Louise O'Neill on manned mission to Mars: "Why not go to Venus?" (MOD Warning post 1)

El_Duderino 09

Peter Denham wrote: »

Can safely say I was at many a party and never witnessed a rape. I generally don't hang around with scum though. I'm not sure consent classes will work on your friends, they just sound like scumbags.

Maybe stop blaming the system for your friend's awful acts and accept they are bad people?

It's funny because you're the champion of consent discussion but more than anyone here you make rape sound trivial.

Phew. Glad to hear you were invited to parties at uni. Scumbags and all that aside, are you sure you were never at a party where people who were too drunk to consent, had sex?

Now I’m sure all your friends have their pioneer badges and a white star for not cursing, but how would you know if anyone you know did something like that unless they told you?

El_Duderino 09

Peter Denham wrote: »

There's nothing legendary about intervening in a rape. You had a responsibility to speak up and didn't, instead you did nothing and expect the rest of us to listen to you harp on about consent.

And is that what you go around doing at parties? Checking to make sure everyone consented to everything they're doing? I’d say a party round your place is a real blast.

No. I didn’t report anything. I was there and I know the craic. It was considered normal behaviour but I don’t think it should be. That’s why I think discussion is a good idea.

Peter Denham

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

And is that what you go around doing at parties? Checking to make sure everyone consented to everything they're doing? I’d say a party round your place is a real blast.

No. I didn’t report anything. I was there and I know the craic. It was considered normal behaviour but I don’t think it should be. That’s why I think discussion is a good idea.

Nope I dont ( you said earlier you do though) But you said you saw guys tag teaming a drunk girl. So you were there watching thinking to yourself "this is wrong, we really need more consent classes." Then left and did nothing. Good man.

Or, you invented these stories and realised it makes you look bad, now you're stuck in a loop of hypocrisy. Either way you've added nothing of use to your cause, whatever that is. Good luck to you.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I think it depends on if you’re looking out for it. It’s good for you to be so blissfully ignorant of the world around you.

In those few years I saw some incredible things. Lads tagging each other in and out on drunk women

You even said earlier you look out for it parties! Hahaha. Sorry this is too easy.

We don't need consent classes, we need to reprimand bad behaviour. As you haven't got a coherent view, and keep contradicting yourself, I'd rather spend my time discussing this with someone with a more honest approach. Thanks .

El_Duderino 09

Peter Denham wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

And is that what you go around doing at parties? Checking to make sure everyone consented to everything they're doing? I’d say a party round your place is a real blast.

No. I didn’t report anything. I was there and I know the craic. It was considered normal behaviour but I don’t think it should be. That’s why I think discussion is a good idea.

Nope. But you said you saw guys tag teaming a drunk girl. So you were there watching thinking to yourself "this is wrong, we really need more consent classes." Then left and did nothing. Good man.

Or, you invented these stories and realised it makes you look bad, now you're stuck in a loop of hypocrisy. Either way you've added nothing of use to your cause, whatever that is. Good luck to you.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I think it depends on if you’re looking out for it. It’s good for you to be so blissfully ignorant of the world around you.

In those few years I saw some incredible things. Lads tagging each other in and out on drunk women

You even said earlier you look out for it parties! Hahaha. Sorry this is too easy.

We don't need consent classes, we need to reprimand bad behaviour. As you haven't got a coherent view, and keep contradicting yourself, I'd rather spend my time discussing this with someone with a more honest approach. Thanks .

I told you that. I don’t know why you think that’s a ‘gotcha’ moment. I saw those things happen and no, I didn’t go up and ask whether they had consented whilst in a fit state to do so. That’s not how real life works. You’ll find out some day when you venture off boards and into the real world, I’m sure.

You didn’t answer whether you’re sure you were never at a party where people hooked up who were too drunk to consent. Or how you would know if your own mates did anything they shouldn’t, unless they told you.

You seem so stuck in a black and white view of the world. I wonder how much of the world you’ve ever seen.

I suppose if you’ve only known people with perfect understanding of things and only seen people behave correctly, then you might think there are only good people and bad people. I happen to know otherwise.

El_Duderino 09

Anyway thanks for the chat. It’s good to know more about someone who would oppose discussion of a topic which I think is pretty important and potentially harmful when it goes wrong.

Peter Denham

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

That’s not how real life works. You’ll find out some day when you venture off boards and into the real world, I’m sure.

You seem so stuck in a black and white view of the world. I wonder how much of the world you’ve ever seen.

