Martin Cullen's 'rape' experience

Slideshowbob

What another embarassment for Cullen.

Ill-chosen words in my opinion.

I heard on radio other night the attention brought on him at the time was partly his own fault anyway in the manner in which he awarded the work in question!

Sulmac

A terrible and very insensitive choice of words to use. However, what he and his family (as well as Monica Leech and her family) had to go through is inexcusable and the journalists involved should be disgusted with themselves.

Red_Marauder

Not ill chosen at all. People are far too sensitive about this type of thing.
You think that people who actually went through the ordeal of a rape have so little to worry about as to get offended by this choice of words?

I understand him to mean that his family and his children suffered a personal violation that they had no control over, that it was very traumatic, and I see no problem with him using this term at all.

Sand

Its total nonsense that this took over the media for the past few days when they have remained mute and dazed as the government inflicts something like NAMA upon the taxpayer. It seems we dont have an informed media, just a tabloid press looking for easy headlines.

moceri

Hey if you can't stand the Heat, stay out of the Kitchen.

Reginald P. DuM

I found it incredible that this man would choose such words to court public sympathy. It's not up for debate that he was wronged and badly at that, it must have been traumatic reading the false tales in the papers. But to liken it to rape, and to repeat the word shows a serious lack of sensitivity, no to mention cop on. Boo hoo Martin, so they told a few lies. It reminds me of Berties suicide quip, what do the pay these spin doctors for at all.

Maebh

Red_Marauder wrote: »

You think that people who actually went through the ordeal of a rape have so little to worry about as to get offended by this choice of words?

Yes, actually, I do.

As for the incident itself, I wrote a letter explaining my position on the whole thing to Mr Cullen. I do think that a poor choice of words helps foster a sense of "Anything bad that violates my sense of space, hey let's call it rape!"

Yes, the journos were bad for what they did, and I'm not defending involvement of his family, I still think that using the term rape is indefensible.

hallelujajordan

I have no problem at all with the comment, particularly when you read it in its full context . .

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/0123/1224262926553.html

He was trying to convey the trauma that his family had been put through !

yoshytoshy

hallelujajordan wrote: »

I have no problem at all with the comment, particularly when you read it in its full context . .

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/0123/1224262926553.html

He was trying to convey the trauma that his family had been put through !

It's hard to understand why he didn't keep quiet about it now though ? ,why did he go and mention rape when people know for sure now ,what actually happened.
Just seems like he's having a dig at the media ,at other peoples expense.

hallelujajordan

yoshytoshy wrote: »

It's hard to understand why he didn't keep quiet about it now though ? ,why did he go and mention rape when people know for sure now ,what actually happened.
Just seems like he's having a dig at the media ,at other peoples expense.

He was speaking at a conference about defamation law . . he was there to share his own personal experience. . I thought he did so quite well ..

yoshytoshy

hallelujajordan wrote: »

He was speaking at a conference about defamation law . . he was there to share his own personal experience. . I thought he did so quite well ..

The whole rape thing though ,he's playing the very game that he is criticizing.
He could have made his point a completely different way ,but I can understand the guy is upset and happy at the same time ,he may have been confused.

fatmammycat

His crass and frankly obnoxious use of 'rape' to describe his treatment was offensive and ridiculous and I know it upset a NUMBER of people who have suffered real and actual rape.

anymore

He and his fellow Ministers for the previous ten years could have ensured that people like Suzy long did not premature deaths - it was not a lack of money that caused her death - millions and millions of taxpayers money have been squandered on quangoes, expenses etc, etc.

Red_Marauder

Maebh wrote: »

As for the incident itself, I wrote a letter explaining my position on the whole thing to Mr Cullen. I do think that a poor choice of words helps foster a sense of "Anything bad that violates my sense of space, hey let's call it rape!"

That is quite the exaggeration.

If you look at the transcript of what was said, how these lies left Cullen isolated and depressed, and how his young children suffered bullying from teachers, journalists and other kids, it is clear that what he went through was a very serious and very public violation.

This is just a case of the media getting their egos bruised, just like how theyve been sulking all week about not having had a photo op with Eamon Lillis's mistress outside the Criminal Courts of Justice.

Having heard excerpts of the speech on the News at One I have to say I thought a lot of his honesty and I actually do think that the word rape was a useful analogy for the kind of intrusion and personal abuse that he was subjected to.

Slideshowbob

poor minister cullen

can i say i felt 'raped' in my pocket when I consider the waste of taxpayers money for e-voting machines over which he had a remit!

I will withdraw wuch a statement immediately as I could never consider what someone who is raped goes through!

itsonlywords

Red_Marauder wrote: »

That is quite the exaggeration.

