Feminists and the Nordic Council want to BAN "anti-feminism".....yes....BAN!

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT
 

Feminists in Scandinavia (Iceland where I live, Norway, Sweden etc) have always been more along the lines of "evil men hurr durr" rather then "lets actually help women!".

And now I got news in my local media that made me shake my head in disgust (technially it appears that its almost a week old on the english site I found that reported it, but at least in MY country I only heard the news now).

Feminists and the Nordic Council want the government to BAN websites that they consider to be "anti-feminist" or hostile towards feminism.

That is correct. If you dislike feminists, then the government should be able to go after your ass!

http://www.the-spearhead.com/2013/03/29/antifeminism-might-become-illegal-in-the-nordic-countries/

They also want to do a number of other things, like paying attention to other peoples "anti-feminist tendencies".

Note that I read the news in an Icelandic source first. This is merely the first english source I was able to find.

So, can we all agree now that feminism as an idea has now been completely ruinned beyond all repair?

Thoughs?

EDIT: I think this is the actual program/idea. Though I think it is in Norwegian or Swedish. I am not entirely sure: http://forrettindafeminismi.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/antifeminisme.pdf

EDIT: It appears that there is actually a english summary on page 35.

Neo-Feminism is a destructive ideology solely aimed at vilifying men. That is quite obvious. All Neo-Feminists do is lying, blowing problems out of proportion to create issues and vilify anyone who thinks they're going overboard. They are doing nothing positive for women, all they do is abuse the name of a movement which has achieved a lot in the past in order to convince sensible people their conspiracies are factual.

It's a bit like how environmentalism has been hijacked by ex-commies who use "the environment" as an excuse to push their communist agenda which does nothing to help the environment.

And obviously now those neo-feminists want to "censor" (well actually it's worse than that it's manipulation) those who dare to question their unfounded absurd misandrist conspiracies;

"The press must take care of their responsibilities against antifeminism (The media must ensure that it has the competence to meet extreme actors without legitimising them or their opinions. Editors of online comments' fields have a special responsibility to ensure that their users are not made targets of threats and harassment, and that xenophobic and antifeminist sentiments are not fuelled or legitimised.)"

Hardcore_gamer:
So, can we all agree now that feminism as an idea has now been completely ruinned beyond all repair?

Um, no. Just in the way we don't look at PETA's antics and say the idea of not abusing animals is "completely ruined" or "beyond all repair." The textbook definition of feminism is advocating that social, political and all other rights of women be equal to that of men. I refuse to be the first to initiate the "there's still progress to be made" argument, but I will say even if you could prove in all first-world countries women are completely equal to men and we are completely over sexism, it's safe to say there are still many countries in the middle east and in Africa who (among other things) could use a healthy dose of feminism.

Hardcore_gamer:
So, can we all agree now that feminism as an idea has now been completely ruinned beyond all repair?

So, if certain feminists in Scandinavia want to do such things as ban threats and harassment based on a person's gender, and protect marginalised men, then all of feminism should be abandoned?

...

Seriously though, you should have gone with "want to ban anti-feminist websites" in your title.

Oh, The Spearhead. This is going to be totally reliable and unbiased and won't misrepresent anything at all.

Let's look at reality for a second. Boring, I know.

Antifeminist Threats and Harassment must be made Illegal."

Note the "threats and harassment" part? It's not banning antifeminist thought or discussion, it's banning active attempts to harm other people.

And actually, the article only says that the Nordic Council have received the recommendation, not that they agree with it or are planning to implement any of the suggestions.

So they haven't actually banned anti-feminism at all, nor is there any evidence that they are planning to, or even that they're going to start taking measures against extremist antifeminism. Maybe edit the thread title so it's not a total fucking lie? Just a suggestion.

thaluikhain:

Hardcore_gamer:
So, can we all agree now that feminism as an idea has now been completely ruinned beyond all repair?

So, if certain feminists in Scandinavia want to do such things as ban threats and harassment based on a person's gender, and protect marginalised men, then all of feminism should be abandoned?

...

Seriously though, you should have gone with "want to ban anti-feminist websites" in your title.

Ugh, not the "but they just want to ban threats an etc" argument again.

One thing that has to be understood here is that the feminists always play around with words to make their statements sound like they mean different things then they actually do.

