unite against the war on women April 28

[velkyn]

Really didn't know about this at all until now but a new group Unite Women has been working for having a ralley in every state capitol against the war against women the GOP and "right" have been waging. 

http://unitewomen.org/unite/

seems like other women's groups are behind this too, like NOW.  for all of that, seems to be rather under the radar.

unlike the idiots in the US gov't that would try to remove protections against violence, I'd rather be with this guy

[Seppuku]

21st Century and the Western World still doesn't have fair or equal right for women. Well I wish the very best of luck to all you yanks. Hope you don't have to put up with the shit your extreme right wingers like to dish out for too much longer.

[Nick]

That guy looks like the captain from Star Trek.

[velkyn]

and who better to have to kick some ass.  Mr. Stewart grew up in a home where his father beat his mother and back then there was nothing he could do about it.

a video(and yes, Icould happily listen to him read a phone book) http://protectthehuman.amnesty.org.uk/videos/patrick-stewart-on-violence-against-women-2 

[Seppuku]

I did not know that. :/

But the man certainly has a way with words and not to mention is damn awesome, so I'm sure he'll be a great arse kicker.

[One Above All]

I think it's great that women are doing this. People should realize that they're never alone. If you're not being treated unfairly, stand up and speak out. Even if it doesn't work for you, others will do the same, and eventually you will succeed.

[Nick]

I don't know.  The Republicans and FOX are not going to like this.

[Quesi]

I don't know.  The Republicans and FOX are not going to like this.

Well then let's just not do it.  Best not to make waves. 

[Seppuku]

If it pissed FOX off then great! I enjoy watching Bill O'Reilly rave like a loony (AKA, himself), it's how I get my kicks.

[Quesi]

Not sure I could stomach Bill O'Reilly.  But I'm watching Ancient Aliens for kicks this evening. 

So Seppuku and I are both watching fanatics presenting disjointed facts spun together with wild, unfounded assumptions, making irrational proclamations about the past and really bizarre predictions about the future. 

So this is what the godless do on a Friday night, huh?  If only the theists knew....

[kindred]

Meh, not exactly the type of cause I can get behind. My grandfather tried to beat my mother up when she was a teen and she responded by trying to stab him with an umbrella. If she could do it, against a man twice her size, I gather other women can. A victim is a victim whether male or female. Its one of those "fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me type of deals." Been physically abused myself and I still hold that view.

Abusers are bullies. Bullies prey on the weak that don't fight back. All you need to do is fight back. You don't even need to win and the abuser will stop. Abusers , like predators, will not take on prey that can fight back.

My point being: abuse against women isn't some sort of special crime that needs to be punished with extra oomphf and that there are far better causes to support with your limited time and effort. Why not look at economic issues or other tangible and concrete issues that are far easier and have a better input to output ratio? Not to mention, that issues like this are hard to control because of the difficulty of enforcing the new rules. Do you think that abused women would just up and report their abusers? No. They wouldn't let themselves be abused if they didn't think that the relationship is worth it, and if their decision is destroying their happiness its still their decision and we have no right to veto it.

[velkyn]

it's not just abuse against women, Kindred.  It's women getting paid less then men, not being to make our own medical choices like men (no problem in getting Viagra but all sorts of roadblocks to the potential results of all that viagra), not getting support to have children as the religious seem so intent on making women do.  The recent violence against women legislation was expanded to violence agaisnt any partner, be they male or female and the GOP idiots were against that too. 

All of the efforts against women will be against men if these idiots get the chance.

and this is pure horseshit

They wouldn't let themselves be abused if they didn't think that the relationship is worth it, and if their decision is destroying their happiness its still their decision and we have no right to veto it.

 

[Argyle]

Cite on that last quote?

[jeremy0]

Get a rally started - did you all notice PIPA and SOPA?  My intention here is to show you that numbers do matter, as long as your congressmen/women know what position you are collectively taking.  The rebuke against said legislation only worked because so many of us emailed, phoned, or mailed our congressmen with the same thing - we are against current PIPA/SOPA legislation.