If you look at the transcript of what was said, how these lies left Cullen isolated and depressed, and how his young children suffered bullying from teachers, journalists and other kids, it is clear that what he went through was a very serious and very public violation.

This is just a case of the media getting their egos bruised, just like how theyve been sulking all week about not having had a photo op with Eamon Lillis's mistress outside the Criminal Courts of Justice.

Having heard excerpts of the speech on the News at One I have to say I thought a lot of his honesty and I actually do think that the word rape was a useful analogy for the kind of intrusion and personal abuse that he was subjected to.

The people of Waterford know very well that martin has a vivid imagination and we doubt very much if things happened like he said they did. Also maybe he was actually raped and he was comparing the two events? It's possible. If we believe everything that comes out of his mouth.

juuge

His choice of the word 'rape' is inexcusable in this instance and again another gaff by a politician that really should know better. How the likes of Cullen, Willie O'Dea, Dick Roche etc, get to positions of authority beggars belief. The guy is a joke, his political record is a joke and his Fianna Fail party is a joke. The sooner we are rid of them the better.

OI

It's Martin bloody Cullen, of course it's wrong

Red_Marauder

itsonlywords wrote: »

The people of Waterford know very well that martin has a vivid imagination and we doubt very much if things happened like he said they did.

They seem to have enough confidence in him to vote for him on a pretty consistent basis.

rubensni

Red_Marauder wrote: »

They seem to have enough confidence in him to vote for him on a pretty consistent basis.

Confidence in his ability to bring home the goods, beyond that nothing maters in politics. Once they bring home the bacon to the constituencies they keep getting in. The person's integrity or credibility are irrelevant.

Maebh

Red_Marauder wrote: »

That is quite the exaggeration.

If you look at the transcript of what was said, how these lies left Cullen isolated and depressed, and how his young children suffered bullying from teachers, journalists and other kids, it is clear that what he went through was a very serious and very public violation.

This is just a case of the media getting their egos bruised, just like how theyve been sulking all week about not having had a photo op with Eamon Lillis's mistress outside the Criminal Courts of Justice.

Having heard excerpts of the speech on the News at One I have to say I thought a lot of his honesty and I actually do think that the word rape was a useful analogy for the kind of intrusion and personal abuse that he was subjected to.

Rape shouldn't be used as an analogy. Words have too much power to be thrown around with little thought for the consequential effects.

Screw the media, I'm talking about rape victims.

And as I said to Mr Cullen, just because some of the symptoms match up doesn't mean they are equal...

Laminations

Maebh wrote: »

Rape shouldn't be used as an analogy. Words have too much power to be thrown around with little thought for the consequential effects.

Screw the media, I'm talking about rape victims.

And as I said to Mr Cullen, just because some of the symptoms match up doesn't mean they are equal...

He was making a figurative and not a literal comparison. The same way you just said 'screw the media'.

It was possibly a poor choice of words and a bit of a blunder but if people didn't look for the slightest thing to get offended by it would have gone unnoticed

Slideshowbob

Laminations wrote: »

He was making a figurative and not a literal comparison. The same way you just said 'screw the media'.

It was possibly a poor choice of words and a bit of a blunder but if people didn't look for the slightest thing to get offended by it would have gone unnoticed

Perhaps he used the term precisely for the exposure he achieved.

It's one thing an effectively anonomous poster saying screw the media here - it's another a minister in our government using an inappropriate term to court sympathy, and express his personal emotions.

Laminations

I can easily understand accusing Bertie of stunts to court sympathy. I don't think this was Cullens intention. It was said at an untelevised conference.
Anyway there are far more damning things to hang Cullen on - one being his performance in government.

Red_Marauder

rubensni wrote: »

Confidence in his ability to bring home the goods, beyond that nothing maters in politics. Once they bring home the bacon to the constituencies they keep getting in. The person's integrity or credibility are irrelevant.

A politician's integrity and credibility are irrelevant? You really think so?

maebh wrote:

Rape shouldn't be used as an analogy. Words have too much power to be thrown around with little thought for the consequential effects.

What power?
I just do not understand why someone could possibly take this as a personal offence? He was talking about his experiences and how he and his family went through a serious personal trauma that deeply effected them.
I don't understand how this term, which is clealy intended to refer to a violation of himself and his family, can actually offend anyone personally.

If I used the term 'murder' on a far, far lighter note than Cullen used this, there would be no issue. For example if I said, "I crashed the car, Dad's going to murder me", I don't think people would think twice about it.

