Support NeoGAF

[Horp]

We're talking about actual rapes and sexual assault that were reported. I know people are used to letting that shit slide because they love a good show, but you have got to be fucking kidding me with this "not all men" bullshit.

Well I'm not sure what you are saying here. It's obviously -not all men-, it's a factually valid statement, that is also an important argument to make. But this is not some kind of legal segregation that has been suggested. It is not a denial of public space or even a concept that has to be exclusive to one of the genders. It's just a case of: women suffer at all other festivals, at this festival the women doesn't have to suffer, with the cost of some minor "suffering" for men.

Thank you for this conversation. I clearly see from your posts that you have detailed your position. I have learned a lot. Thank you.

Like, it's not like right is maximizing happiness and wrong is, like, suffering, misery, pain, etc.

Hehe what is wrong with you, man. You state, without any reasoning "suffering defines right or wrong", then expect the response to be based with a bunch of arguments and reasoning? Lol.
You could have brought up utilitarism and other ethical concepts, with examples, but you didnt. So of course my response wont. Then you go and be and asshole, facepalm.

 

[SephLuis]

It is defined by suffering. We don't punch people because it's wrong because we are causing harm. It's, like, what most people use as a base.

Wrong about what?

Right or wrong are not defined by pain, but are completely subjective. If I suddenly take a slap to the face during an argument, this doesn't mean I am now in the right.

What we consider right or good today, may become wrong or bad tomorrow. Not necessarily because people suffered for it, but because the point of view changed.

No guy has been harmed. Those who value people's saftey over going to a concert will not care for this change. It's as simple as that.

People who want to watch a concert, will go to a concert and won't do any shit while at it.
People who want trouble, will just change places.

What has that accomplished ?

 

[Subpar Spatula]

Right or wrong are not defined by pain, but are completely subjective. If I suddenly take a slap to the face during an argument, this doesn't mean I am now in the right.

What we consider right or good today, may become wrong or bad tomorrow. Not necessarily because people suffered for it, but because the point of view changed.



People who want to watch a concert, will go to a concert and won't do any shit while at it.
People who want trouble, will just change places.

What has that accomplished ?

They were wrong to slap you. That isn't relevant to the argument. You messed up your analogy.

Point of view has evolved over time to reduce harm: rights, new laws to protect, etc. There's a reason why people protest due to pains done by the government.

It accomplished a safe concert for women. Like, you're not giving alternatives.

Hehe what is wrong with you, man. You state, without any reasoning "suffering defines right or wrong", then expect the response to be based with a bunch of arguments and reasoning? Lol.
You could have brought up utilitarism and other ethical concepts, with examples, but you didnt. So of course my response wont. Then you go and be and asshole, facepalm.

So you're saying we as a society don't strive to outlaw things cause suffering or protect from it while also striving to be more inclusive, respectful, and helpful to make everyone's life better?

Do you treat people badly because it's neither right ir wrong?

 

[D i Z]

Well I'm not sure what you are saying here. It's obviously -not all men-, it's a factually valid statement, that is also an important argument to make. But this is not some kind of legal segregation that has been suggested. It is not a denial of public space or even a concept that has to be exclusive to one of the genders. It's just a case of: women suffer at all other festivals, at this festival the women doesn't have to suffer, with the cost of some minor "suffering" for men.

Don't be that guy. You know that most arguments against this are couched in "not all men" and it's obviously not the point, but the absolute go to defense. There is no suffering of men here just because they can't attend. That is utter nonsense. And anyone using that vocabulary needs to be reacquainted with what actual suffering is to divorce them of that bullshit immediately..

 

[Horp]

Don't be that guy. You know that most arguments against this are couched in "not all men" and it's obviously not the point, but the absolute go to defense. There is no suffering of men here just because they can't attend. That is utter nonsense. And anyone using that vocabulary needs to be reacquainted with what actual suffering is to divorce them of that bullshit immediately..