They know you vote them into office.  If you really want to make a difference, get a single voice on some issues and start getting it very visual.  And when you have the numbers, email your congressman.  This delivers you results.  You can do the same thing for the people that are demanding certain removals and additions of legit legislation at OccupyWallStreet.org (just google occupy wall street), as well as the people trying to start a new political party out of it called 'the people's party'.  This group has been trying to push legislation for years, and they have good reasons/ideas, yet they have largely been ignored due to insufficient visibility, not enough visible support, and no corporate support.

If you all come together with a single voice - your congressmen/women will listen to it.  Good luck.

BTW - not only Fox, but numerous news organizations are against these types of things.  It's time for change - and congress isn't cutting it.  I hope you guys can get something serious started here...  And btw, yes, the president carries a big stick - 'tread softly and carry a big stick' was what was meant by that.

[One Above All]

Cite on that last quote?

That quote (assuming you were talking about the one in velkyn's most recent post in this thread), much to my surprise, is from kindred.

[velkyn]

Cite on that last quote?

right here

Meh, not exactly the type of cause I can get behind. My grandfather tried to beat my mother up when she was a teen and she responded by trying to stab him with an umbrella. If she could do it, against a man twice her size, I gather other women can. A victim is a victim whether male or female. Its one of those "fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me type of deals." Been physically abused myself and I still hold that view.

Abusers are bullies. Bullies prey on the weak that don't fight back. All you need to do is fight back. You don't even need to win and the abuser will stop. Abusers , like predators, will not take on prey that can fight back.

My point being: abuse against women isn't some sort of special crime that needs to be punished with extra oomphf and that there are far better causes to support with your limited time and effort. Why not look at economic issues or other tangible and concrete issues that are far easier and have a better input to output ratio? Not to mention, that issues like this are hard to control because of the difficulty of enforcing the new rules. Do you think that abused women would just up and report their abusers? No. They wouldn't let themselves be abused if they didn't think that the relationship is worth it, and if their decision is destroying their happiness its still their decision and we have no right to veto it.

[Historicity]

That guy looks like the captain from Star Trek.

Patrick Stewart has long been a member of Amnesty International.  He wrote 2 of the episodes of ST:TNG about his activities.  One was where a McCarthyite prosecutor got Capt Picard on the stand and so entangled him with questions about Romulan subversive activities that he, citing the precedent in the Federation's constitution to refuse to answer questions because they might incriminate him.  The audience could see he was innocent and Stewart was demonstrating why the 5th Amendment can defend an innocent man.

In another he wrote Picard was captured and tortured by a Kardassian who as a mindbending exercise was torturing him to admit there were 5 lights when there was 4.  That was derived from 1984 when Winston Smith was tortured to admit a different number of fingers held before his face.

[Frank]

In another he wrote Picard was captured and tortured by a Kardassian who as a mindbending exercise was torturing him to admit there were 5 lights when there was 4.  That was derived from 1984 when Winston Smith was tortured to admit a different number of fingers held before his face.

Maybe if the Kardassian had fastened a ravenous rat to Picards face instead of the pain device he might well have saw 5 lights instead of 4.

[Seppuku]

I kept reading that as Kardashian, I was thinking, "why was Kim Kardashian torturing Picard?" As far as I was aware he did nothing to hurt her.

[kindred]

Cite on that last quote?

That quote (assuming you were talking about the one in velkyn's most recent post in this thread), much to my surprise, is from kindred.

It's a valid point. Is it not? A governing body has no right to curtail a human beings freedom just as long as their actions do not curtail other peoples freedom. The only situation that would warrant action on the part of a governing body is if said person being abused wants to get out of said relationship and the husbands/boyfriend/whatever is curtailing her freedom to do so.

None of us have the right to stop people from making stupid decisions. Be it smoking, drugs or anything that harms oneself as long as it does not curtail the freedom of other people, nobody has the right to stop anorexics, alcoholics, the suicidally depressed etc. from hurting themselves.

edited for clarity.

[One Above All]

kindred, adults can still be brainwashed. Hitting someone until they do what you want will result in major side effects, but it will also result in brainwashing. There's also Stockholm Syndrome and a bunch of other stuff that the person being abused is prone to.
People who are abused don't choose to be abused or remain quiet. They just don't see any other option(s).