There are a few things going on here
(1) It's Martin Cullen. Enough said.
(2) He's a man. Would there be an issue if Mary Coughlan said this? I would seriously doubt that.
(3)He was having a go at the media. Given the self important nature of some elements in the media and how they reported this story, this reactionary "offense" is of no surprise.

Do you think people are actually thinking about this issue in their daily lives?

Slideshowbob

Red_Marauder wrote: »

A politician's integrity and credibility are irrelevant? You really think so?



What power?
I just do not understand why someone could possibly take this as a personal offence? He was talking about his experiences and how he and his family went through a serious personal trauma that deeply effected them.
I don't understand how this term, which is clealy intended to refer to a violation of himself and his family, can actually offend anyone personally.

If I used the term 'murder' on a far, far lighter note than Cullen used this, there would be no issue. For example if I said, "I crashed the car, Dad's going to murder me", I don't think people would think twice about it.

There are a few things going on here
(1) It's Martin Cullen. Enough said.
(2) He's a man. Would there be an issue if Mary Coughlan said this? I would seriously doubt that.
(3)He was having a go at the media. Given the self important nature of some elements in the media and how they reported this story, this reactionary "offense" is of no surprise.

Do you think people are actually thinking about this issue in their daily lives?

Surely it should be moreso expected that politicians set standards rather than the media?!

Choke

itsonlywords wrote: »

The people of Waterford know very well that martin has a vivid imagination and we doubt very much if things happened like he said they did. Also maybe he was actually raped and he was comparing the two events? It's possible. If we believe everything that comes out of his mouth.

Unless your name is John Halligan, I don't think you can speak for all the people of Waterford.
Also, as I recall it the incident of the journalist entering his house was recorded in the papers at the time.

Arnold Layne

Did Martin Culln join the Mile High Club, when he was "raped" by the media reporting how he flew First Class to the Beijing Olympics and visited his family in Economy Class wearing the supplied slippers?

Choke

I don't think that anyone who reads his original comments can honestly be that offended - it was obvious what he was saying and in what context.

Tbh, I'm inclined to believe him just because I can't see any political advantage in what he said - no PR consultant would have counseled him to make the speech, if anything they would have counseled against.

Macha

Red_Marauder wrote: »

I just do not understand why someone could possibly take this as a personal offence? He was talking about his experiences and how he and his family went through a serious personal trauma that deeply effected them.
I don't understand how this term, which is clealy intended to refer to a violation of himself and his family, can actually offend anyone personally.

Because it belittles the far more serious trauma that is rape. The rape analogy is quickly becoming the new Godwin's law.

Red_Marauder wrote: »

There are a few things going on here
(1) It's Martin Cullen. Enough said.
(2) He's a man. Would there be an issue if Mary Coughlan said this? I would seriously doubt that.
(3)He was having a go at the media. Given the self important nature of some elements in the media and how they reported this story, this reactionary "offense" is of no surprise.

None of this excuses his use of the analogy of rape. And I'm not offended, I just think it was wrong.

Red_Marauder wrote: »

Do you think people are actually thinking about this issue in their daily lives?

Er...aren't we talking about it?

Choke

taconnol wrote: »

Because it belittles the far more serious trauma that is rape. The rape analogy is quickly becoming the new Godwin's law.

He was using 'rape' to mean violation.
That term has been used many times in that context, for instance, to describe the destruction of the environment.

It's a recognised use of the word.

Macha

Choke wrote: »

He was using 'rape' to mean violation.
That term has been used many times in that context, for instance, to describe the destruction of the environment.

It's a recognised use of the word.

I am well aware of the word and it's Latin origins. However, it's most common meaning in English is as a forced sexual act and Mr. Cullen was well aware of it, as he made clear when he added the phrase "and I use those words very carefully". He would not have added that phrase if he just meant it in the less common form of "to despoil", which in the vast majority of cases is used for inanimate objects such as the environment or countryside, as you state yourself.

He could have very easily said violated but he didn't. And I believe he specifically chose the word "rape" because of it's loaded meaning.

donaghs

Choke wrote: »

He was using 'rape' to mean violation.
That term has been used many times in that context, for instance, to describe the destruction of the environment.

It's a recognised use of the word.

I don't think so. It's one thing to say that "the environment was raped", or the Japanese were responsible for the "Rape of Naking", or some other non-human analogy.

But Cullen was making a direct analogy between a few weeks in the media limelight, and being raped (sexually assaulted). He said the experience was like "being raped".

A better indirect analogy for Cullen would be the way he's abused taxpayers money on nonsense like underspec-voting machines, pr consultants, helicopter rides, etc, etc. He may not be much worse than some of our other politicians (no excuse) but we know enough about him to know he's a disgrace to this country.