I know it isn't suffering in that sense, that was kind of my point. It is a good trade off, this festival.
And I'm not any kind of guy. You and I agree on the validity of the festival, but your arguments aren't good, and your way of arguing i worse. No need to point fingers at people that haven't done anything, and in turn alienating a whole bunch of men that reads this thread that could be made to agree bur will likely turn out as soon as they see some of the posts in here.

 

[SephLuis]

They were wrong to slap you. That isn't relevant to the argument. You messed up your analogy.

Point of view has evolved over time to reduce harm: rights, new laws to protect, etc. There's a reason why people protest due to pains done by the government.

The analogy doesn't make sense, because the point of right/wrong being defined by pain doesn't make sense either.

Laws aren't made to reduce harm, but to make people live with each other. Social contract and all of that. One can say that the law of "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth" is the fairest one, however, it's the one that would cause the most suffering. A law that doesn't do nothing against criminals makes less suffering in an isolated case, however, it encourages crime to go on.

Maximizing happiness, as you said in a post before, also means that we will have to pass some valleys for it. It's not a static thing either since happiness for some, often means conflict for another group.

It accomplished a safe concert for women. Like, you're not giving alternatives.

By that logic, if I expel all the men from a city, it will accomplish a safe city for women ?

I mean, you won't have to worry about 20 idiots making sexual assaults, but you didn't solved the underlying problem either. Making security stronger and better or actually apprehending the culprits would.

As I said before, in this case you protected the woman going to that concert. The 20 idiots will find another place and time to cause a ruckus.

 

[excelsiorlef]

collective punishment is against the geneva convention

Lol

As if you pulled out the Geneva convention

Well expect only two people to show up to the Iron Maiden show then...

Cause there are only 2 female metal fans.

 

[ponpo]

”We won't play at this festival again until we've had assurances from the police and organizers that they're doing something to combat what appears to be a disgustingly high rate of reported sexual violence," Mumford and Sons wrote on Facebook in 2016. That same year, as The Washington Post's Elahe Izadi reported, police handed out wristbands at the festival that bore the words, ”Don't Grope."

Is this real lol. Wonder how effective that was.

 

[D i Z]

I know it isn't suffering in that sense, that was kind of my point. It is a good trade off, this festival.
And I'm not any kind of guy. You and I agree on the validity of the festival, but your arguments aren't good, and your way of arguing i worse. No need to point fingers at people that haven't done anything, and in turn alienating a whole bunch of men that reads this thread that could be made to agree bur will likely turn out as soon as they see some of the posts in here.

I haven't pointed a finger at anyone or anything other than to say that incidents have been reported, undoubtedly there are more that were not. And I'm not alienating anyone by tell people to be cool with their bullshit and let the concerns already noted create something for people other than them. My argument is bulletproof. What are you arguing for besides the right to just argue? I say let them do it. How is that an actual real problem for anyone?

 

[Volimar]

Wouldn't the better solution be to have better security at the event?

 

[Subpar Spatula]

The analogy doesn't make sense, because the point of right/wrong being defined by pain doesn't make sense either.

Laws aren't made to reduce harm, but to make people live with each other. Social contract and all of that. One can say that the law of "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth" is the fairest one, however, it's the one that would cause the most suffering. A law that doesn't do nothing against criminals makes less suffering in an isolated case, however, it encourages crime to go on.

Maximizing happiness, as you said in a post before, also means that we will have to pass some valleys for it. It's not a static thing either since happiness for some, often means conflict for another group.



By that logic, if I expel all the men from a city, it will accomplish a safe city for women ?

I mean, you won't have to worry about 20 idiots making sexual assaults, but you didn't solved the underlying problem either. Making security stronger and better or actually apprehending the culprits would.

As I said before, in this case you protected the woman going to that concert. The 20 idiots will find another place and time to cause a ruckus.

Your analogy is stupid because you tethered a slap (wrong) with an argument and said "i'm right if I get slapped because a slap is wrong".

Do you treat others badly without remorse because it's right or wrong?

It would be safer for women in certain lights. Does the pros outweigh the cons of removing all men? Naw. You're being too simple with how ot works. A city is not analogous to a music festival. You 100% know this.

Security has failed. Police have failed. Men reporting these attacks and friends of those attackers have failed too. All I get from you is "it doesn't matter because they will still commit crimes".