[velkyn]

It's a valid point. Is it not? A governing body has no right to curtail a human beings freedom just as long as their actions do not curtail other peoples freedom. The only situation that would warrant action on the part of a governing body is if said person being abused wants to get out of said relationship and the husbands/boyfriend/whatever is curtailing her freedom to do so.

as Lucifer said, some people don't know how to get out or that they can and it's perfectly find to resist such ignorance and violence.  They don't know the questions to ask.

None of us have the right to stop people from making stupid decisions. Be it smoking, drugs or anything that harms oneself as long as it does not curtail the freedom of other people, nobody has the right to stop anorexics, alcoholics, the suicidally depressed etc. from hurting themselves.

Bullshit. By those actions of hurting themselves, they do hurt others.  If I hadn't told my husband to go to the psychologist's and get some help, he would likely have commited suicide due to the depressive end of the bipolar cycle.  If he had killed himself, he would have harmed me.   I would have committed him to the local psych ward if I would have had too because there was a chance that he could get better. And he did. 

not trying is just avoiding responsiblity.

[kindred]

It's a valid point. Is it not? A governing body has no right to curtail a human beings freedom just as long as their actions do not curtail other peoples freedom. The only situation that would warrant action on the part of a governing body is if said person being abused wants to get out of said relationship and the husbands/boyfriend/whatever is curtailing her freedom to do so.

as Lucifer said, some people don't know how to get out or that they can and it's perfectly find to resist such ignorance and violence.  They don't know the questions to ask.

None of us have the right to stop people from making stupid decisions. Be it smoking, drugs or anything that harms oneself as long as it does not curtail the freedom of other people, nobody has the right to stop anorexics, alcoholics, the suicidally depressed etc. from hurting themselves.

Bullshit. By those actions of hurting themselves, they do hurt others.  If I hadn't told my husband to go to the psychologist's and get some help, he would likely have commited suicide due to the depressive end of the bipolar cycle.  If he had killed himself, he would have harmed me.   I would have committed him to the local psych ward if I would have had too because there was a chance that he could get better. And he did. 

not trying is just avoiding responsiblity.

Did he give you consent? Did you forcibly take him to the doctor?

In the end it was his choice and all you did was influence him, as it should be. I see no conflict here. Also, insanity induced by depression is different and not comparable to addiction or self-destructive behaviour due to willful ignorance or stupidity. You did not encroach on his freedom while he was still sane, all well and good.(summary:insanity=not accountable=not free)

Why would you being hurt factor in, though? You gave him both opportunity and permission to hurt you the moment you had a relationship. Why would you complain? Isn't that part of the whole risk to reward relationship deal? There's a risk that you get hurt and a reward of fulfillment.(you appeal to emotion=emotional arguments do not work)

[Kimberly]

All you need to do is fight back. You don't even need to win and the abuser will stop. Abusers , like predators, will not take on prey that can fight back.

Really? This is by far the stupidest advice you could give someone being abused. What do you think really happens when you fight back? Does that make them happier? Does it make them suddenly become rational? When you punch them in the face are they going to be like, "You know what I was wrong, come here and kiss me.". Or does it instead escalate the violence and rage?

Edit: I'm not advocating that the victim do nothing, but the quoted text is not the answer.

[kindred]

All you need to do is fight back. You don't even need to win and the abuser will stop. Abusers , like predators, will not take on prey that can fight back.

Really? This is by far the stupidest advice you could give someone being abused. What do you think really happens when you fight back? Does that make them happier? Does it make them suddenly become rational? When you punch them in the face are they going to be like, "You know what I was wrong, come here and kiss me.". Or does it instead escalate the violence and rage?

Edit: I'm not advocating that the victim do nothing, but the quoted text is not the answer.

Seen domestic violence at home. All I can say is, if you let somebody beat you and not walk away than you are at fault too. The sheer amount of stupidity is mind-boggling. Oh my god! somebody is beating me, why I should leave him, but oh wait, he has come to me and said he has seen the error of his ways for the upteenth time, O REJOICE!

Nobody forced my mother into the relationship, she stays and martyr herself because she believes that everyone has been sent by god on a mission and that her mission is to help my douchebag father.

