"Why I did not report my rapist"

retro:electro

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Out of interest, what did she say about McGregor?

She wrote an article about his recent interview with GQ magazine where he made a comment about one of the kardashians. He's living in LA now and he said something like he'd love to see their arses about the place and some other ignorant things. Later on though, she adds in this little gem..

"As sentiments go, it’s a familiar one – it seems like just yesterday that the now US President Donald Trump talked about how he can (because he’s male, rich and powerful) “grab [women] by the pussy.” Similarly, quips McGregor: “The double champ does what the **** he wants.”

What she fails to mention however is McGregor's comment about "doing what he wants" was in relation to MMA and not women. She has manipulated his comment and then, out of context, framed it in a conversation about "rape culture". Completely wrong, irresponsible and dangerous. I'm no fan of the way McGregor speaks, but he never said "he can do what he wants" to women, and for her to imply that he said that and compare it to Trump's "pussy" comment is really a disgraceful thing to do.

hatrickpatrick

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Of course not, but if I'd said no and he did it anyway then my actions would be irrelevant, he would have done it against my will. Whether I took action to stop him doesn't affect whether I gave my consent, and if I have verbally made it clear that I do not consent, that's the end of the story as far as consent goes.

She said "she let him" i.e. she allowed him to. She said herself she let him to avoid an awkward conversation. She let him. Let him. Allowed him. Let him.

hatrickpatrick

anna080 wrote: »

She wrote an article about his recent interview with GQ magazine where he made a comment about one of the kardashians. He's living in LA now and he said something like he'd love to see their arses about the place and some other ignorant things. Later on though, she adds in this little gem..

"As sentiments go, it’s a familiar one – it seems like just yesterday that the now US President Donald Trump talked about how he can (because he’s male, rich and powerful) “grab [women] by the pussy.” Similarly, quips McGregor: “The double champ does what the **** he wants.”

What she fails to mention however is McGregor's comment about "doing what he wants" was in relation to MMA and not women. She has manipulated his comment and then, out of context, framed it in a conversation about "rape culture". Completely wrong, irresponsible and dangerous. I'm no fan of the way McGregor speaks, but he never said "he can do what he wants" to women, and for her to imply that he said that and compare it to Trump's "pussy" comment is really a disgraceful thing to do.

Ah yeah. Standard SJW bullsh!t, everything is connected to literally everything else. No comment can ever be taken at face value without reference to everything else you've ever said in your entire life.

hatrickpatrick

Omackeral wrote: »

She said "she let him" i.e. she allowed him to. She said herself she let him to avoid an awkward conversation. She let him. Let him. Allowed him. Let him.

After he had already assaulted her. That's the part people aren't getting. The sex may have been consensual in this regard but the initial foreplay was not, and that's sexual assault plain and simple. She said no and he kept touching her - case closed.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

After he had already assaulted her. That's the part people aren't getting. The sex may have been consensual in this regard but the initial foreplay was not, and that's sexual assault plain and simple. She said no and he kept touching her - case closed.

She kept kissing him.

hatrickpatrick

Rainfreeze wrote: »

If he kissed her after she said no then he is guilty of kissing without consent. By the sounds of it then she reciprocated thus giving consent non verbally to sex.

It was more than kissing, he was undressing her. That's not just kissing without consent, it's sexual assault. If someone reached into my pants and grabbed my bollocks after I told them not to, they would have just molested me - regardless of any other factors.

retro:electro

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

It was more than kissing, he was undressing her. That's not just kissing without consent, it's sexual assault. If someone reached into my pants and grabbed my bollocks after I told them not to, they would have just molested me - regardless of any other factors.

Would you keep kissing them though? And let the already blurred boundaries get even more hazy?

hatrickpatrick

anna080 wrote: »

Would you keep kissing them though? And let the already blurred boundaries get even more hazy?

It's not relevant. The word "no" trumps all other considerations when it comes to consent.

retro:electro

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

It's not relevant. The word "no" trumps all other considerations when it comes to consent.

Of course it's relevant. And in this instance it's absolutely fundamental.

MuffinTop86

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

After he had already assaulted her. That's the part people aren't getting. The sex may have been consensual in this regard but the initial foreplay was not, and that's sexual assault plain and simple. She said no and he kept touching her - case closed.

So the sexual assault was followed by consensual sex. Not rape though.

westernlass

I've just watched her Facebook live and to me the crediblity of her article is less again. She said she dimisses others differing opinions of hers (she referenced boards) as the opponent not having the intelligence she has to understand her feminist theories.

Also she said she does not have to answer any questions of readers if she doesn't want just because. It again to me shows the immaturity. Immaturity to write an article like this without thinking through the long term effects on others. Also as an influencer engagement is what you want. You cannot cherry pick what you want a reaction to be.

I actually don't see what she has gained from this. She works with brands and I'd imagine this controversy will reduce interest in working with her. She doesn't have google ads on her page so has gained no more income. She said herself the opposing arguments have hurt her lots. The poor guy who knows who he is is probably in a world of pain.