 

[Despera]

Is this real lol. Wonder how effective that was.

 

[ponpo]

lol

 

[Sarcastic Poster]

Banning men this year will certainly cure the problem. Then next year there will be no sexual assaults because men as a collective will have learned their lesson. A truly genius plan.

 

[SephLuis]

Your analogy is stupid because you tethered a slap (wrong) with an argument and said "i'm right if I get slapped because a slap is wrong".

I didn't said "i'm right if I get slapped because a slap is wrong". I said getting slapped has nothing to do with right/wrong, just as pain has nothing to do with it.

Discussion is fine and all, but sometimes two parties cannot get into an agreement just by debating. This leads to disputes of force which by itself isn't right/wrong either.

Do you treat others badly without remorse because it's right or wrong?

Not sure what this has to do with anything.

It would be safer for women in certain lights. Does the pros outweigh the cons of removing all men? Naw. You're being too simple with how ot works. A city is not analogous to a music festival. You 100% know this.

Yes, I do know this. But making the "solution" on a large scale just serves to show how stupid it is.

Security has failed. Police have failed. Men reporting these attacks and friends of those attackers have failed too. All I get from you is "it doesn't matter because they will still commit crimes".

Then stay at home ?

By that logic, the concert will have a failed security.
A failed police will be patrolling the streets.
Inside a failed state that didn't educated men and woman to report attacks.

An event just for woman is fine, but one that insists on teaching 20 people "how to behave", then yes, it doesn't matter because they will still commit crimes.

 

[Don Draper's Hat]

Banning men this year will certainly cure the problem. Then next year there will be no sexual assaults because men as a collective will have learned their lesson. A truly genius plan.

I think it's more about women being able to enjoy themselves at a festival without the fear of being inappropriately touched by complete strangers.

 

[Subpar Spatula]

Then stay at home ?

It's quite clear you don't care about their safety.

 

[Horp]

They were wrong to slap you. That isn't relevant to the argument. You messed up your analogy.

Point of view has evolved over time to reduce harm: rights, new laws to protect, etc. There's a reason why people protest due to pains done by the government.

It accomplished a safe concert for women. Like, you're not giving alternatives.



So you're saying we as a society don't strive to outlaw things cause suffering or protect from it while also striving to be more inclusive, respectful, and helpful to make everyone's life better?

Do you treat people badly because it's neither right ir wrong?

Im saying the concept of right and wrong are much more complex than pain and suffering. Not to sound "like that" but I have taken many courses at uni on ethics and "right and wrong" is a complex matter with many hundreds of even thousands of years of theories, often with many great points for each theory. Uni courses doesn't make mean I know right from wrong, far from it, but they made me understand that it is a much more compelx matter than "suffering define right or wrong".

 

[AntiFacebook]

They don't have to ban all the men, just the ones who are immigrants from third world countries.
I hope it doesn't sound racist, but that's the hard thruth.
And it's not like banning only immigrant men is any worse than banning all men.

 

[T.v]

It's like they are saying... maybe its time for men to take fucking responsibility for themselves and other men.



Nahhhhhhh, clearly just discrimination against men!

Why should I take responsibility for other men?

I'm all for a women's only festival if it makes them feel safe, I just don't know if banning men from an existing festival is a good idea. Although, it was cancelled anyway so you could say it is something entirely new now.

 

[Subpar Spatula]

Im saying the concept of right and wrong are much more complex than pain and suffering. Not to sound "like that" but I have taken many courses at uni on ethics and "right and wrong" is a complex matter with many hundreds of even thousands of years of theories, often with many great points for each theory. Uni courses doesn't make mean I know right from wrong, far from it, but they made me understand that it is a much more compelx matter than "suffering define right or wrong".

You gotta understand that just because you say this doesn't mean anyone will listen. You're not exolaining your position.

 

[excelsiorlef]

They don't have to ban all the men, just the immigrant ones.
I hope it doesn't sound racist, but that's the hard thruth.
And it's not like banning only immigrant men is any worse than banning all men.

