|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Monday July 30, @03:12PM EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
I would suggest writing a powerful slogan
about false accusation of rape on every a wall
next to each urinal with that message.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Monday July 30, @03:47PM EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I would probably be willing to vandalize property if I saw something like that in a public restroom. And as for the moral justification, do you think black men should be expected to sit back and do nothing if signs were posted in bathrooms that said, "watch out for black men who might rob you"? This is the kind of case where civil disobedience would be very appropriate, and I would have no problem with it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Monday July 30, @05:10PM EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I would probably be willing to vandalize property if I saw something like that in a public restroom.
Everyone wrights on restroom walls.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Users of our products shall not post or upload any content which is: ...(3) advocating illegal activity or discussing illegal activities with an intent to commit them" (standard disclaimer seen on many web sites)
I understand the messages above to be of a purely hypothetical and philosophical nature and in no way to be construed as to be in violation of the excerpt from a "Terms of Use" statement above.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I agree - though I think there's something to be said for civil disobedience (and *true* civil disobedience is when you make sure the public knows that you did it), I would like to ask people not to advocate potentially illegal activities on this web site. It's not how we're going to become mainstream.
Scott
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scott,
There's a lot that could be said for civil or even un-civil disobedience. The only question I would pose is do we want to say it here and makes things easy for our enemies.
Tom Pollock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My own personal response is probably extreme, but if I were to walk into a men's restroom in a place of public business and see something like that, I think I'd demand to be allowed to use the women's restroom, where I could take care of my business in a more comfortable and non-accusatory environment. Call it avoiding a hostile "business" environment. :) I rarely use urinals because they're seldom properly cleaned in my area, but it's the principal of the thing.
Considering the climate of fear regarding sexual harassment on college campuses these days, I wonder if offended men could file a sexual harassment claim against the universities and "Men Stopping Rape" as a response to this... well... harassment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why, it's elementary, my dear Watson! If one in four women will be raped, then one in four men must be a rapist! Right?
Right.
This whole thing is just completely infuriating - but even more so, it's tragic. To think that the perception of gender relations in this world, once defined as cooperative and loving, is now defined as oppressed/oppressor. And it only further demeans the male body by defining a natural component unique to the male body as a weapon of violence against females. In this light, men can never be viewed as fully human - not when a natural part of our bodies is associated with evil power over the opposite sex (also, dangerously, it establishes a correlation between men's possession of this body part and women's quality of life on the planet - thus, women could be seen as having an appreciable "stake" in men's having, or not having, this body part and perhaps be given the right to exercise that "stake" in the future).
Meanwhile, women's childbearing capacity gives them the ultimate power over life and death in this world - only, instead of classifying it as power, we instead classify it as an occupational hazard, as women unfairly paying the price for male sexuality.
If you want a clear understanding of just how morally superior we believe women are compared to men, not to mention how much more sacrosanct we believe the female body is, you need only consider the difference in how we react to the aforementioned female power as compared to how we react to the aforementioned male power.
Apparently, it is such a violation of a woman's privacy and an insult to her intellect and morality to question her decision to have an abortion that an underaged female - a girl - should thus be allowed to obtain one without even her parents' knowledge; she deserves the utmost respectful secrecy in what she does with her body, on the grounds that she is morally equipped to wield her power without supervision.
Meanwhile, no moral insult is too harsh for a man, nor is any male body part or bodily function so sacrosanct, that an innocent man may enjoy the privacy of employing a private organ in performing a private function without feeling the theoretical "spotlight" of a sign on the urinal that snidely and insolently acknowledges the organ, equates it with a weapon, and then implies that the man might be otherwise inclined to use it to commit a criminal act of violence.
It makes me think I might as well not even bother showing the decency to wear pants anymore, since my manhood has now become classified as a topic of public concern to be dealt with as openly and matter-of-factly as the nuclear bomb and the hole in the O-Zone.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
