george will, moron

[dellinger63]

Dismissing or doubting the claims of women alleging abuse serves nothing but to perpetuate and worse, abet the abuse.

In fairness I found and read Will's piece and also found it disgusting. I've known not one or two but dozens of women who were abused and although they each are affected in a different way and to different degrees, not one of them would as Will would say 'even in a delusional state' have considered it any sort of privilege.

I now have to wonder what kind of self-absorbed or delusional state Mr. Will is living in that he has never encountered 'victims' in the snow globe of his personal life?

I also like to ask him what sort of privilege he would reap if he had been a victim? Or don't male sexual abuse victims exist in that snow globe he lives in?

[dellinger63]

I'd also like to add if 'nonconsensual touching' is included, I'd put the number of victims closer to 4 out of 5 rather than the 1 out of 5 he is doubting.

[GenuineRisk]

Unsurprisingly, The Onion does it better than George:

http://www.theonion.com/articles/col...s-to-re,36129/

I got involved in a discussion on Facebook with someone who said he didn't think the numbers on how many women are assaulted, etc., could possibly be right, therefore, they weren't true. Sigh. As they say, you cannot reason a man out of something he did not reason himself into.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

Unsurprisingly, The Onion does it better than George:

http://www.theonion.com/articles/col...s-to-re,36129/

I got involved in a discussion on Facebook with someone who said he didn't think the numbers on how many women are assaulted, etc., could possibly be right, therefore, they weren't true. Sigh. As they say, you cannot reason a man out of something he did not reason himself into.

yeah, actual assaults are actually higher, since so many women don't report them.

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by Danzig

yeah, actual assaults are actually higher, since so many women don't report them.

The Washington Post ran another offensive op-ed about how if more women would just get married, they would lessen their chance of being assaulted by a
partner. One of the most bone-headed things I've ever read in that paper. I'll post the link if I can find it again.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

The Washington Post ran another offensive op-ed about how if more women would just get married, they would lessen their chance of being assaulted by a
partner. One of the most bone-headed things I've ever read in that paper. I'll post the link if I can find it again.

i just double-checked my calendar....yep, it shows this is 2014. sometimes i wonder tho.


i found it, am reading it now.

[Danzig]

'For women, part of the story is about what social scientists call a “selection effect,” namely, women in healthy, safe relationships are more likely to select into marriage, and women in unhealthy, unsafe relationships often lack the power to demand marriage or the desire to marry.'


lack the power to 'demand marriage'?

and of course if they're with a bad boyfriend they won't desire to marry!


er, what? guy contradicts himself:

'But marriage also seems to cause men to behave better.'

and then:

'Marriage is no panacea when it comes to male violence.'

edit~
lol

just saw this on my home page:

http://flavorwire.com/461854/washing...ta-journalism/

i have to say that while reading the op ed, the first thing i thought of was the FSM piece that showed global warming is directly linked to the number of pirates.
as piracy has dropped over the last couple centuries, temps have risen. so, to halt global warming, we need more pirates!

and props to the writer of the response for 'asspuddings'