53
54

Dalhousie’s Dental Hysteria - Margaret Wente (theglobeandmail.com)

M4Strings が 投稿

全ての 144 コメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
ベスト
トップ
新着
注目
論争中
古い順

[–]justaguy201 32 ポイント33 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Am I right that this is probably the popular opinion, but not a lot of people want to voice it for fear of sounding like a misogynist sympathizer?

I, as a young male don't approach the topic with a 10 foot stick in real life.

[–]sleepwatch 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Same here but I agree with the general tone of the article.

[–][削除されました]  (1子コメント)

[deleted]

    [–]willpunchyou 51 ポイント52 ポイント  (43子コメント)

    I feel like this is getting so much attention for nothing... I get it, yes, but they are suspended. We don't need to know who they are and ruin their lives. Everyone makes mistakes.

    I'll get downvoted for this, but at least I'm not phony trying to protest about this.

    [–]MuFoxxa 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (12子コメント)

    You have my upvote. Reason& logic must prevail, and not some out of whack inflated victimhood narrative

    [–]varslashwww 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I've just started calling it for what it is. A witch hunt.

    [–]alabasterhotdog 30 ポイント31 ポイント  (8子コメント)

    Regardless of your position on the Dal dentistry blowup, is there ever a substantive reason to present a Margaret Wente article? Totally not a dig at OP, just a comment on Wente. She's the daily filler on the Globe's editorial page for one colour of ideological goggles, the poorly thought out counterpoint to shitty Jim Stanford and the like for the set with the other coloured goggles. Literally every piece she writes has that same subtext, of her trying to conjure up what an ill-informed, middle-aged suburban person would think about a complex societal issue. Rant complete.

    [–]canashian 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (1子コメント)

    She deliberately takes contrary positions to drive up readership. It works I guess.

    [–]tadallagashDartmouth 14 ポイント15 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    she's like a diet anne coulter

    [–]M4Strings[S] 15 ポイント16 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I've never read a Margaret Wente article before, nor do I think I ever will again, simply because I don't read the paper. I won't condemn or dismiss what the woman says based on what she has said in the past though. On this occasion, she seems to be one of the few people reporting that aren't letting emotion and a mob mentality seep into her writing about this issue.

    [–]dayoldhater 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Thank-you.

    [–][削除されました]  (2子コメント)

    [deleted]

      [–]JonPublic 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

      The person making it is a commercially employed attention troll.

      [–]pinkpamplemousse -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Agree. She's one of my least favourite columnists. Her opinions consistently strike me as simplistic and poorly reasoned.

      [–]mismos00 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (2子コメント)

      This is a great, but slightly long, article about the wave of seemingly controversial stories in the media lately that explains the race stories nationally and the misogyny stories locally with the heavily laden, morally righteous overtones. Great read if you're on either side of these issues!

      http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/12/17/the-toxoplasma-of-rage/

      [–]JackStargazer 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

      This is an excellent article with a sensible explanation for the issues involved in these cases, and I think more people should read it.

      My favorite line, I think:

      It’s in activists’ interests to destroy their own causes by focusing on the most controversial cases and principles, the ones that muddy the waters and make people oppose them out of spite. And it’s in the media’s interest to help them and egg them on

      [–]mismos00 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      It made things so clear for me, as the past couple of months there have been so many baffling stories in the media.

      [–]TheVastHalifax 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (2子コメント)

      Using the term "hysteria" is probably not going to help things.

      [–]shipwrekktHalifax 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Yeah, holy shit. Bad choice of word. I almost didn't catch that.

      [–]clock_bumfinger 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      They knew exactly what they were fucking doing when they chose that word.

      [–]damac_phone 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (10子コメント)

      Finally a voice of reason.

      [–]FUCKBOY_JIHADCanada 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (9子コメント)

      you can always count on Ol' Margaret "Don't be a victim" Wente to provide the voice of reason.

