Australian Politics Forum - R.I.P. Allison Baden-Clay

Phemanderac

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3507
Gender: male

Re: R.I.P. Allison Baden-Clay
Reply #135 - Jul 19^th, 2014 at 11:09am

GA wrote on Jul 19^th, 2014 at 10:55am:

Aussie wrote on Jul 18^th, 2014 at 4:18pm:

GA wrote on Jul 18^th, 2014 at 2:36pm:

red baron wrote on Jul 18^th, 2014 at 12:33pm:

Of course Australians are going to be more interested in Australian homicides rather than those occurring overseas. Occasionally a sensational case overseas captures our attention.

If we were to talk about all the homicides overseas, as well as home grown, this site would run out of space.

We are talking about the vilification of men (and males generally), not crime itself. And all of this chivalrous stuff we are seeing here from crap factories like Cods, is really just that a load of crap. If AB-C had murdered her husband, instead of him murdering her, it would have been less of a story (and she would probably get less than ten years jail when she was convicted). Now, I'm not complaining about the disparities involved, only pointing to an anti-male trend, which although being part of a natural tendency, is still a dangerous direction to be taking.

I think your basic premise is right. If a man kills a woman, the tears are jerked. It does not happen when a woman kills a man.

It's a natural response. But the problem is if emotions start dictating to us the direction society is taking, then we do have a problem. I mean consider the logic: We need to show more concern for women and children because they are the primary components needed for our propagation, which is the reason why of course it's women and children into the life-boats first (nothing to do with chivalry aspect by itself). But now that the situation is that the world is suffering from an oversupply of people, children (in the clinical sense) have become a liability. But of course, we are not going to go against our natural instincts and not want to protect them, but do have to consider looking at the situation from the other end, that is if the newly emerging now present a potential problem, then those that are dying, the more knowledgeable elderly, also creates a problem. We have a double whammy situation.

The real point to all of what I'm saying above is that we have to put in place a political party that represents the thinking (minority) of the public, if we are going to avoid directions being set by a non-thinking majority.

You make some good points GA, however, I would respectfully suggest that your premise above is slightly flawed...

We protect Women and Children ostensibly because we (overall) see them as weaker and less able to protect themselves. Now I am not commenting on whether or not that is the right way to see women and children, however, as far as propagation of our species go, well technology aside, Men and Women would seem to be of equal import regarding propagation of our species, whereas children are the result of said propagation.

Back to top

On the 26th of January you are all invited to celebrate little white penal day...

"They're not rules as such, more like guidelines" Pirates of the Caribbean..

IP Logged

GA

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1130
Gender: male

Re: R.I.P. Allison Baden-Clay
Reply #136 - Jul 19^th, 2014 at 11:28am

cods wrote on Jul 18^th, 2014 at 1:08pm:

red baron wrote on Jul 18^th, 2014 at 12:33pm:

Of course Australians are going to be more interested in Australian homicides rather than those occurring overseas. Occasionally a sensational case overseas captures our attention.

If we were to talk about all the homicides overseas, as well as home grown, this site would run out of space.

silly sausage can make his own thread.. who cares...this thread was about saying goodbye to Allison whos life was cut short..

A tear-jerking tribute to someone that none of us know personally. And what about all of the other mothers (ignoring fathers of course) that have died in that time, where do we recognize them here, stupid.

Quote:

I read a lot of books on murderers mostly American and you are right.. there wouldnt be enough room on any forum to mention them all...horrific numbers..and the latest where the male shot his own children in the back of their heads...is something I cannot come to grips with there is nothing that can excuse that..there is no punishment that will change that or make anything better...

the sickness out there is growing worse..

and the gun brigade sit back and polish their nails...

And when have I suggested that 'murder' should be a topic in itself in a political forum. The Jodi Arias trial (which at least has a political aspect in that it involves a death penalty) was used as an example only of something that gets worldwide coverage but is ignored by the over-emotionalism in place here.

And if guns are a problem, then men are an even greater problem. As, for example, there are more guns than there are males in the USA.

(Making any such suggestion look as stupid as clearly it is).

For example, there would have been maybe hundreds of thousands AR-15 rifles (the weapon Martin Bryan used) manufactured in the USA, but despite that number, they would have been used in only (most probably less) than hundreds of murders, in other words, numerically speaking, there is no correlation, stupid.

Back to top

IP Logged

GA

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1130
Gender: male

Re: R.I.P. Allison Baden-Clay
Reply #137 - Jul 19^th, 2014 at 11:43am

Phemanderac wrote on Jul 19^th, 2014 at 11:09am:

GA wrote on Jul 19^th, 2014 at 10:55am:

Aussie wrote on Jul 18^th, 2014 at 4:18pm:

GA wrote on Jul 18^th, 2014 at 2:36pm:

red baron wrote on Jul 18^th, 2014 at 12:33pm:

Of course Australians are going to be more interested in Australian homicides rather than those occurring overseas. Occasionally a sensational case overseas captures our attention.

If we were to talk about all the homicides overseas, as well as home grown, this site would run out of space.

We are talking about the vilification of men (and males generally), not crime itself. And all of this chivalrous stuff we are seeing here from crap factories like Cods, is really just that a load of crap. If AB-C had murdered her husband, instead of him murdering her, it would have been less of a story (and she would probably get less than ten years jail when she was convicted). Now, I'm not complaining about the disparities involved, only pointing to an anti-male trend, which although being part of a natural tendency, is still a dangerous direction to be taking.

I think your basic premise is right. If a man kills a woman, the tears are jerked. It does not happen when a woman kills a man.

It's a natural response. But the problem is if emotions start dictating to us the direction society is taking, then we do have a problem. I mean consider the logic: We need to show more concern for women and children because they are the primary components needed for our propagation, which is the reason why of course it's women and children into the life-boats first (nothing to do with chivalry aspect by itself). But now that the situation is that the world is suffering from an oversupply of people, children (in the clinical sense) have become a liability. But of course, we are not going to go against our natural instincts and not want to protect them, but do have to consider looking at the situation from the other end, that is if the newly emerging now present a potential problem, then those that are dying, the more knowledgeable elderly, also creates a problem. We have a double whammy situation.

The real point to all of what I'm saying above is that we have to put in place a political party that represents the thinking (minority) of the public, if we are going to avoid directions being set by a non-thinking majority.

You make some good points GA, however, I would respectfully suggest that your premise above is slightly flawed...

We protect Women and Children ostensibly because we (overall) see them as weaker and less able to protect themselves. Now I am not commenting on whether or not that is the right way to see women and children, however, as far as propagation of our species go, well technology aside, Men and Women would seem to be of equal import regarding propagation of our species, whereas children are the result of said propagation.

A female lion is hardly weak (as it is them that do most of the hunting), but it's still the job of the male lions to protect the pride. A lioness will protect it's offspring because they are essential to the ongoing survival of the pride. And men could be completely dispensed with at this point in time, whereas the same can't be said for females.

Correction: I didn't ignore 'technology', but that aside, a women can produce a little over one child a year, whereas a man could produce 365 with little problem.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Jul 19^th, 2014 at 11:49am by GA »

IP Logged