I've got 74 posts compared to your 6,700 and I'm the one that is stuck on boards. You really are the gift that keeps on giving.

You can throw insults all you like but I live in a world where I don't think everyone should do everything for me, if I see a rape I intervene. Not slink off and complain on the Internet about my mates while still being friends with them and blaming the system for their behaviour. Take action if you think something is wrong, don't run away. Bye now!

Walter Bishop

terryduff12 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/aliaabeed/status/1047871718369443846 ya think ya heard it all

I'm going to take wind-up account for 500:


https://twitter.com/AliaAbeed/status/1044724479719616518

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Peter Denham wrote: »

We don't need consent classes, we need to reprimand bad behaviour. As you haven't got a coherent view, and keep contradicting yourself, I'd rather spend my time discussing this with someone with a more honest approach. Thanks .

Surely it's better to educate in order to prevent the bad behaviour before it even happens?

Do you accept that people have wound up in court or otherwise been accused of sexual assault and used the excuse "she consented" or "I thought she consented", or do you believe every incident of non-consensual sexual activity (rape or otherwise) is pre-meditated and that the accused knew what he was doing and knows it was wrong?

Peter Denham

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Surely it's better to educate in order to prevent the bad behaviour before it even happens?

Do you accept that people have wound up in court or otherwise been accused of sexual assault and used the excuse "she consented" or "I thought she consented", or do you believe every incident of non-consensual sexual activity (rape or otherwise) is pre-meditated and that the accused knew what he was doing and knows it was wrong?

I believe people will say anything to get out of trouble. I'd say it's very rare that people rape each other by accident or dont know that they may be assaulting someone. So rare that it doesnt warrant everyone needing consent classes. Maybe you have some data? I'd be interested to read it. Anecdotal evidence isn't really evidence, I'm happy to have my mind changed with facts.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Peter Denham wrote: »

I believe people will say anything to get out of trouble.
I'd say it's very rare that people rape each other by accident or dont know that they may be assaulting someone. So rare that it doesnt warrant everyone needing consent classes. Maybe you have some data? I'd be interested to read it. Anecdotal evidence isn't really evidence, I'm happy to have my mind changed with facts.

The answer to my second question is "no" then. And you've ignored the first.

As regards data: data as to what, exactly? I haven't claimed anything, other than people can wind up in court accused of sexual assault when they believed they had consent. The Paddy Jackson/Stuart Olding case as previously mentioned. Ched Evans is another one I can think of off the top of my head. Considering a fair amount of sexual assault cases don't even get reported, I'm pretty sure the data you want is impossible to collect.

Which brings me back to the first question you didn't answer: is prevention better than acting too late?

You stated earlier it was possible to give consent while very drunk. I'd argue this is a very dangerous stance to take if you proceed to have sex with someone on that basis, as they may not remember. Not saying you're wrong but if you really want to stay out of court, you won't accept it as consent. And the very fact we have this disagreement means yes - consent awareness is nessecary.

(BTW - I'm not talking consent classes, I'm talking consent awareness as part of sex education classes)

Peter Denham

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

The answer to my second question is "no" then. And you've ignored the first.

As regards data: data as to what, exactly? I haven't claimed anything, other than people can wind up in court accused of sexual assault when they believed they had consent. The Paddy Jackson/Stuart Olding case as previously mentioned. Ched Evans is another one I can think of off the top of my head. Considering a fair amount of sexual assault cases don't even get reported, I'm pretty sure the data you want is impossible to collect.

Which brings me back to the first question you didn't answer: is prevention better than acting too late?

You stated earlier it was possible to give consent while very drunk. I'd argue this is a very dangerous stance to take if you proceed to have sex with someone on that basis, as they may not remember. Not saying you're wrong but if you really want to stay out of court, you won't accept it as consent. And the very fact we have this disagreement means yes - consent awareness is nessecary.

(BTW - I'm not talking consent classes, I'm talking consent awareness as part of sex education classes)

But you are implying there was a crime commited in those cases? Why do you think that? Those are poor examples in my opinion.

It's embedded in public knowledge that no means no, don't do something to someone that you wouldn't like done to you. So I'm asking how many cases were found to be in innocent breakdown in communication? None I would wager. You're again claiming that education is the key to stopping bad behaviour. Why? Where's the evidence for this ? That's the whole crux of my argument if you'll read a single one of my posts. I haven't ignored anything. (I'm happy to be proven wrong on this, I've been accused of having a political agenda, couldn't be further from the truth.)

The court doesn't accept "sorry your honour, no one told me it's wrong to rape my girlfriend" so why should I?