      [–][削除されました]  (4子コメント)

      [deleted]

        [–]FUCKBOY_JIHADCanada 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (3子コメント)

        It is absurd. It's absurd because the vast majority of rape victims aren't raped by strange men when they're drunk, but by people they know and trust (boyfriend/husband, friend, relative, professional superior, etc).

        EDIT: I cited a BestOf'd Reddit comment here that I found particularly salient which is obviously bad practice in an argument, so I've replaced it with RAINN's statistics, which say likewise and do not echo what was in the article by Wente.

        So yes, in terms of preventing rape overall, telling women to not get drunk around men is not really at all helpful. It's not "practical advice" because it fails at addressing the vast majority of rape occurrences.

        [–]TheNakedAbsurdistNova Scotia 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

        I think the better practical advise should be "don't get black-out drunk". Doesn't really cover the rape issue though.

        [–]CharlesMcJessy -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

        Edit: you tricked me for a second.

        [–]MorgaineDaxNova Scotia -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (3子コメント)

        She's not saying anything in that article that RAINN hasn't said, and I don't see anyone calling that group victim blamers.

        [–]FUCKBOY_JIHADCanada 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (2子コメント)

        Nowhere in any RAINN publication can I find them advising against alcohol consumption to avoid being raped, which is the first line of the article in black and white.

        [–]MorgaineDaxNova Scotia 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

        https://rainn.org/images/03-2014/WH-Task-Force-RAINN-Recommendations.pdf

        In the last few years, there has been an unfortunate trend towards blaming “rape culture” for the extensive problem of sexual violence on campuses. While it is helpful to point out the systemic barriers to addressing the problem, it is important to not lose sight of a simple fact: Rape is caused not by cultural factors but by the conscious decisions, of a small percentage of the community, to commit a violent crime.

        As anyone who has worked on rape prevention knows, risk-reduction messaging is a sensitive topic. Even the most well-intentioned risk-reduction message can be misunderstood to suggest that, by not following the tips, a victim is somehow to blame for his or her own attack. Recent survivors of sexual violence are particularly sensitive to these messages, and we owe it to them to use them cautiously. Still, they are an important part of a rape prevention program. To be very clear, RAINN in no way condones or advocates victim blaming. Sexual assault is a violent crime and those who commit these crimes are solely responsible for their actions. That said, we believe that it is important to educate members of a campus community on actions they can take to increase their personal safety. In fact, we believe it’s irresponsible not to do so.

        They're both saying the same thing. You can't blame "rape culture" for rapists, and you can teach men and women not to get into shitty situations without it being pure victim blaming. It's just RAINN is in the business of informing people, and Margaret is in the business of selling newspapers.

        [–]Weyland_Ind 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

        A mistake! That's why we they were found out they replied with “Red Alert!!! … We have to get rid of the evidence.”

        [–]ProfessorTroy 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (1子コメント)

        Can't help feel if it was a opinion piece written by a male, it would have gotten ripped to shreds by the SJW.

        Always glad to see a piece with a balanced opinion. The middle ground seldom gets any attention.

        [–]canashian 16 ポイント17 ポイント  (0子コメント)

        Agree with her if you want, but no sane person would ever accuse Margaret Wente of being balanced on any issue. Just deliberately inflammatory.

        [–]mismos00 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

        I find it unbelievable these stupid guys are being dragged through the media's mud. This is the first piece I've read on this issue that isn't simply calling these guys every name in the book. All most people want to do is put their 'moral superiority' on display and express how 'disgusted' they are. You can't even respond to the social media posts about this topic and have a rational discussion without being labeled a misogynistic.

        [–]CatchHerInTheEye 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (3子コメント)

        Why do people keep equating kicking these guys out of school to branding them as criminals? Sorry, but I seem to have missed the fact that you can only kick someone out of university if they have done something criminal.

        "They didn't commit any crimes!!!!!!!!"

        So? No one is saying that they did, that's not the point what so ever. The point is that they made a group that HELD THE NAME OF THEIR FACULTY and then made violent comments about their female classmates. If they were employed and an employer found out about this group that was tied to their business and they talked about other employees they would be fired in a S-E-C-O-N-D, so why is it different here?

