Discussion about hot topics trending today

[garhkal]

On another subject.. What's everyone's opinion on this??

http://dailycaller.com/2016/08/16/ha...-sex-club-ban/

[Coco Pops]

On another subject.. What's everyone's opinion on this??

http://dailycaller.com/2016/08/16/ha...-sex-club-ban/

Are you sure that isn't satire?

What kind of insanity I don't know...

[Coco Pops]

And if they try to arrest the black neighbours on suspicion of "suspicious behaviour" , and they resist because they've done nothing wrong.. The police then get to arrest/shoot them 20 times for resisting arrest..

What only 20 times?

[Annoyed]

On another subject.. What's everyone's opinion on this??

http://dailycaller.com/2016/08/16/ha...-sex-club-ban/

Sounds about right. Despite all of the whining about the evils of discrimination, it is still perfectly acceptable to discriminate, as long as the target of the discrimination is men.

[Falcon Horus]

BUT That still doesn't alieviate the issue of proving they made a hoax call..

Victims will stay at a crime scene, unless they don't want to press charges.
If everything is fine after a check, and nothing can be found wrong -- I'd say chances are it was a hoax call.

Are you sure that isn't satire?

It isn't.

Here be the article from the Harvard paper:

Seneca To Go Gender Neutral, But Membership Could Stay All-Women

Though the article has a different build-up.

Excerpt:

By C. Ramsey Fahs, CRIMSON STAFF WRITER4 days ago

This fall, the all-female Seneca organization will formally adopt a gender neutral policy in response to administrative sanctions against single-gender social groups—but future memberships could remain all-women in practice without running afoul of the College’s penalties.

According to an email from the Seneca’s undergraduate officers to Seneca members obtained by The Crimson, Associate Dean of Student Life David R. Friedrich assured the Seneca at a May meeting that if the group removed gender requirements from its charter and bylaws, the club “could continue to operate as it always has.”

Although the Seneca will continue to only invite women to their first recruitment event of the semester, men will be allowed to attend the event without an invitation and participate in the subsequent parts of the selection process should they wish, said undergraduate co-president president Avni Nahar ’17 in an interview.

“Like Women in Business or Latinas Unidas, although men may apply, our membership can be made up wholly of women without incurring the sanctions of the administration's new policy,” Nahar and co-president Fran F. Swanson ’17 wrote in the email, according to a copy obtained by The Crimson .

“Our mission of ‘strengthening opportunities for women at Harvard" can and will remain unchanged,’ Nahar and Swanson wrote in their email to the Seneca.

A 501(c)3 group “committed to making the Harvard experience more rewarding for undergraduate women” and currently unrecognized by the College, the Seneca occupies a unique place in the Harvard social ecosystem. While its limited membership—the group is composed of around 50 women, according to its website—produces a social environment “like many all-female organizations,” the group also hosts and contributes to numerous public events geared towards women’s empowerment writ large.

And here's an article about the Harvard change in the Final Clubs; dealing with one of its oldest all-male clubs:

Harvard wants secretive male clubs to go co-ed. All-female groups are being punished in their wake.

And here's another one from the Harvard Magazine:

Final Club Fallout

I assume, it was garhkal's aim to complain about the all-male clubs forced to go co-ed, but it sadly itsn't as simple as how he would like it to be. There's more to it than just a few co-ed rules Harvard put down.

Over here, all student clubs are co-ed and some are small while others are big. Some have a lot of money to spend, others not enough (Economica f.e. is one of the richest student bodies in my city - go figure / my student club "Alfa" was barely scraping by).

So, I can only assume that these clubs are like the Rotary clubs, and Lion Clubs which are also split between male and female only. The oldest all-male club dates back to 1791 -- that's pretty impressive. Seneca, the club from the article, was first foiunded in 1999.

[Falcon Horus]

Sounds about right. Despite all of the whining about the evils of discrimination, it is still perfectly acceptable to discriminate, as long as the target of the discrimination is men.

LOL, you should read the article in my post above about the oldest all-male club at Harvard. Their president was forced to resign after he complained that allowing women into the club would increase the risk of sexual assault.

Say what now?

[garhkal]

Are you sure that isn't satire?

What kind of insanity I don't know...

I am sure it isn't satire, since i first hear of it on Thursday's Outnumbered..

It isn't.

Here be the article from the Harvard paper:

Seneca To Go Gender Neutral, But Membership Could Stay All-Women

Though the article has a different build-up.

Wow.. So it seems the gals only groups are going to be given a pass on being forced to go co-ed, but if they wanna go, that's on them to do so.. BUT guy only ones will be required..

[Annoyed]

I am sure it isn't satire, since i first hear of it on Thursday's Outnumbered..



Wow.. So it seems the gals only groups are going to be given a pass on being forced to go co-ed, but if they wanna go, that's on them to do so.. BUT guy only ones will be required..

Really, garhkal, you know better than to expect otherwise. Discrimination based upon sex is still perfectly acceptable, as long as it's the men being discriminated against.

If I ever win the lottery, one thing I would do with my newfound wealth and free time would be to find situations such as this, find a way to gain legal standing, and sue the shiznit out of these people. If they want equality, fine, they can have it, but it had damned well better be equality.

[Pharaoh Hamenthotep]

Really, garhkal, you know better than to expect otherwise. Discrimination based upon sex is still perfectly acceptable, as long as it's the men being discriminated against.

If I ever win the lottery, one thing I would do with my newfound wealth and free time would be to find situations such as this, find a way to gain legal standing, and sue the shiznit out of these people. If they want equality, fine, they can have it, but it had damned well better be equality.

But you've already shown on several occasions that you don't know what equality is...

Also, you've skipped ahead on your list of topics to complain about.. We've already done equality this month.