Consent education would do no harm, but you won't see a reduction in sexual assault cases. By that logic we would have no crime at all, as we're taught that from day 1 that crime is bad. It's removing the accountability of perpetrators of violence to say they don't know any better.

Anyway, I've covered everything in my posts, I'm not interested in repeating myself but would be interested in some stats and or data if anyone has some.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Peter Denham wrote: »

But you are implying there was a crime commited in those cases? Why do you think that? Those are poor examples in my opinion.

No I'm not. I said "people can wind up in court accused of sexual assault when they believed they had consent" - I never offered any opinion on whether or not a crime was cimmitted.

It's embedded in public knowledge that no means no, don't do something to someone that you wouldn't like done to you. So I'm asking how many cases were found to be in innocent breakdown in communication? None I would wager. You're again claiming that education is the key to stopping bad behaviour. Why? Where's the evidence for this ? That's the whole crux of my argument if you'll read a single one of my posts. I haven't ignored anything. (I'm happy to be proven wrong on this, I've been accused of having a political agenda, couldn't be further from the truth.)

Consent isn't "no means no" - consent is no answer means no. "mmmm" means no.

I'm not talking about "cases" - I'm talking about "incidents".

The court doesn't accept "sorry your honour, no one told me it's wrong to rape my girlfriend" so why should I?

Again - why does it only refer to incidents where a court is involved?

Consent education would do no harm, but you won't see a reduction in sexual assault cases. By that logic we would have no crime at all, as we're taught that from day 1 that crime is bad. It's removing the accountability of perpetrators of violence to say they don't know any better.

Anyway, I've covered everything in my posts, I'm not interested in repeating myself but would be interested in some stats and or data if anyone has some.

When you say you want stats and data - stats and data on what, exactly...?

How many legal sexual assault cases end in conviction or acquittal? I don't see how this will help because it's not my point.

My point is that consent awareness will reduce the incidents - not cases - of sexual transgressions - not necessarily assaults, or even crimes - where there has been assumed consent.

As to how one goes about gathering data when two thirds of sexual assualts are unreported (page 21 in case you're wondering) I have no idea.

Peter Denham

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

My point is that consent awareness will reduce the incidents - not cases - of sexual transgressions - not necessarily assaults, or even crimes - where there has been assumed consent. .

No means no is an obvious example I offered, the point was it's common knowledge to not force someone into something they don't want to do or appear uncomfortable doing. If you do, you've a serious character flaw.

Stats and data on sexual crimes that were committed due to a faulty understanding of the law in relation to consent. I know most aren't reported, so how many court cases have reached the conclusion of accidental rape? Or of the one third that have been reported, do you think a lot of these were accidental? As reported cases are all we have to go on there must be some figure you're basing your opinion on. Or are you simply taking the accused at their word when they say they thought they had consent? If so, why are you reluctant to factor in the possibly that they are lying to get off?

I'll reply to everything else tomorrow when I have more time. Just to clarify, you agree consent awareness will likely be useless in reducing sexual assaults etc but will more be aimed at reducing minor transgressions? What would these constitute? Why would education not reduce the liklihood of serious sexual assault in your opinion?

Also, is "I didn't know it was wrong" a reasonable defence for a crime? If a person genuinely didn't receive the necessary education that they shouldn't commit a crime should they be acquitted?

Apologies if I've taken you up wrong on any of the above.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Peter Denham wrote: »

No means no is an obvious example I offered, the point was it's common knowledge to not force someone into something they don't want to do or appear uncomfortable doing. If you do, you've a serious character flaw.

Stats and data on sexual crimes that were committed due to a faulty understanding of the law in relation to consent. I know most aren't reported, so how many court cases have reached the conclusion of accidental rape? Or of the one third that have been reported, do you think a lot of these were accidental? As reported cases are all we have to go on there must be some figure you're basing your opinion on. Or are you simply taking the accused at their word when they say they thought they had consent? If so, why are you reluctant to factor in the possibly that they are lying to get off?

I'll reply to everything else tomorrow when I have more time. Just to clarify, you agree consent awareness will likely be useless in reducing sexual assaults etc but will more be aimed at reducing minor transgressions? What would these constitute? Why would education not reduce the liklihood of serious sexual assault in your opinion?

Also, is "I didn't know it was wrong" a reasonable defence for a crime? If a person genuinely didn't receive the necessary education that they shouldn't commit a crime should they be acquitted?

Apologies if I've taken you up wrong on any of the above.