 

[Despera]

They don't have to ban all the men, just the ones who are immigrants from third world countries.
I hope it doesn't sound racist, but that's the hard truth.
And it's not like banning only immigrant men is any worse than banning all men.

Explain your position.

 

[Switch Back 9]

This thread is fucking doomed from the start.

Jesus fuck at some of the responses in here. Some of you are so far up your own self-righteous asses it's comical.

 

[AntiFacebook]

Explain your position.

It is known that most violent crimes(and specifically sex crimes) in european countries are performed by immigrants from african and arab countries.

 

[Subpar Spatula]

Why should I take responsibility for other men?

I'm all for a women's only festival if it makes them feel safe, I just don't know if banning men from an existing festival is a good idea. Although, it was cancelled anyway so you could say it is something entirely new now.

You're not being held responsible. They want to make a festival where women metaphorically don't have to cover their drinks when talking to people.

 

[fraktur]

Explain your position.

His position is very clear: white men don't rape. It's the browns who do. Gotta protect "his" white women from them

 

[excelsiorlef]

It is known that most violent crimes(and specifically sex crimes) in european countries are performed by immigrants from african and arab countries.

Your tag is perfect for this conversation

 

[Corleth the Fey]

They don't have to ban all the men, just the ones who are immigrants from third world countries.
I hope it doesn't sound racist, but that's the hard thruth.
And it's not like banning only immigrant men is any worse than banning all men.

Nah, sounds pretty racist.

 

[nekkid]

Excluding a whole group of people because of the atrocious behaviour of a few.

 

[someday]

They don't have to ban all the men, just the ones who are immigrants from third world countries.
I hope it doesn't sound racist, but that's the hard thruth.
And it's not like banning only immigrant men is any worse than banning all men.

I was sure there would be a /s at the end but there really isn't...I think we found the /t_d member.

 

[Horp]

You gotta understand that just because you say this doesn't mean anyone will listen. You're not exolaining your position.

??
I say its more complex than that. You're saying it's not. And "anyone will listen", what the heck man, several posters have already disagreed with you while only you so far seems to disagree with me in my opinion that it is more complex than what you're trying to make of it.

A piece of advice; dont argue by trying to fling shit, dont ask for reasoning while you have none yourself and dont just randomly assume everyone agrees with you.

 

[Despera]

It is known that most violent crimes(and specifically sex crimes) in european countries are performed by immigrants from african and arab countries.

You have a source detailing the ethnicities of previous offenders from these music events?

 

[Moff]

It is known that most violent crimes(and specifically sex crimes) in european countries are performed by immigrants from african and arab countries.

do you have any facts to back that statement up?
specifically about this festival, how many of the rapes and sexual assaults in the OP were done by immigrants?

 

[Switch Back 9]

Nah, sounds pretty racist.

fuck it, it's GAF, nevermind. Buncha hypocrites happy to cast stones at a whole group but lose their minds when someone else does the same.

 

[travisbickle]

Excluding a whole group of people because of the atrocious behaviour of a few

The event has been cancelled.

 

[nekkid]

The event has been cancelled.

But even the suggestion is still questionable.

 

[Evil Monkey DTT]

They said " 'women only' would exclude NON BINARY and trans" which imply "women only" would exclude binary trans people

which is weird because

1) binary trans women are women

2) binary trans men are men and therefore excluded from man-free.

For someone taking care of language to be inclusive ... they really sucked there xD

Or could be a swedish-english translation fuck up =P

And that right there is unforgivable, I've been pretty conflicted about the whole thing. On one hand, a rape free environment sounds amazing for people and I'm happy for them..... but this is still a form of discrimination and guilting an entire gender is sexist. But if this is excluding trans I'm out entirely.

The event has been cancelled.

I'm more thinking about the idea behind the event rather than the event itself, not that my idea matters all that much if I'm not to be included. But still, stuff like this really makes us have to figure out our own morals so I'm glad I get the chance to stretch that thought process.

 

[Tinfoilhatsron]

“Since it seems to be OK to discriminate against women all the time, maybe it’s OK to shut out men for three days? I would not exactly call it an abuse not to come to the festival,” she told Sweden’s Aftonbladet.