They say things like "we want to ban violent porn!" or "we want to ban anti-feminist threats" etc.

But the reason for why they say so isn't because they think porn and violent porn are 2 different things or because they only want to ban threats. They do it because they want people to think of porn and violence as being the same thing, and that all anti-feminists are also people who make threats. And that it thus makes total sense to ban porn and anti-feminists, because that way they are "fighting aganst violence" and "people who make threats". Their statements are designed to be confusing and misleading on purpose.

Lilani:

Um, no. Just in the way we don't look at PETA's antics and say the idea of not abusing animals is "completely ruined" or "beyond all repair."

Except that PETA is just some small fringe of nutcases that nobody really cares about or listens to. This is the Nordic council of Scandinavia, not some small group of extremists that holds no real true influence. Thus your comparison isn't very good.

Hardcore_gamer:

Ugh, not the "but they just want to ban threats an etc" argument again.

Yeah, it's so damn irritating when people bring up things like facts and reality when you're trying to have a fearmongering alarmist tirade.

It just seems rather silly to me that Male Rights organizations are basically being put on the same level as the Aryan Nation and Islamic Radicals. As someone else said; neo-feminism really isn't the answer to much of anything. Their main racket is to find rather small or unrelated issues and making them seem like we're putting women in the back of the bus or something.

Shock and Awe:
It just seems rather silly to me that Male Rights organizations are basically being put on the same level as the Aryan Nation and Islamic Radicals.

Oh, I agree. It's not like antifeminists have actually killed people.

boots:

Shock and Awe:
It just seems rather silly to me that Male Rights organizations are basically being put on the same level as the Aryan Nation and Islamic Radicals.

Oh, I agree. It's not like antifeminists have actually killed people.

So we're going to use the example of an individual who was mentally ill and abused as a child as a posterboy for the opposition? Well in that case all feminists are now Valerie Solanas. According to your logic anyway.

But this is the internet! There can be no facts here!D:
Seriously though this seams to be stretching the issue a we bit.

Shock and Awe:

So we're going to use the example of an individual who was mentally ill and abused as a child as a posterboy for the opposition? Well in that case all feminists are now Valerie Solanas. According to your logic anyway.

Er, you realise that the people on this board actually do insist that all feminists are Valerie Solonas (or Andrea Dworkin, take your pick).

We are NOT going down the same path gender threads have taken in Off Topic. Keep it civil people.

image

Hardcore_gamer:

So, can we all agree now that feminism as an idea has now been completely ruinned beyond all repair?

Hardly.

If history has taught us anything it's that humanity's attention span tends to have the half-life of a sickly gnat. If only because of this then however this one particular matter turns out in Finland feminism as an idea won't be ruined beyond all repair by it.

It is kinda hypocritical how one movement is vilified (MRA) while the other is presented as the savior of all humankind (current feminism) when the two are practically identical in many ways.

Although personally im against both.

boots:

Shock and Awe:

So we're going to use the example of an individual who was mentally ill and abused as a child as a posterboy for the opposition? Well in that case all feminists are now Valerie Solanas. According to your logic anyway.

Er, you realise that the people on this board actually do insist that all feminists are Valerie Solonas (or Andrea Dworkin, take your pick).

Maybe they do, but I do not. Its just as intellectually dishonest as claiming all people opposed to the more ridiculous aspects of feminism are like the fellow you brought up.

Ryotknife:
It is kinda hypocritical how one movement is vilified (MRA) while the other is presented as the savior of all humankind (current feminism) when the two are practically identical in many ways.

This is, ironically, completely true. Most of the issues raised by MRAs (like men being disadvantaged in child custody, or being pressured not to show emotion or weakness) are based upon ideas of gender deconstruction that were brought to light in feminist literature. Yet a lot of MRAs act like feminists invented traditional gender roles.

Shock and Awe:

Maybe they do, but I do not. Its just as intellectually dishonest as claiming all people opposed to the more ridiculous aspects of feminism are like the fellow you brought up.

