Al Porter's excuse was that he was being flamboyant

OhChicken

Just reading Al Porter's statement in relation to recent allegations and I'm simply horrified that he has suggested that he was "merely expressing his flamboyant persona". Let's face it gays, he was obviously suggesting that he was being camp and openly gay as if what he did was associated behaviour - grab random guy's c0cks cause that's what we like. There can be a perception that gay people can be morally ignorant hound dogs and his statement does not help this.

I for one will be seeking a refund for the tickets I booked for this year's Panto.

Am I alone for feeling let down by these revelations of Ireland's most famous gay?

Mars Bar

OhChicken wrote: »

Just reading Al Porter's statement in relation to recent allegations and I'm simply horrified that he has suggested that he was "merely expressing his flamboyant persona". Let's face it gays, he was obviously suggesting that he was being camp and openly gay as if what he did was associated behaviour - grab random guy's c0cks cause that's what we like. There can be a perception that gay people can be morally ignorant hound dogs and his statement does not help this.

I for one will be seeking a refund for the tickets I booked for this year's Panto.

Am I alone for feeling let down by these revelations of Ireland's most famous gay?

That would be Graham Norton.

OhChicken

Mars Bar wrote: »

That would be Graham Norton.

Forgot about him, but in fairness he is effectively British.

The Sunday Independent states that Al is our most famous gay.

endacl

OhChicken wrote: »

Forgot about him, but in fairness he is effectively British.

How?

OhChicken wrote: »

The Sunday Independent states that Al is our most famous gay.

Oh. OK. Sindo. I'm out...

mistersifter

yeah, as I was just saying on another thread , his whole act was based off a harmful stereotype about gay men being sex-obsessed deviants who are waiting to grope any person - gay or not. . Seems he's taking things one step further in his statement today.

munster87

OhChicken wrote: »

Forgot about him, but in fairness he is effectively British.

The Sunday Independent states that Al is our most famous gay.

Louis Walsh?

One eyed Jack

Not to let the discussion be side-tracked by who is or isn't the most well-known personality in Ireland who happens to be ABCH, his attempt to excuse his behaviour is really just that - inexcusable. It's predicated on the assumption of adopting a persona commonly associated with gay men by people who simply don't know any better.

Al Porter knew better at the time, and he knows better than to use that excuse now, but he appears to be taking a leaf out of Kevin Spaceys book in associating his excuse for his behaviour with a common (albeit misguided) stereotype of gay men.

OhChicken

You would really need to be fond of playing devil's advocate to believe that it simply never occurred to Porter that his behaviour was inappropriate and had an upsetting impact on those who were on the receiving end. At 24 he's not a product of some Mad-Men type upbringing where feeling up women (or men, in this case) is seen as no big deal. He should know as part of basic 'right v wrong' that groping someone without their consent is not an acceptable way to behave, even if it's supposedly done with humourous intent rather than to intimidate.

What he needs to do now is personally apologise to those he's hurt, keep himself away from all media spotlight, seriously reflect on how he treats people and resolve to never subject anyone else in that situation again. That's pretty much the bare minimum he needs to do if he wants to redeem himself.

OhChicken wrote: »

I for one will be seeking a refund for the tickets I booked for this year's Panto.

I'm assuming the part has a standby or an understudy who could take the role? Just say for example this scandal never arose but he fell and broke his leg the night before the first performance; surely the role is recast rather than the whole show being called off? If not, and he doesn't step aside, public pressure will probably cause the venue to pull it anyway. Can't imagine it would go ahead as planned.

orangerhyme

OhChicken wrote: »

Just reading Al Porter's statement in relation to recent allegations and I'm simply horrified that he has suggested that he was "merely expressing his flamboyant persona". Let's face it gays, he was obviously suggesting that he was being camp and openly gay as if what he did was associated behaviour - grab random guy's c0cks cause that's what we like. There can be a perception that gay people can be morally ignorant hound dogs and his statement does not help this.

I for one will be seeking a refund for the tickets I booked for this year's Panto.