BennyLava

One wonders why, if it was so painful for him in the first place, he felt the need to bring it all back up again, using terminology that was guaranteed to garner maximum media attention.

there is a term for people like him, and I use my words carefully, media seeking whore

Red_Marauder

BennyLava wrote: »

One wonders why, if it was so painful for him in the first place, he felt the need to bring it all back up again, using terminology that was guaranteed to garner maximum media attention.

There were no recording media present at the meeting - I think it might have been Cian McCormack who recorded it on his i-phone. If you listen to the playback you can hear that it's a very poor recording and totally inaudible in parts.

It certainly wasn't the place to launch a media campaign as you cynically suggest.

Also what do you mean by this

if it was so painful for him in the first place, he felt the need to bring it all back up again

He was addressing an audience on the personal effects of defamation of character, and recounted a traumatic experience for himself.
Are you suggesting it's wrong for people who suffer bad experiences to talk about it in public? Cullen certainly has nothing to answer for there.

taconnol wrote:

it belittles the far more serious trauma that is rape.

I don't agree at all. Everybody knows what rape is, as a society we have been very much brought into tune with the human suffering that sexual abuse draws on an individual.
Do you actually think this waters that down? You really think that when rape is discussed in future people will only associate it with defamation of name? That notion is bizarre and ridiculous in equal measure.

Do you object to the use of the term murder as well, when it is used in a metaphoric sense. or have you ever used that term?

rubensni

Red_Marauder wrote: »

A politician's integrity and credibility are irrelevant? You really think so?

In the eyes of the Irish public? Yes I do. Personally I don't like it, but what can I do? The fact is the bigger the crook, the bigger the vote.

"Stroke" Fahy tops the poll:
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/convicted-councillor-stroke-fahy-tops-the-vote-1765362.html

Lowry creams off the top:
http://www.tipperarystar.ie/news/Lowry-Tipp-Tops-in-Dail.5972456.jp

Bev the queen of Mayo:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/ireland/article5439768.ece

Around the time of the next election I'll be making a bet with Paddy Power that John O'Donoghue will top the poll in South Kerry. It's not a sure thing, but if Jackie Healy Rae's son runs ahead of The Father Rae, The Bull will have it in the bag.

Darsad

Red_Marauder wrote: »

Are you suggesting it's wrong for people who suffer bad experiences to talk about it in public? Cullen certainly has nothing to answer for there.
I don't agree at all. Everybody knows what rape is, as a society we have been very much brought into tune with the human suffering that sexual abuse draws on an individual.
Do you actually think this waters that down? You really think that when rape is discussed in future people will only associate it with defamation of name? That notion is bizarre and ridiculous in equal measure.

Do you object to the use of the term murder as well, when it is used in a metaphoric sense. or have you ever used that term?

How could you possible try to defend this mans use of the word rape to do this is more fitting of your words bizarre and ridiculous in equal measure. Perhaps he suffered some inconvenience but he no doubt will be well rewarded when he takes his libel case after the electorate dump him. He is well versed at showing the croc tears, personally I find his prancing around China Air's first class in his pj's en route to the olympics while the athletes were stuffed into economy on the same flight more offensive than a little bit of media intrusion.

Red_Marauder

rubensni wrote: »

In the eyes of the Irish public?

No I was merely responding to you statement that confidence and integrity are irrelvant. If you wish to qualify that by saying that's the opinion of the Irish voting public, I'm not going to argue with you there.

Darsad wrote:

Perhaps he suffered some inconvenience but he will be well rewarded when he takes his libel case after the electorate dump him.

I don't think the electorate will dump their minister - or certainly not over this; frankly I'm convinced they have bigger issues to concern themselves with. And it doesn't include his pyjamas.

Also, he's extremely unlikely to take any defamation case now, not least for the reason that as far as I understand it the Statute of Limitations legislation has, or has just about, "expired" the defamatory articles in question.

Furthermore. I think the term "some inconvenience" is a complete understatement. There is no question but that elements of the newspaper media constinued a campaign against Leech and Cullen which sought to sell newspapers by defaming individual parties and printing lies about them, as found by the jury in the Leech libel case.
When you take the personal nature of these lies, the impact it had on a young family, and the personal intrusion into the lives of, and embarrassment for, children, spouses and grandparents, it amounts to something more than "inconvenience"

Darsad

Red_Marauder wrote: »

Also, he's extremely unlikely to take any defamation case now, not least for the reason that as far as I understand it the Statute of Limitations legislation has, or has just about, "expired" the defamatory articles in question.