Oh, did I do that? I seem to remember that I pointed to a single case of an anti-feminist murdering a bunch of people in the name of antifeminism. Would you mind quoting the bit of my post that added, "... and all antifeminists are exactly like this guy"?

boots:

Shock and Awe:

Maybe they do, but I do not. Its just as intellectually dishonest as claiming all people opposed to the more ridiculous aspects of feminism are like the fellow you brought up.

Oh, did I do that? I seem to remember that I pointed to a single case of an anti-feminist murdering a bunch of people in the name of antifeminism. Would you mind quoting the bit of my post that added, "... and all antifeminists are exactly like this guy"?

You were making the implication that because of the actions of one insane individual all Mens Rights Groups are on the same level as the Aryan Brotherhood and Islamist Radicals.

Ryotknife:
It is kinda hypocritical how one movement is vilified (MRA) while the other is presented as the savior of all humankind (current feminism) when the two are practically identical in many ways.

Although personally im against both.

Well the reason why one is vilified while the other is not is simply because neo-feminists use the name of a movement that did great things to push their agenda. So people are mislead into believing neo-feminism = feminism (and this is often proven by people mentioning things which were pushed by the feminist movement, but have now become moot issues due to these issues being fixed, as being neo-feminism).

And the MRA is probably as bad (i've yet to actually inform myself about their agenda because they're so insignificant anyway) simply because it is a reactionary movement which probably take extreme stances as a reaction to the extreme stances of neo-feminism.

Ryotknife:
It is kinda hypocritical how one movement is vilified (MRA) while the other is presented as the savior of all humankind (current feminism) when the two are practically identical in many ways.

Although personally im against both.

I have never seen nor been shown by its proponents a MRA group that addresses real instances of discrimination men face. For example, custody battles in the US frequently favor women, even when the woman is clearly the less suitable parent. Also, it is very difficult for even perfectly qualified men to get jobs caring for children, society has grown to consider women getting slapped horrific and men getting slapped funny, and male rape is never taken as seriously as it should. However, the MRA groups don't push that stuff. They go on about how men are still expected to hold doors for women even though women are "supposed" to be equal and tripe like that. I would agree that there is a potential for them to be equal, but I have yet to spy a MRA group that isn't just a coven of anti-feminists looking for validation.

Copper Zen:
We are NOT going down the same path gender threads have taken in Off Topic. Keep it civil people.

But it's hard to stay civil when the OP is making stuff up about the article they posted :<

Copper Zen:

Not to sound like a fawning toadie, but that video is awesome.

OT: I don't even know what I'm doing here. Can we just agree that feminism isn't a useless movement, and that the link is unreliable? Can someone also properly translate the pdf file?

I don't agree with approaches that ban anything on the internet, because it's utterly useless to try. Things on the radio and the TV is different and falls on the purvey of free speech vs hate laws and good taste.

EDIT: And uh there's isn't a "worldwide feminists conspiracy". Just saying.

Frission:

Copper Zen:

Not to sound like a fawning toadie, but that video is awesome.

OT: I don't even know what I'm doing here. Can we just agree that feminism isn't a useless movement, and that the link is unreliable? Can someone also properly translate the pdf file?

I don't agree with approaches that ban anything on the internet, because it's utterly useless to try. Things on the radio and the TV is different and falls on the purvey of free speech vs hate laws and good taste.

EDIT: And uh there's isn't a "worldwide feminists conspiracy". Just saying.

I'm not sure it's totally translated but starting towards the bottom (~pg. 32?) it starts being in english.

The summary from the expert panel IS in their and it is in english, and it is what the spearhead article list though it goes into more detail in the actual pdf.

Some if it can definetly be construed as scarily orwellian, given a certain light. Largely because their just so damn broad in their brush. The problem is I don't know if their more specific above or if the actual sum up at the bottom is the full summary of how they feel.

What, for example, constitutes anti-feminist activity? Saying strip clubs should be legal, for example, could be construed in certain Nordic countries as being anti-feminist, despite an argument from some feminist that a womans right to her own body includes exploiting stupid horny men for lots of money with it. It's just, in the ENGLISH summary, it's incredibly vague what 'anti feminism' is. The fact that they want to collect data and get names of people exhibiting 'anti feminist' ideology or behavior is also kind of disturbing.

Lilani:

Ryotknife:
It is kinda hypocritical how one movement is vilified (MRA) while the other is presented as the savior of all humankind (current feminism) when the two are practically identical in many ways.