Am I alone for feeling let down by these revelations of Ireland's most famous gay?

I'm certainly not condoning his actions but I know lots of straight male mates who would grab another lads privates for a laugh.
It was done to me lots of times, kinda like lads drunken shenanigans type of thing. Particularly around that age group of 18 - 25.

I wasn't offended but maybe the difference in this case was that they weren't really mates, it was a work environment albeit a pub/comedy club and also maybe cos Al Porter is gay and groping straight lads that it has a sexual element to it.

I'm not condoning it but if a mate grabbed my privates, I'd consider it just a laugh but this situation is obviously different.

Girls have done it to me also, not even friends just drunk ones in bars.
Again I didn't find it offensive, but if a guy groped a woman's privates, I'd consider it a horrendous sexual assault.

RabbleRouser2k

orangerhyme wrote: »

I'm certainly not condoning his actions but I know lots of straight male mates who would grab another lads privates for a laugh.
It was done to me lots of times, kinda like lads drunken shenanigans type of thing. Particularly around that age group of 18 - 25.

I wasn't offended but maybe the difference in this case was that they weren't really mates, it was a work environment albeit a pub/comedy club and also maybe cos Al Porter is gay and groping straight lads that it has a sexual element to it.

I'm not condoning it but if a mate grabbed my privates, I'd consider it just a laugh but this situation is obviously different.

Girls have done it to me also, not even friends just drunk ones in bars.
Again I didn't find it offensive, but if a guy groped a woman's privates, I'd consider it a horrendous sexual assault.

Not lgbt myself, and not condoning the groping either, but from accounts, he reached down inside their clothes, even inside their underwear-that's worse than groping. Skin to genital contact in that case, without consent, is assault. Also, there was incidents where he grabbed people in toilets and bathrooms, again-no consent.

I'm confused about how you think one is a laugh, but one is horrendous assault. That to me, is hypocritical. Not an attack on you, more a critique of the opinion.

orangerhyme

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

Not lgbt myself, and not condoning the groping either, but from accounts, he reached down inside their clothes, even inside their underwear-that's worse than groping. Skin to genital contact in that case, without consent, is assault. Also, there was incidents where he grabbed people in toilets and bathrooms, again-no consent.

I'm confused about how you think one is a laugh, but one is horrendous assault. That to me, is hypocritical. Not an attack on you, more a critique of the opinion.

That's the big difference I guess; he actually groped inside the underwear, whereas the incidents I'm talking about were always outside.

I agree it's hypocritical but just reality. The difference is men can generally physically defend themselves from women and are very rarely raped by women and obviously the opposite is true the other way.
Just the sense of threat and disgust and probably fear a woman would feel, whereas a man in that situation would in general just laugh it off.

I'll probably be killed for saying this but what Al Porter was described as doing doesn't seem too big of a deal to me really.
If it happened to me I wouldn't care. They're grown men, then can handle it.

They're not women or children.

Like how bad did the victims feel? Actually traumatised or was it just an annoyance?

Needs Must

The only thing he is really sorry about is that it became public knowledge. Now he is on damage limitation mode with the help of the legal profession. Ah yea the customary divert tactic and do anything to get off a sinking ship.

snowflaker

https://twitter.com/thealporter/status/932293263658246144

What a shyt non apology

snowflaker

orangerhyme wrote: »

That's the big difference I guess; he actually groped inside the underwear, whereas the incidents I'm talking about were always outside.

I agree it's hypocritical but just reality. The difference is men can generally physically defend themselves from women and are very rarely raped by women and obviously the opposite is true the other way.
Just the sense of threat and disgust and probably fear a woman would feel, whereas a man in that situation would in general just laugh it off.

I'll probably be killed for saying this but what Al Porter was described as doing doesn't seem too big of a deal to me really.
If it happened to me I wouldn't care. They're grown men, then can handle it.

They're not women or children.

Like how bad did the victims feel? Actually traumatised or was it just an annoyance?