"

Under the libel laws He has six years within which he can initiate a case that does not mean it has to be heard and Im sure his Legal team would be well able to delay any hearing until it suited Mr Cullen. I also think you are very wrong about his electorate not dumping him waterford has been hit pretty badly in the last year or two and from what im hearing he is no where near as popular as before bit like FF across the country I suppose .
If Cullens chin is made of China then perhaps he is in the wrong job.

Red_Marauder

Darsad wrote: »

Under the libel laws He has six years within which he can initiate a case

That's why I said his libel case as has been set out is unlikely to proceed.

You don't seem to be aware that the Minister lodged notification of intended proceedings with the High Court in 2004 and that is due to expire this year.

Darsad

Well you know the government could also expire within this year which just might suit , but I have no doubt extensions can be sought if they happen to cling on some how !

Red_Marauder

No they can't, it's there in black and white.
You might not want to think so, but the law is the law.

Maebh

Laminations wrote: »

He was making a figurative and not a literal comparison. The same way you just said 'screw the media'.

It was possibly a poor choice of words and a bit of a blunder but if people didn't look for the slightest thing to get offended by it would have gone unnoticed

That's why, you'll notice, I said "analogy".

a·nal·o·gies
1.
a. Similarity in some respects between things that are otherwise dissimilar.
b. A comparison based on such similarity.

I said he may have felt violated, he may have felt sad, he may have felt shame etc, but these things do not equal rape.

And I don't agree that the public know what the effects of rape really are. This country has a tendency to downplay sexual assault.

So, metaphor, as in "my dad's gonna murder me", is one thing. But a direct analogy is what we're talking about. Not a metaphor. He meant it seriously (but not, I'll grant him, literally), and that's why I say there are certain words you shouldn't just fling around...

But hey, who cares, right? I'm just over-reactionary I guess...

moonpurple

to op, very wrong move by the chap, I mean ok most voters are ladies but is feminism the last refuge of the scoundrel?

Laminations

Maebh wrote: »

That's why, you'll notice, I said "analogy".

a·nal·o·gies
1.
a. Similarity in some respects between things that are otherwise dissimilar.
b. A comparison based on such similarity.

I said he may have felt violated, he may have felt sad, he may have felt shame etc, but these things do not equal rape.

And I don't agree that the public know what the effects of rape really are. This country has a tendency to downplay sexual assault.

So, metaphor, as in "my dad's gonna murder me", is one thing. But a direct analogy is what we're talking about. Not a metaphor. He meant it seriously (but not, I'll grant him, literally), and that's why I say there are certain words you shouldn't just fling around...

But hey, who cares, right? I'm just over-reactionary I guess...

By that definition his use of rape as an analogy is justified. You say yourself that he may have felt violated, sad and shamefull. The comparison is based on these similarities but the violations themselves remain dissimilar. He was expressing how he felt, not trying to diminish the public condemnation of rape. Like i said feel free to jump on the man for his governments dismal performance but dont knock him for trying to express how he feels by using an analogy. It is an over reaction

Darsad

Laminations wrote: »

. Like i said feel free to jump on the man for his governments dismal performance but dont knock him for trying to express how he feels by using an analogy. It is an over reaction

As with many of his actions down the years, his use of the word rape the venue and context behind its use just show the mans incompetence.The motive behind its use I still believe to be some feeble attempt to gain some public sympathy for his possible upcoming legal proceedings.

marco_polo

Darsad wrote: »

As with many of his actions down the years, his use of the word rape the venue and context behind its use just show the mans incompetence.The motive behind its use I still believe to be some feeble attempt to gain some public sympathy for his possible upcoming legal proceedings.

Is public sympathy a large factor in the verdict of libel cases these days?

Darsad

marco_polo wrote: »

Is public sympathy a large factor in the verdict of libel cases these days?

Obviously not in the verdict but one would imagine that a highly paid minister /public servant would be cognizant of the publics perception of his actions and would it not be in his interest to try and garrner as much public sympathy as possible prior to under taking possibly lucrative
proceedings.

Red_Marauder

What is your preoccupation with a legal dispute?

If anything, it has been indicated in the Leech libel case that Cullen would have a strong basis for having his character defamed... what on earth is your problem with that? You have a problem with defamation law? You think the media didn't do anything wrong?

As has already been explained, the six year order is about to expire in a few months, so he won't be able to undertake that course of legal action which he may once have considered. Get over it...

PeakOutput

having read the article it was a completely fair comment

Darsad

Red_Marauder wrote: »

What is your preoccupation with a legal dispute?...

None My preoccupation is with the individual concerned and the damage he has inflicted on this nation through his incompetence and not the rights and wrongs of any legal case. Why dont you come out and tell us where your coming from and what is your vested interest in defending the indefensible.