Although personally im against both.

I have never seen nor been shown by its proponents a MRA group that addresses real instances of discrimination men face. For example, custody battles in the US frequently favor women, even when the woman is clearly the less suitable parent. Also, it is very difficult for even perfectly qualified men to get jobs caring for children, society has grown to consider women getting slapped horrific and men getting slapped funny, and male rape is never taken as seriously as it should. However, the MRA groups don't push that stuff. They go on about how men are still expected to hold doors for women even though women are "supposed" to be equal and tripe like that. I would agree that there is a potential for them to be equal, but I have yet to spy a MRA group that isn't just a coven of anti-feminists looking for validation.

Copper Zen:
We are NOT going down the same path gender threads have taken in Off Topic. Keep it civil people.

But it's hard to stay civil when the OP is making stuff up about the article they posted :<

to be fair, I never even heard of the MRA until I came to the escapist. I brought up the subject to RL family and friends and the only reaction I get out of them is when they think MRA = military rations. Im willing to bet money that most americans don't even know they exist.

MRA doesn't push stuff because they don't exist for the most part.

Frission:

Copper Zen:

Not to sound like a fawning toadie, but that video is awesome.

OT: I don't even know what I'm doing here. Can we just agree that feminism isn't a useless movement, and that the link is unreliable? Can someone also properly translate the pdf file?

I don't agree with approaches that ban anything on the internet, because it's utterly useless to try. Things on the radio and the TV is different and falls on the purvey of free speech vs hate laws and good taste.

EDIT: And uh there's isn't a "worldwide feminists conspiracy". Just saying.

I would say that feminism is becoming an increasingly corrupt movement, but that is the inevitable conclusion to any long lasting social movement as people will exploit the movement for their own gains or agenda unrelated to the original intent of the movement.

then again, the US government is a hell of a lot more corrupt and it is still around so....

generals3:
Neo-Feminism is a destructive ideology solely aimed at vilifying men.

I'm not familiar with Neo-feminism beyond what was said in the OP's blog link. Could you provide additional information with citations?

generals3:

It's a bit like how environmentalism has been hijacked by ex-commies who use "the environment" as an excuse to push their communist agenda which does nothing to help the environment.

Ex-commies? Communist agenda? Are you speaking of Finland? The environmentalists I've met in the US Southeast and my home state of Texas don't seem to belong to the same type of groups you're describing. The folks who disagree with them don't use such terminology, either.

EDIT: I mean that I was born in Texas. I no longer live there but "Born a Texan--always a Texan". :)

Lilani:
I have never seen nor been shown by its proponents a MRA group that addresses real instances of discrimination men face. For example, custody battles in the US frequently favor women, even when the woman is clearly the less suitable parent. Also, it is very difficult for even perfectly qualified men to get jobs caring for children, society has grown to consider women getting slapped horrific and men getting slapped funny, and male rape is never taken as seriously as it should. However, the MRA groups don't push that stuff. They go on about how men are still expected to hold doors for women even though women are "supposed" to be equal and tripe like that. I would agree that there is a potential for them to be equal, but I have yet to spy a MRA group that isn't just a coven of anti-feminists looking for validation.

Valid concern...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Coalition_of_Fathers_and_Children
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fathers_4_Justice
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Society_For_Men%27s_Health_%26_Gender
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Coalition_for_Men
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Save_Indian_Family_Foundation
http://www.nationalcenterformen.org/
http://www.mensaid.com/
http://www.mankind.org.uk/
http://www.prostate.org.nz/

There are more, but that should get you started. I'm also aware of several Men's Groups attempting to gain ground in various academic settings that are getting a lot of pushback from the institution to.

Hopefully that helps!

Copper Zen:

generals3:
Neo-Feminism is a destructive ideology solely aimed at vilifying men.

I'm not familiar with Neo-feminism beyond what was said in the OP's blog link. Could you provide additional information with citations?

generals3:

It's a bit like how environmentalism has been hijacked by ex-commies who use "the environment" as an excuse to push their communist agenda which does nothing to help the environment.

Ex-commies? Communist agenda? Are you speaking of Finland? The environmentalists I've met in the US Southeast and my home state of Texas don't seem to belong to the same type of groups you're describing. The folks who disagree with them don't use such terminology, either.