        People should know by now that your social media presence can have serious repercussions on your professional life. That is what is happening here. "OH it was a private group" - yeah, until it wasn't. Everyone has seen it now, they have SERIOUSLY damaged the reputation of their school, they have said SERIOUS things about sexual violence against women - the same women that are IN THEIR CLASS. Again, they would be 100% fired if they were employed anywhere, so why are we taking kicking them out of their program as so different? Because then they won't have a license? Well ... too god damn bad.

        Dumb as fuck.

        [–]mismos00 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

        This story is running as if this guys killed someone and nobody cares. When in fact it's not even clear they even violated any school rules, and people that don't know these students or hardly anything about the situation are calling for HARSH punishments before any due process, AND ON TOP of all that, the offensive things they said were in a PRIVATE setting meant for friends and someone STOLE their personal message/information and shared it (that seems to me to be the only crime here). This whole thing seems to break certain rights and freedoms of these students for the sake of deferring to public mob mentality with a politic agenda.

        [–]Vanq86 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

        I in no way shape or form defend what these clowns said and did. It was obviously a massive case of poor judgement and I can completely understand people getting offended by the things they said and did. They should know by now that nothing on Facebook ever goes away. But I also don't think it's fair to say that people should consider everything on Facebook to be public. The word private is used a lot on there - private messages, private groups, etc., so I don't fault anyone for thinking a closed discussions will remain closed.

        With that said, in this case I think expelling them is almost worse than branding them criminals. At least criminals are given due process and their day in court, and if found guilty can do their time to repay society and gain some respect back and show they've learned from their mistakes. I'm sure the university could find any loophole it wants in its code of conduct to expel these guys without giving them so much as an explanation. Heck, if they were practicing dentists and this came to light it probably wouldn't even be this bad; their employer would fire them, and they'd be able to learn from their mistakes and move on and try to practice elsewhere - it wouldn't blow up in the national news like this.

        But because it's going on at a university there's a spotlight on it. There's now a chance these guys will be expelled before they even get a chance to graduate, all for things they said in private in some cases well over a year ago. They now have massive debts they'll have no hope of paying off if they can't make it to the field, and no employer wanting to touch them with a 10 foot pole for fear of the public scrutiny they'll bring. It's no wonder they're on suicide watch. Imagine your life being destroyed for an off-color joke you made a year ago to a few friends in private. Or like for some of the guys in the group, because you were simply sitting around the table when your friend told the joke.

        That isn't saying what they did was right. I think if anything it brings some important issues to the forefront to be discussed, but the way it's being handled as a witch-hunt is just preventing any real discourse from occurring, IMO. If this wasn't happening at a university do you think it would get this kind of attention? If it was a face to face conversation that was overheard between laughing friends do you think it would get this kind of attention? Of course not, because that kind of thing happens every day. But because it happened on Facebook and the Dalhousie name was attached it's now an easy media circus, it brings up recent memories and the media can enrage the masses with sensational rhetoric for easy ad revenue. I saw one article that mentioned a post in the group made on the anniversary of the Montreal Massacre, as though it were related at all.

        The university is in a tough spot here. This needs to be addressed publicly because of the attention it's getting and because other recent cases of a similar nature have stirred up public sentiment. They can't appear to be doing nothing by trying to handle it all behind closed doors - there are simply too many people at the door with pitchforks (almost literally) that won't be happy with their decision making. They almost have to give up the students to save the face of the institution, which I think speaks to a greater overall issue. I don't think offering these 'gentlemen' up for slaughter will satiate the masses nor actually get to the root of the societal problems at play here.

        To top it off imagine the position the girls are now in. It's got to feel helpless. I can't speak for them obviously, but imagine finding out someone at your work insulted you behind your back, and you could only stand in silence while the whole world came down on them for it with backlash so strong they end up on suicide watch. Especially if it's someone you worked with daily for years and never had a prior problem with as presumably some of these girls did. That's got to be a mind-fuck. It would be 10 fold worse if something actually happened to that person I think.