You've kind of taken me up wrong on a lot here: specificly, the point that I'm only refering to cases that wind up on court (I'm not) or what you think my attitude towards what I think consent awareness will or will not achieve.

What I'm basing my attitudes on is stories that I've heard from multiple people who have been assaulted by people who seemed not to care. Problem is, this, to you, will all be anecdotal, so there's not much point in me raising the issue. Examples of things I've been told are "he didn't seem to care - he just thought it was a laugh in front of his friends","she's a woman, I'm a man - who's going to believe me?" and "I was kinda drunk and I don't remember whether I said yes or not.".

Peter Denham

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

You've kind of taken me up wrong on a lot here: specificly, the point that I'm only refering to cases that wind up on court (I'm not) or what you think my attitude towards what I think consent awareness will or will not achieve.

What I'm basing my attitudes on is stories that I've heard from multiple people who have been assaulted by people who seemed not to care. Problem is, this, to you, will all be anecdotal, so there's not much point in me raising the issue. Examples of things I've been told are "he didn't seem to care - he just thought it was a laugh in front of his friends","she's a woman, I'm a man - who's going to believe me?" and "I was kinda drunk and I don't remember whether I said yes or not.".

OK. So really you can't really offer anything in terms of how consent education will reduce sexual assaults etc

And the anecdotal evidence you provide points towards bad behaviour from bad people who didn't care if what they were doing is right or wrong. People you said before that education wouldn't work on. The argument is about whether consent education is needed to reduce rape or assault being committed out of ignorance so those stories have no relevance. I sympathise with the people you mention though, as there's way too many people out there that will excuse the awful actions done to them as lack of education. Be it false accusations or sexual assault. I've definitely no idea how your friend drinking too much and being unable to remember the previous night can be remedied by consent education, we already have drink awareness campaigns and they don't seem to work.

So really you think we absolutely need consent education...just because? There's no harm chucking it in with sex education, it absolutely is not a pressing matter though and you won't see a reduction in sexual violence. As I've said from the start, bad people do bad things.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Peter Denham wrote: »

OK. So really you can't really offer anything in terms of how consent education will reduce sexual assaults etc

Correct. Because it doesn't exist. But that doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

It would be like me telling you to prove the alternative: its not proveable one way or the other.

And the anecdotal evidence you provide points towards bad behaviour from bad people who didn't care if what they were doing is right or wrong. People you said before that education wouldn't work on. The argument is about whether consent education is needed to reduce rape or assault being committed out of ignorance so those stories have no relevance. I sympathise with the people you mention though, as there's way too many people out there that will excuse the awful actions done to them as lack of education. Be it false accusations or sexual assault. I've definitely no idea how your friend drinking too much and being unable to remember the previous night can be remedied by consent education, we already have drink awareness campaigns and they don't seem to work.

No, it's bad behaviour from people who though "it doesn't hurt" as opposed to "I don't care".

The drinking girl was in the wrong: my point being that consent is something women need to be aware of as well as men.

So really you think we absolutely need consent education...just because? There's no harm chucking it in with sex education, it absolutely is not a pressing matter though and you won't see a reduction in sexual violence. As I've said from the start, bad people do bad things.

No, not "just because" - if you believe that, you haven't reading my posts.

And AGAIN - I'm saying consent awareness as part of sex education - not consent education. Said it a few times now, but you always seem to change it back.

The difference is that there' a bit more to it then just telling someone to not thing "I'm going to do what I want to this person and I don't care if they agree to it or not." And if your question is "such as what?" then it kind of proves my point.

Peter Denham

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Correct. Because it doesn't exist. But that doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

How is consent relevant to your friend drinking so much that they forget the previous night?Surely that falls under drink awareness, which we have plenty of and it still didn't work on her. You were also the one that stated the people involved didn't care, you're changing that now.

Actually there's plenty of evidence of other awareness campaigns that have failed or had little impact, drink and drug awareness, speeding. The mere fact that we still have crime is evidence that awareness is isn't very effective.

That's what has formed my opinion. So the onus is on you to explain how this is not only necessary, but will work? You haven't even come close to answering that. You've dodged it repeatedly actually. You've said awareness will prevent the crime, but have offered nothing to back this up, so why say it?

El_Duderino 09

Peter Denham wrote: »

You can throw insults all you like but I live in a world where I don't think everyone should do everything for me, if I see a rape I intervene. Not slink off and complain on the Internet about my mates while still being friends with them and blaming the system for their behaviour. Take action if you think something is wrong, don't run away. Bye now!