[Falcon Horus]

I think what folks are missing is that these all-male clubs can do exactly the same, and probably get away with it. Besides, did you see the post about the female clubs wanting to stay female-only for the reason of having a safer environment and be unique as opposed to being overrun by the male half.

The articles are about so much more than just the gender-neutral stuff, but that's all you guys can see -- discrimination against yourselves. Cause oh noes, Harvard wants the clubs to go co-ed... TWO MALE HARVARD MEN made it law, not even tha feminist!11!!!! Should you have missed that line.

[SoulReaver]

TWO MALE HARVARD MEN made it law, not even tha feminist!

also there were jews who worked for the Reich3

[aretood2]

I think what folks are missing is that these all-male clubs can do exactly the same, and probably get away with it. Besides, did you see the post about the female clubs wanting to stay female-only for the reason of having a safer environment and be unique as opposed to being overrun by the male half.

The articles are about so much more than just the gender-neutral stuff, but that's all you guys can see -- discrimination against yourselves. Cause oh noes, Harvard wants the clubs to go co-ed... TWO MALE HARVARD MEN made it law, not even tha feminist!11!!!! Should you have missed that line.

"Probably" being the operative word. As for safe environment and being overrun by the "male half" isn't that self defeating? I don't buy it. Women shouldn't be treated like a perpetual weak victim class that can only ever be the victim. That's not how equality works. It's funny how you use Garhkal's and Annoyed's logic on racism when it pertains to sexism though. Or rather, sad.

Are men allowed in these women club yes or no? Conversely can women be not allowed in the men club yes or no? If the answers to these two questions differ, then it is not equal, period. If the answers to the two questions are the same, then it is equal. There's no need for convoluted hoops to jump through to try to shoehorn the semblance of equality here.

As for the cause of differing rules, saying that women can have exclusive clubs but not men because of safety takes away the onus of men to well...be safe. It absolves them of their responsibility by taking it as a fact that something bad will happen no matter what. Instead of dealing the the source it only treats the symptom. And it is also offensive. Why bother not being a perverted predator if society will treat you as such regardless?

also there were jews who worked for the Reich3

Token male voters?

[Gatefan1976]

"Probably" being the operative word. As for safe environment and being overrun by the "male half" isn't that self defeating? I don't buy it. Women shouldn't be treated like a perpetual weak victim class that can only ever be the victim. That's not how equality works. It's funny how you use Garhkal's and Annoyed's logic on racism when it pertains to sexism though. Or rather, sad.

Are men allowed in these women club yes or no? Conversely can women be not allowed in the men club yes or no? If the answers to these two questions differ, then it is not equal, period. If the answers to the two questions are the same, then it is equal. There's no need for convoluted hoops to jump through to try to shoehorn the semblance of equality here.

As for the cause of differing rules, saying that women can have exclusive clubs but not men because of safety takes away the onus of men to well...be safe. It absolves them of their responsibility by taking it as a fact that something bad will happen no matter what. Instead of dealing the the source it only treats the symptom. And it is also offensive. Why bother not being a perverted predator if society will treat you as such regardless?

What I have bolded is the most dangerous part of sexism from a male perspective, "boys will be boys" sexism.

[Falcon Horus]

"Probably" being the operative word. As for safe environment and being overrun by the "male half" isn't that self defeating?

And it will "probably" happen that way anyway.

I don't get the all-male/female clubs to begin with anyways. Like I said, our student clubs are co-ed from the beginning of their existence. That is, if I even knew how old they are. Universities differ in age, but most of them began when women weren't allowed to study so... who knows.

Did you read the article about the Porcellain club? I found it rather hilarious that the president of the board was forced to quit after stating it would lead to more sexual assaults if they would let females in. Well, he knows his boys then, I'd say.

[COLOR="#000080"]Are men allowed in these women club yes or no? Conversely can women be not allowed in the men club yes or no?

Yes, men are allowed. Whether they'll be let in, is another matter.
Yes, women are allowed. Whether they'll be let in, is another matter.

If the answers to these two questions differ, then it is not equal, period. If the answers to the two questions are the same, then it is equal. There's no need for convoluted hoops to jump through to try to shoehorn the semblance of equality here.

Except that it's not about equality. It's about genderneutrality, making the exclusive clubs, inclusive instead.

As for the cause of differing rules, saying that women can have exclusive clubs but not men because of safety takes away the onus of men to well...be safe. It absolves them of their responsibility by taking it as a fact that something bad will happen no matter what. Instead of dealing the the source it only treats the symptom. And it is also offensive. Why bother not being a perverted predator if society will treat you as such regardless?

I refer to the article about the oldest Harvard male-exclusive club.

Exclusive All-Male Harvard Club Says Letting in Women Could Increase Sexual Misconduct

In a statement to the paper, current Porcellian graduate board president Charles M. Storey criticized the university’s work in preventing sexual assaults and their attitudes towards final clubs. Storey wrote that he “unequivocally” supports Harvard’s mission of reducing sexual assaults on campus, but protested that no specific allegation had been made against his group and that making the final clubs co-ed would not bring the change the school desires.

“Given our policies, we are mystified as to why the current administration feels that forcing our club to accept female members would reduce the incidence of sexual assault on campus,” said Storey. “Forcing single gender organizations to accept members of the opposite sex could potentially increase, not decrease the potential for sexual misconduct.”

Storey added that his club believes it “is being used as a scapegoat for the sexual assault problem at Harvard despite its policies to help avoid the potential for sexual assault,” and said the sexual climate report conflates “the issues of sexual assault, gender equity, and exclusivity.”

So in order to lower the misconduct, they want the clubs co-ed, but Storey thinks it will only increase -- male logic at work?

[Coco Pops]

What about this "male tears" thing a lot of so called "online feminists" rave about?

What's the deal with that?