You have actually met environmentalists in the southeast? I thought they all had "hunting accidents" :).

Although, funny enough it is the Democrats in my state (NY) that are anti-environment and it is the republicans who are trying to protect it.

Course, it is probably just part of the "we love what you hate (and vice versa)" that is so common among dems/repubs

Copper Zen:

generals3:
Neo-Feminism is a destructive ideology solely aimed at vilifying men.

I'm not familiar with Neo-feminism beyond what was said in the OP's blog link. Could you provide additional information with citations?

generals3:

It's a bit like how environmentalism has been hijacked by ex-commies who use "the environment" as an excuse to push their communist agenda which does nothing to help the environment.

Ex-commies? Communist agenda? Are you speaking of Finland? The environmentalists I've met in the US Southeast and my home state of Texas don't seem to belong to the same type of groups you're describing. The folks who disagree with them don't use such terminology, either.

Neo-feminism is what i have decided to call "feminism" because i feel calling what people now call feminism feminism is an insult to the feminists who fought hard to ensure women got equal rights. And because i don't really think fabricating and twisting facts is what feminism was about (which is something what neo-feminist activists love to do nowadays). Hence "neo-feminism".

While off course it can depend on the country in many european countries after the fall of the berlin wall and the communist ideology in general a lot of commies have decided to recycle themselves in environmentalism. And than you get what a friend called "watermelon" green parties. Parties which are green on the outside but red in the inside.

generals3:

Neo-feminism is what i have decided to call "feminism" because i feel calling what people now call feminism feminism is an insult to the feminists who fought hard to ensure women got equal rights.

Are you saying that you can't cite any actual examples of Neo-feminism because you just made up the definition? Are you including all modern forms of feminism or just radical feminism in the definition? If the latter, we already have a name for radical feminism. Three guesses what it is.

Frission:
Can someone also properly translate the pdf file?

Well I had written and long reply with a short summery of the suggestions on page 5 and 6. But after I posted this post i saw that the report had actually translated this part in pages 35 and 36.

A few more notes from the report:
The Report is in Norwegian and I'm Danish. There are some differences between written danish and written norwegian, but I can get most details.

The name of the report is "How to oppose anti-feminism and right wing extremism"

The front page suggest that it's made by the Nordic council, "Reform" (an NGO i don't know) and the Norwegian government.

The authors of the report defines feminism as "The thought that there exist a structural unequal framework in society and said framework will more often than not favor men over women. And this framework will not disappear without action".

generals3:

Neo-feminism is what i have decided to call "feminism" because i feel calling what people now call feminism feminism is an insult to the feminists who fought hard to ensure women got equal rights. And because i don't really think fabricating and twisting facts is what feminism was about (which is something what neo-feminist activists love to do nowadays). Hence "neo-feminism".

So you're saying that the same kind of feminists who fought in the trenches decades ago for women to have the right to vote, work, etc have gone the way of the Dodo bird and that modern contemporary feminists--whether they're from where ever you are, Finland, Texas, Alabama, Canada, Mexico, etc. are ALL liars with "misandrist conspiracies" in mind...

...uh-huh...

generals3:

While off course it can depend on the country in many european countries after the fall of the berlin wall and the communist ideology in general a lot of commies have decided to recycle themselves in environmentalism. And than you get what a friend called "watermelon" green parties. Parties which are green on the outside but red in the inside.

One thing I'm learning about Europe as R&P's designated Mod is that I have A LOT to learn about Europe--and many, many other things. From what you're saying it sounds like you're talking about Eastern European countries that used to be part of the Soviet bloc. Would I be correct in that?

Hatespeech legislation is nothing new. As something which undermine the foundation of free debate democracy is built upon, it should not exist. But in this day and age the problem is more principled than practical. A US server, the TOR browser, and a bit of legal advice on how to play jurisdictions from civil rights enthusiasts, and they're all good to go.

It'll presumably only harden the tone anyway, as the hatespeech laws on race and religion have done across the EU. The law de facto can not be applied to ordinary mainstream discourse: So those who oppose them would do well to help create a rougher discourse on the subject they concern, in order to limit the scope of free speech they apply to. Which is rather regrettable for the people it's supposed to protect, but free speech is far too important to not accept some collateral damage in the defence of it.