        On a side note, I hope I'm not the only one wondering when we can take back the power from words. Not so much with the posts these clowns made, but in general. I see it in the discussions here on reddit, and in countless cases of 'political-incorrectness' the media jumps on - heck look at the words that can't be said on television. People point their fingers at words and start screaming and ignore what was meant by them. I think we've got to start looking at intentions as a whole and start keeping things in context if we want to ever really move forward. Having these 'magic words' that people can't say takes power from us and puts it in the word itself. Too often now I see people dancing around issues trying to be politically correct in an effort to avoid offending people, when I think it's silly that words offend people at all - it's the intentions behind the words that should matter and not the words themselves.

        [–]CLB2015 -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

        YES!!!

        The G & M has a piece today that is probably the best analysis yet.

        http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/relationships/why-the-penalty-should-be-harsh-in-the-dalhousie-dentistry-case-including-naming-names/article22340476/

        Dumb as fuck fer sure

        [–]dostunis 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

        People need things to be outraged about. It's human nature. Booze, drugs, religion, outrage; Simply psychological distractions to help bury the deep, barely surfaced constant dread of knowing that one day you will die and ultimately nothing you do, say, fail or accomplish amounts to anything of substance. The world does not care about you. The universe certainly does not care about you. Your existence and opinions and outrage are a meaningless blip in the billions upon billions of years that you will never be a part of.

        So alleviate your existential blues with manufactured outrage. Bury the uncomfortable reality that these dumb kids could very easily have been you or anyone you know. Cry for their heads and keep praying your own shitty behaviours are never in the spotlight. And if the mob turns on you? Well, it won't be forever. Life is terminal, after all.

        [–]President_Cow -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (6子コメント)

        Right wing clickbait. They definitely used "hysteria" knowing it adds an extra layer of troll.

        [–]thebelowisnotfactual 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (5子コメント)

        "Hysteria, in its colloquial use, describes unmanageable emotional excesses." I think that's exactly what's going on here. i couldn't think of a better word.

        [–]aradil 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (4子コメント)

        It's blatant trolling when you use charged language (albeit language which has an apt dictionary definition) with a history rooted in "unmanageable emotional excess" of anyone possessing ovaries, a problem which traditionally was treated with vibrators.

        Using charged language like this is not at all accidental.

        [–]RockyThe 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (1子コメント)

        So language like "hate fuck=rape" isn't somehow emotionally charged, designed to make it impossible to defend people without defending "rapists"?

        [–]aradil 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

        My argument was that we shouldn't use charged language. "Hate fuck" is clearly charged language. Charged language a large reason for why this entire mess is happening right now.

        I think you got the exact opposite of what I intended out of my comment.

        But I understand your point -- equating "hate fuck" to rape is a similar problem. I'm not trying to defend the irrational people on that side of the discussion, there's plenty of idiocy going around here on all sides of the argument.

        [–]thebelowisnotfactual -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

        Man, you people are so sensitive about every little fucking detail. You go out of your way to be offended. I can only imagine how tiresome it must be.

        [–]aradil 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

        Not tiresome at all.

        Many people on the other side of the fence response exactly the same way when being told they are part of "rape culture". The textbook definition of rape culture fits our culture perfectly, and we are all part of that culture. That being said, this is clearly a loaded phrase, and in no way does it specifically call all men rapists.

        Same as the term "patriarchy". The textbook definition still largely fits our society, but many people take serious issue with it, because for whatever reason people take it to mean that men run everything, so all men have it better than all women.

        Both of these terms are extremely loaded, and personally I don't like using them. They only cause people to get upset. Same as using gender loaded terms like "hysteria", or race loaded terms like "urban", or further extreme examples like "misogynist", "misandrist", "feminazi", or "men's rights activist" (which is sometimes used in a derogatory way).

        I'm in no way offended by any of this stuff. In fact, I'm not at all surprised to see clickbait titles using charged language. Precisely because it's designed to get exact conversation going.