... The hell?

 

[Subpar Spatula]

??
I say its more complex than that. You're saying it's not. And "anyone will listen", what the heck man, several posters have already disagreed with you while only you so far seems to disagree with me in my opinion that it is more complex than what you're trying to make of it.

A piece of advice; dont argue by trying to fling shit, dont ask for reasoning while you have none yourself and dont just randomly assume everyone agrees with you.

It seems you and one other.

You're not putting up an argument but trying to frame how mine is wrong because you know better. Like, I gave my position and have not because saying you're wrong isn't equal.

 

[fanboi]

fuck it, it's GAF, nevermind. Buncha hypocrites happy to cast stones at a whole group but lose their minds when someone else does the same.

You act like GAF is like a hive mind... but please show me a post for the user that you quoted that is contradicting what he posted here.

 

[Horp]

It seems you and one other.

You're not putting up an argument but trying to frame how mine is wrong because you know better. Like, I gave my position and have not because saying you're wrong isn't equal.

And I gave you mine. I explained how the matter of right and wrong has been discussed for ages, by women and men much smarter than you and I. There are books and even societies that has been formed around different ideas on right and wrong. Suffering minimation is one theory, just one, among others.
So whats your answer to this (which i stated before, already). That me, and thousands of philosophers before me have argued around right and wrong and have deemed to much more conplex than your, basic concept.

 

[Trident]

This seems like a standard authoritarian vs libertarian scenario. The authoritarian upside is that the government can ostensibly provide safety by targeting a broad group that is considered to be statitistically over represented with respect to a particular crime or set of particular crimes (in this case by allowing venues to limit entrance based on gender).

The authoritarian downside is that this sort of behavior is easily abused when placed into the hands of the government - see, e.g., racial profiling and stop and frisk.

I generally fall onto the libertarian side with respect to this argument.

Edit: or is the libertarian side letting venues decide this on their own and the authoritarian side forcing them to be open to all? Man I'm all mixed up!

 

[Subpar Spatula]

And I gave you mine. I explained how the matter of right and wrong has been discussed for ages, by women and men much smarter than you and I. There are books and even societies that has been formed around different ideas on right and wrong. Suffering minimation is one theory, just one, among others.
So whats your answer to this (which i stated before, already). That me, and thousands of philosophers before me have argued around right and wrong and have deemed to much more conplex than your, basic concept.

See. There's more framework for the "smarter people than you", it's a decredit tactic. What are these theories? How are theh applied in real life? Are you here for a discussion or to say you're wrong and stop? If the former, then we can carry on, the latter would require a megaphone and a lawn chair on someone's lawn.

 

[Alx]

They should just build a separation in the concert hall, with men on one side and "not men" on the other, so they don't mix. Problem solved.

Spoiler

/s or not, you decide.

 

[DrFurbs]

What do they mean by "certain men"?

 

[SiegfriedFM]

They don't have to ban all the men, just the ones who are immigrants from third world countries.
I hope it doesn't sound racist, but that's the hard thruth.
And it's not like banning only immigrant men is any worse than banning all men.

Oh for fucks sake.

https://www.metro.se/artikel/försökte-stoppa-sexövergrepp-på-bråvalla-blev-brutalt-misshandlad

At this very festival, an immigrant was brutally assaulted by five white men for STOPPING an attempted rape.

 

[Erin S Kittens]

They said " 'women only' would exclude NON BINARY and trans" which imply "women only" would exclude binary trans people

which is weird because

1) binary trans women are women

2) binary trans men are men and therefore excluded from man-free.

For someone taking care of language to be inclusive ... they really sucked there xD

Or could be a swedish-english translation fuck up =P

Nonbinary trans people would be excluded with 'women only' language, and said language has a history of also excluding binary trans women, like the Michigan Women's Music Festival you mentioned later.

 

[flintstryker]

This is pretty stupid

 

[milanbaros]

They had a similar issue in a club I used to go to where there were a spate of knife crime and because the offenders were all black they banned black people from attending. Thought that was bullshit and think this is bullshit too.