Gorr:

The Report is in Norwegian and I'm Danish. There are some differences between written danish and written norwegian, but I can get most details.

Thanks.

1) To make it illegal to make threat somebody due to there gender, and make it equally illegal to say these threats on the wab as in other media.

Making it illegal to threaten people makes absolute sense. Freedom of speech does not cover verbal threats, hate speech or verbal assault.

2) Make it easier for women/men to report threats and harassment to the police. These initiatives should focus on women/men who are public debaters.

Also makes sense.

3) Make a yearly survey on the scope of anti-feminism and right wing extremism speech.

4) Give money to research into anti-feministic groups.

These are both bullshit and there's no reason for them unless there's evidence of anti-feminist groups committing criminal activity.

6) Prevent marginalization of (young) men. Marginalized men are more prone to become anti-feministic.

Oh, look at that, a suggestion that the Nordic Council pay attention to men's issues and help marginalised men. The OP kept a bit quiet about that one.

7) Make an Ombudsman for equality affairs. And make sure that this office looks into cases of anti-feminism.

First clause yes, second clause no.

8) The press should make sure not to legitimize anti-feministic proponents when quoting or interviewing.

This is also bullshit and an overt threat to freedom of speech.

9) Increase cooperation between experts on islamophobia, right wing extremism, neo-nazism and anti-semitism. Since there is a significant overlap in the groups promoting these ideas.

This makes sense, but including anti-feminism doesn't. Opposition to a political or academic idea is not the same as hatred towards a particular race or religion.

Are you seriously linking to The Spearhead? Maybe next you'll find something written on Stormfront to link to in a thread about race-relations.

Copper Zen:
Snip

Well no, not eastern european countries necessarily. The thing is that following the fall of the USSR communism lost all appeal to anyone in the west. After all the fall was proof communism was a failure in all aspects. Thus those who used to try and spread communism in the West were forced to get a new agenda because no one would take theirs seriously anymore.

Now I will also add that Neo-feminism doesn't exist in all countries. There are still plenty of countries where women are treated as second class citizens and where Feminism is needed to help them. But let me ask the following question: what would be the meaning of feminism in a country where the initial ideas have already been implemented? Wouldn't the word "feminism" be pointless considering a vaste majority of the people already adheres to the idea promoted? Wouldn't that make those feminists just "normal people"? In the past you had normal people who were misogynistic and feminists who were in favor of equality. Now you have normal people who are in favor of equality and misogynists who are against it, so where does that put the feminist activists? It puts them in the Neo-feminist section which are just there to fabricate issues in order to keep their movement relevant/justified.

When neo feminists go and double the actual wage gap (recent example from belgium) in order to create extra controversy it's quite obvious they have become useless for the true feminist cause. Now i also realize there are plenty of people who are part of this neo-feminist group thinking they are feminists because of misinformation spoonfed to them by neofeminists. But the fact remains that if you're pro equal rights and against sexism you're not a feminist, you're just part of the crowd.

You know, it's basically like calling yourself an abolitionist because you're anti slavery. Surely you would agree it would be nonsensical for someone to identify himself as such when slavery doesn't exist in his country and is widely rejected.

boots:

Are you saying that you can't cite any actual examples of Neo-feminism because you just made up the definition? Are you including all modern forms of feminism or just radical feminism in the definition? If the latter, we already have a name for radical feminism. Three guesses what it is.

What kind of examples do you want? How they inflate the wage gap? How they inflate the numbers surrounding rapes? (both things which create extra controversy but also make men look worse than they are) Or maybe how they can't resist making a gender issue out of everything? (recent examples can be found in the gaming discussion in the topic about the absurd scarlet blade) Or how whenever they come across numbers which may suggest there is a gender issue they decide to conveniently ignore any other possible explanation? (typically done with the wage gap issue)

It's a report saying that says, among other things, you shouldn't be able to threaten or harass people online or offline. Some Norse countries already have this in place.

That is absolutely the right approach and I think the fact that people are getting so twisted about what should be a fairly simple and unanimously supported idea shows that they're buying into antifeminist propogranda or perhaps haven't read the actual document.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here