The action I choose to take isto support open discussion of consent so people make more informed decisions.

El_Duderino 09

Peter Denham wrote: »

No means no is an obvious example I offered, the point was it's common knowledge to not force someone into something they don't want to do or appear uncomfortable doing. If you do, you've a serious character flaw.

Stats and data on sexual crimes that were committed due to a faulty understanding of the law in relation to consent. I know most aren't reported, so how many court cases have reached the conclusion of accidental rape? Or of the one third that have been reported, do you think a lot of these were accidental? As reported cases are all we have to go on there must be some figure you're basing your opinion on. Or are you simply taking the accused at their word when they say they thought they had consent? If so, why are you reluctant to factor in the possibly that they are lying to get off?
/quote]

No means no but what exactly means yes? That’s actually a much more interesting discussion than most people give credit for. Some people think consent can be assumed unless explicitly stated otherwise. Some people think consent needs only body language. Some people think consent can be revoked only with a clear and unequivocal stop. Some people think ‘ah stahp’ is stop while other think ‘ah stahp’ is flirty ‘yes’.

Some people think it’s fine to consent when drunk, so what happens when they don’t remember consenting and believe they were assaulted?

I’d imagine the 2thirds which aren’t reported contain a lot of these marginal issues which is precisely why they’re not reported. Because the people involved aren’t sure whether there was an assault or not.

Hence the need for discussion to standardise public understanding of consent.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Peter Denham wrote: »

How is consent relevant to your friend drinking so much that they forget the previous night?Surely that falls under drink awareness, which we have plenty of and it still didn't work on her. You were also the one that stated the people involved didn't care, you're changing that now.

Actually there's plenty of evidence of other awareness campaigns that have failed or had little impact, drink and drug awareness, speeding. The mere fact that we still have crime is evidence that awareness is isn't very effective.

That's what has formed my opinion. So the onus is on you to explain how this is not only necessary, but will work? You haven't even come close to answering that. You've dodged it repeatedly actually. You've said awareness will prevent the crime, but have offered nothing to back this up, so why say it?

Work, in terms of what? I'm saying it will reduce potential misunderstandings and no, I can't prove it as there has never been a factual study on the topic of potential misunderstandings - but doesn't mean I'm automatically wrong and it's automatically a waste of time. My point is that it should be an important part of sexual education. Sex is about communication, so why would you want to cut an important part of communication out of sex education?

On the subject of awareness drives, I'd argue that drink awareness is working - people seem to be far more aware of how much alcohol they're consuming these days and the long term effects of binge drinking. Statistics show that as a nation we are drinking less than we used to, but obviously co-relation is not causation. Can YOU give me FACTS to PROVE awareness drives do NOT work?

I might have said reduce crime, but I did not say prevent crime. Not totally - if you think I meant that, you're being niave. Some crimes are going to happen regardless. But even one case is prevented, it will have reduced crime.

Outlaw Pete

Free performance of Asking For It tonight in the Abbey:

https://www.abbeytheatre.ie/free-first-previews/

20 minutes in I shall be invading the stage holding a banner which says: "DOWN WITH THIS SORT OF THING!!"

py2006

I wonder why its free?

Outlaw Pete

There's a free performance of all the plays at the Abbey this year.

skooterblue2

py2006 wrote: »

I wonder why its free?

The world outdoor paint drying Championships are on over the road. Looks like they will have a stiff opposition with the massive turn out to that. (For anyone not in Dublin its the wettest coldest night of the year, so far.)

Muscles Schultz

Happy Christian Holiday Louise if you’re reading !

yerwanthere123

Every time I see this thread re-emerge I always think "oh jesus, what's she said now".

Thankfully not the case this time!

Augme

yerwanthere123 wrote: »

Every time I see this thread re-emerge I always think "oh jesus, what's she said now".

Thankfully not the case this time!

I always think "the obsessed men of after-hoursstill haven't given up."

yerwanthere123

Augme wrote: »

I always think "the obsessed men of after-hoursstill haven't given up."

Well when she writes deeply sexist nonsense about men then they're entitled to complain. But equally it's a bit lame to bump the thread when she hasn't actually said anything

AndyBoBandy

I’d say Christmas dinner in louise’s house is a barrel of laughs, especially when dad takes the carving knife out to slice up the Turkey, a role traditionally synonymous with the man of the house!!

Hector Savage

She probably gets really pissed off when people wish her a Merry/Happy Christmas ... but then is creaming herself during Ramadan saying HAPPY RAMADAN to everyone ...