyone has their own right to express themselves. You choose to interpret Nolder's words as insulting, and so did every other person that shares your opinion on this.

But I choose to interpret it as it was meant to be, simply a statement that he doesn't bloody think that media has an affect on people.

Arguing schemantics is beyond the point of this thread.

1.) Considring Im helpin to mod this discusion and this IS NOT debates and discusion, it wuold be my busines. Im not suer waht the rest of taht has to do with me becuse its directd at Gudren so I wont coment. My englsh is impared right now by aphasi but soem of the stuf yuo interpreted frm waht she sid I cannot fathom how you could hav construed, I wil say though.

 

AND

 

2.) SHARES MY OPININ ON THIS? and waht opinin wuold taht be?! EH?!

 

Firs post i made on here, i mentined psycho isnt a good exmple for film, thn I stated violnce in the media dos incres normalistion and hence les reactin to it whn seen on film, whiel statin I dont kno if it wuold translaet into a real lief case of wtching a woman bein beatn and not carin.

 

Second posst, I pointd uot ther dos seem to be indicatins taht women aer blamd for soemthing in the chrsitin bible frm waht i understnd becuse rey said there wasnt. 

 

Third pos on here, I pointd uot waht I percived as logic flaw thn warnd Noldr to keep toen less offensiv.

 

Fourth pos on here, I ws explining to Lenlo th saem thuoght proces of why thnk it was bad exmpe with the whoel eminem thing.

 

Fifth post I caled you out for sayin thers no proof for waht Aes Sedai Guy statd by providin reserch done in taht area regrding childrn and violnce and any corelation it might haev in the countris of interst to incresing agresiveness, whiel explining I dont necesarily agree with it myslf and explining my point of view - whch was in regrds to childrn, it dos cause normalisatin but in regrds to incresed agresions, it posible but it probaly onl a portin of the problms.

 

sixth pos was statin waht I thioght Aes Sedai Guy was talkin abuot then explining waht emotionly chalenged is.

 

And seventh pos was th oen I jus maed becuse Noldre has been comin acros as offnsive to othre peple, not onl in this thred but Ive goten complints in privaet of it. Now taht I have doen a review of evry one of my post of this thred, waht opinon of mien dos evryone shaer that I am so crusadin to defnd that your acusing me of ??? The onl clear oen Ive stated in this thred is taht violnce in media has an affec on the devoping mind in at lest normalisatin, an posibly contributing to agresion, and thruogh proxy socity as tiem goes on - of which Iv seen no oen els brooch much of th subjct since, its been abuot violnce aginst women in media an not suer waht else, guess on th adult mind, whch I dont haev an opinion abuot. If I read Noldres respons wrong, thn my mistaek, but wuodl have been prtly actin upon previus cases where othre peple are havin a probelm with his tone and Im making suer the subjct remins accesible and comfrotble to evryone rather than feelin they are goin be bellited because thy believ in soemthing hes goin to call BS.

 

And yes, Im FURIOUS becuse I detest bein acused of holdin a belif I dont, or bandwagining for resons othre than suond logic.