It has opened up the debate about consent but she has no interest in that topic. I can see why she now regrets publishing it.

hatrickpatrick

MuffinTop86 wrote: »

So the sexual assault was followed by consensual sex. Not rape though.

Perhaps, yes. But the sexual assault in itself is a crime and something the guy who did it should be in prison for.

hatrickpatrick

anna080 wrote: »

Of course it's relevant. And in this instance it's absolutely fundamental.

It really isn't. She said no. He persisted. Case closed.

Help!!!!

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Perhaps, yes. But the sexual assault in itself is a crime and something the guy who did it should be in prison for.

Hopefully he wouldn't get a jury full of people who believe one side of the story :rolleyes:

Mountainsandh

Hatrickpatrick

Communication is not limited to words.

All words can be ambiguous, even yes and no.

Has anyone ever replied to you : "yes, yes, absolutely, I will" and meant the complete opposite ? Chances are you knew it ?
Anyone ever said to you : "yeah right" ? Do they mean yes you are right ?
Anyone ever said : "No way !" Do they mean that they think you're lying ?
Even children are very well able to detect when a "no" may mean "if you bugger me enough I may well give in and get you that ice-cream".

Intonation, body language, actions, context, they count. For the times we want no ambiguity, we tend to draw written contracts.

meeeeh

westernlass wrote: »

The poor guy who knows who he is is probably in a world of pain.

Can just ask why such a sympathy for a guy that followed her into the room despite her not inviting him and did not stop for one moment when she was saying no. I would more hope that the 'poor guy' will look up definition of no in the lexicon. He wasn't named but if he came across the whole thing it might not be bad idea for him to look at himself and think would he want another guy to treat a sister or daughter of his like that.

Help!!!!

meeeeh wrote: »

Can just ask why such a sympathy for a guy that followed her into the room despite her not inviting him and did not stop for one moment when she was saying no. I would more hope that the 'poor guy' will look up definition of no in the lexicon. He wasn't named but if he came across the whole thing it might not be bad idea for him to look at himself and think would he want another guy to treat a sister or daughter of his like that.

How do you know while they were drinking she wasn't flirting with him. She hasnt said the week before was a mistake. Then she says I'm going to bed so he assumes she's meant with him. We dont know what went on because its only her side. If any of it is in fact true

westernlass

meeeeh wrote: »

westernlass wrote: »

The poor guy who knows who he is is probably in a world of pain.

Can just ask why such a sympathy for a guy that followed her into the room despite her not inviting him and did not stop for one moment when she was saying no. I would more hope that the 'poor guy' will look up definition of no in the lexicon. He wasn't named but if he came across the whole thing it might not be bad idea for him to look at himself and think would he want another guy to treat a sister or daughter of his like that.

Because I believe it's very unfair the way he's been tried on social media with no ability to defend himself. We have one side of a story. She has admitted he did not know it was rape or intend it as rape. We don't know if she said no very clearly. They were both drunk and there were people in the house. Was it loud? Was she smiling when she said no? Was it in a serious tone or a teasing way?

I admit I may be wrong here but to put out this story without clarifying details or engaging in any follow up is not mature to me. The guy I feel for because he cannot discuss this with anyone for fear of people knowing it was fun. There is no dialogue for him. No chance to defend himself.

meeeeh

Help!!!! wrote: »

How do you know while they were drinking she wasn't flirting with him. She hasnt said the week before was a mistake. Then she says I'm going to bed so he assumes she's meant with him. We dont know what went on because its only her side. If any of it is in fact true

And the 'poor guy' also misunderstood no for yes? It's an easy mistake to make I guess.

westernlass

meeeeh wrote: »

Help!!!! wrote: »

How do you know while they were drinking she wasn't flirting with him. She hasnt said the week before was a mistake. Then she says I'm going to bed so he assumes she's meant with him. We dont know what went on because its only her side. If any of it is in fact true

And the 'poor guy' also misunderstood no for yes? It's an easy mistake to make I guess.

As has been discussed already there are nuances we are not aware of and there was consent in the actions of not stopping kissing or asking him to leave. I'm not saying what happened was right or that he isn't a creep for his actions. I feel this action of people publishing a blog post about him with no recourse for him to defend himself is unfair.

pilly

sara1 wrote:

This post has been deleted.

And that's exactly what bothers me about the whole thing. It belittles what actual rape victims go through.

I'm so sorry for what happened to you and for the fact that you've to read this crap afterwards.

Mountainsandh

meeeeh wrote: »

Can just ask why such a sympathy for a guy that followed her into the room despite her not inviting him and did not stop for one moment when she was saying no. I would more hope that the 'poor guy' will look up definition of no in the lexicon. He wasn't named but if he came across the whole thing it might not be bad idea for him to look at himself and think would he want another guy to treat a sister or daughter of his like that.

Well yeah, he's in need of a good roasting, like a lot of young fellas are. Like a lot of us, he may well be mortified at ways he behaved in the past already, but being called a rapist is a whole new level.

Help!!!!

meeeeh wrote: »

And the 'poor guy' also misunderstood no for yes? It's an easy mistake to make I guess.

How do we know for sure she said no?? It would be more believable a no & a firm hand on the chest.