Are you telling me that because these people have good intentions, it excuses the fact that they help and support evil people being evil? Whatever their intention, they help evil people be evil. Do you think the lousy good for nothing husbands that are unemployed, would exist if not for their breadwinner and housewife all in one combo spouses?

I've seen battered mothers from other families defend their husbands after they molest other women. Is this not evil?

[One Above All]

Brainwashing, Stockholm syndrome... kindred, I'm guessing you don't know how easy it is to control people through fear and pain.

[Omen]

Seen domestic violence at home. All I can say is, if you let somebody beat you...

That is a grossly exaggerated manner of looking at it.

A victim is usually dependent upon an abuser, before the abuse begins, and the dependency is used as means to control the victim to discourage them from leaving the situation.  Sometimes the abuser is the primary bread winner in the family, sometimes the abuser/victim live in a close knit community where there are unspoken rules or pressure to just conform, and sometimes the victim doesn't feel like they could ever get away from the abuser.  The victim begins rationalizing the abuse in order to cope with it emotionally as part of a survival mechanism, such as believing that they would be worse off elsewhere or with someone else.  They compartmentalize in order to refuse having to deal with the abuse to a point where they can't see any other options as realistic, primarily because they are so dependent on the abuser.  It is not surprising that domestic abuse tends to occur more regularly in closely knit rural communities or other kinds of insular situations where no one might know a victim lives in a home simply because they are never allowed to go outside by the abuser.

[Kimberly]

kindred

I'm not implying that at all. Nothing you said above is anything I've said, or implied. If you want to know my personal opinions of domestic violence all you had to do was ask. Please don't assume my stance for me.

My first opinion is of the adult victim. There is more than just physical abuse, their is a psychological warfare going on as well. However, the victim is not with out choice. There are warning signs, or red flags that come up that warn the victim of the person they are becoming involved with. If they ignore those that is their first mistake. Secondly, there is usually a way out and often victims choose to stay. Now, I've already said there is a psychological aspect to it that should be noted, but the victim can decide to leave[1]. If they decide to stay it's in my opinion, that even though psychological weak they accept partial responsibility for allowing the abuse to continue. Lastly, sometimes the victim knows no other way to live. They repeat the pattern over and over with new abusers because they ignore the warning flags I discussed earlier. Sometimes this victim is so accustomed to the role of being the victim that the consciously and unconsciously decide to become a serial victim. Consider it like an addiction, they need help if they are to escape their own "prison[2].".

Please know I'm not trying to be unsympathetic to the victim, or ignore the reprocutions that prolonged abuse does to the brain. I know that sometimes they think they can't leave. That's why we should be spreading proper education, not misinformation. Fighting back[3], and attacking your abuser, is only going to make them hit you harder.

1.	Assuming they are not held prisoner with no way out.
2.	Repeating victimization
3.	Instead of leaving, or attempting to leave. Obviously, if needed in certain situations you HAVE to fight to get out. But I'm referring more to domestic violence in this situation where the abuser is not putting you in a life or death situation. And the victim has no intention to leave. Hope that clarifies this a little.

[Kimberly]

Seen domestic violence at home. All I can say is, if you let somebody beat you...

That is a grossly exaggerated manner of looking at it.

A victim is usually dependent upon an abuser, before the abuse begins, and the dependency is used as means to control the victim to discourage them from leaving the situation.  Sometimes the abuser is the primary bread winner in the family, sometimes the abuser/victim live in a close knit community where there are unspoken rules or pressure to just conform, and sometimes the victim doesn't feel like they could ever get away from the abuser.  The victim begins rationalizing the abuse in order to cope with it emotionally as part of a survival mechanism, such as believing that they would be worse off elsewhere or with someone else.  They compartmentalize in order to refuse having to deal with the abuse to a point where they can't see any other options as realistic, primarily because they are so dependent on the abuser.  It is not surprising that domestic abuse tends to occur more regularly in closely knit rural communities or other kinds of insular situations where no one might know a victim lives in a home simply because they are never allowed to go outside by the abuser.

I should have elaborated further on my opinion because THIS is also part of how I feel. Often times the abuser alienates the victim from anyone who could help them leave.