SpillingTheTea

meeeeh wrote: »

westernlass wrote: »

The poor guy who knows who he is is probably in a world of pain.

Can just ask why such a sympathy for a guy that followed her into the room despite her not inviting him and did not stop for one moment when she was saying no. I would more hope that the 'poor guy' will look up definition of no in the lexicon. He wasn't named but if he came across the whole thing it might not be bad idea for him to look at himself and think would he want another guy to treat a sister or daughter of his like that.

The same question could be asked of you. Why could you have such sympathy for her? Just because she said so? If you expect people to side with her because she said so then it's only out of fairness that we treat him the same.

At the end of the day, nobody apart from Rosemary and the guy involved truly knows what actually went down that night. BUT, friends of the two of them will only know who he is and based on her one sided blogpost, they have the potential to actually accuse him personally and potentially ruin his life.

The last time I checked, in Ireland, you're innocent until proven guilty.... unless you are the subject of a rape accusation on a blog written by a 'influencer'.

Cupcake_Crisis

meeeeh wrote: »

Can just ask why such a sympathy for a guy that followed her into the room despite her not inviting him and did not stop for one moment when she was saying no. I would more hope that the 'poor guy' will look up definition of no in the lexicon. He wasn't named but if he came across the whole thing it might not be bad idea for him to look at himself and think would he want another guy to treat a sister or daughter of his like that.

I have to say, I haven't noticed a huge amount of sympathy for the guy here. In fact, I think the general consensus is that yes, he is an asshole for persisting, but not deserving of the label of a rapist.

Even though he wasn't named, this will eventually make its way back to him.

Help!!!!

Cupcake_Crisis wrote: »

I have to say, I haven't noticed a huge amount of sympathy for the guy here. In fact, I think the general consensus is that yes, he is an asshole for persisting, but not deserving of the label of a rapist.

Even though he wasn't named, this will eventually make its way back to him.

& if she found it easier to have sex rather than have a conversation why not to then there may be quite a few guys out there thinking its them

retro:electro

westernlass wrote: »

I've just watched her Facebook live and to me the crediblity of her article is less again. She said she dimisses others differing opinions of hers (she referenced boards) as the opponent not having the intelligence she has to understand her feminist theories.

Also she said she does not have to answer any questions of readers if she doesn't want just because. It again to me shows the immaturity. Immaturity to write an article like this without thinking through the long term effects on others. Also as an influencer engagement is what you want. You cannot cherry pick what you want a reaction to be.

I actually don't see what she has gained from this. She works with brands and I'd imagine this controversy will reduce interest in working with her. She doesn't have google ads on her page so has gained no more income. She said herself the opposing arguments have hurt her lots. The poor guy who knows who he is is probably in a world of pain.

It has opened up the debate about consent but she has no interest in that topic. I can see why she now regrets publishing it.

Ya that's it Rosemary. We are all thickos are you are a weapon of knowledge. Lol.

mzungu

westernlass wrote: »

I've just watched her Facebook live and to me the crediblity of her article is less again. She said she dimisses others differing opinions of hers (she referenced boards) as the opponent not having the intelligence she has to understand her feminist theories.

I think no matter what side one comes down on (and I do think there was no consent), to hear that kind of glib dismissal is a shame. There was well reasoned points made on here by both sides, but especially by rape survivors who recounted their own experiences. To dismiss all that as a case of not being smart enough to understand 'feminist theory' is a bit off.

midlandsmissus

infogiver wrote: »

sara1 wrote: »

I messaged Rosemary about the McGregor article and told her it was out of context and she should change it. She messaged me back and asked me am I going to spend my whole life insisting she alters things she says. I said as long as she writes misguided, misinformed and I'll judged pieces of writing, yes I will. I also told her when she puts something out into the public sphere, guess what people will comment on it. She said "we all know McGregor has said that line about various things, not just MMA". I told her she was wrong and to check out the video. One of these days she'll say the wrong thing about the wrong person and end up with a law suit.

I was raped as a child, continually. If I had thought for one minute that "an awkward conversation" could get me away from this situation, hell I would have grasped that option with both hands. Every time I think about that line she wrote my heart sinks and I want to cry. I started off this thread believing she was raped, and right now I am ashamed I ever felt that way. This thread has had some excellent points from both sides, fair play to everyone who has made their points with more intelligence and articulation than I ever could.

You've 100 times more backbone and guts then that woman will ever ever have. I hope you find the peace and love you deserve.

I think you should be ashamed of this post.
What on earth has Rosemary done to deserve this level of vitriol?
Something deeply upset her to write about this. Either he raped her, or she was very upset because he kept pushing her into it. And she didn't know how to stand up to him.
Either way, what has she done wrong for you to say things that nasty?
She wrote an interesting point on her twitter. Should threads like this, aimed at and targeting a named person, be allowed to exist on boards? Is it a form of bullying? Can the mods review this?

pumpkin4life

anna080 wrote: »

Ya that's it Rosemary. We are all thickos are you are a weapon of knowledge. Lol.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

One of the reasons a certain percentage of women are attracted to fruitcake feminist theories.