Fcuk me! Are you implying only women and children can be victims?

Annasopra

OhChicken wrote: »

Forgot about him, but in fairness he is effectively British.

The Sunday Independent states that Al is our most famous gay.

Sindo? You're quoting that trash? I agree with previous poster - cant take you seriously there

Annasopra

orangerhyme wrote: »

I'm certainly not condoning his actions but I know lots of straight male mates who would grab another lads privates for a laugh.
It was done to me lots of times, kinda like lads drunken shenanigans type of thing. Particularly around that age group of 18 - 25.

I wasn't offended but maybe the difference in this case was that they weren't really mates, it was a work environment albeit a pub/comedy club and also maybe cos Al Porter is gay and groping straight lads that it has a sexual element to it.

I'm not condoning it but if a mate grabbed my privates, I'd consider it just a laugh but this situation is obviously different.

Girls have done it to me also, not even friends just drunk ones in bars.
Again I didn't find it offensive, but if a guy groped a woman's privates, I'd consider it a horrendous sexual assault.

I don't think grabbing genitals is a trivial laughing matter at all whether it is male or female.

Annasopra

orangerhyme wrote: »

That's the big difference I guess; he actually groped inside the underwear, whereas the incidents I'm talking about were always outside.

I agree it's hypocritical but just reality. The difference is men can generally physically defend themselves from women and are very rarely raped by women and obviously the opposite is true the other way.
Just the sense of threat and disgust and probably fear a woman would feel, whereas a man in that situation would in general just laugh it off.

I'll probably be killed for saying this but what Al Porter was described as doing doesn't seem too big of a deal to me really.
If it happened to me I wouldn't care. They're grown men, then can handle it.

They're not women or children.

Like how bad did the victims feel? Actually traumatised or was it just an annoyance?

I couldnt disagree more. I am not getting into the issue of Al Porter here at all. I find your opinions on men here extremely bizarre. You seem to be painting all men as both physically and emotionally strong and able to prevent domsetic violence/sexual assault and able to emotionally deal with it. You also seem to think that men can't ever really be sexually assaulted.

If a person had put his hands down your boxers to feel your penis and your anus how would you feel? Perhaps you might feel merely annoyed but please do not project your feelings onto all other men.

OhChicken

OhChicken wrote: »

f Ireland's most famous gay?

Rory O'Neill?

NIMAN

Surely the leader of the country is the most famous gay in Ireland?

oal22

The man is delusional if he thinks that shoving his hand down someones underwear, without consent, is just a flamboyant character trait. His sexual orientation or the gender of the victim/victims is completely irrelevant - what he did is vile and disgusting, as is his response. His "apology" is pathetic. He is basically saying "yeah, i did these things, but its only me being flamboyant and I'm sorry if the people I groped didn't like it", subtext being that if they didn't like it, they just don't "get" his humor. He doesn't come across as being in the least but remorseful, if anything, he sounds annoyed that people are up in arms about it at all.

and i'm sorry but "decades in the entertainment business". Decades???? hes 24!!!!

Goodshape

orangerhyme wrote: »

Particularly around that age group of 18 - 25.

That does stand out for me in this story. Al Porter is 24, maybe 25? And he's been working for at least 5 years. That's very young.

He's a feckin' eejit, obviously, but maybe (just maybe) doesn't need his entire career and reputation publicly and irrevocably destroyed.

difference in this case was that they weren't really mates, it was a work environment

That is the, huge, difference here. I know the kind of lads and mates you're talking about but there's a massive difference between a group of mates and someone you work with.

Jesus, the more you read of this the worse it gets. Inappropriately fondling someone's genitals or ass through clothing is bad enough: it may be construed as humourous and harmless by some but it's still wrong. But to actually stick your hand down someone's underwear to touch them in that manner, without their consent, is on another level.

Then there's the allegation of him groping a lad who was in a psychiatric hospital. If that allegation is true then maybe he is just beyond redemption. To take advantage of someone in an extremely vulnerable position warrants far more than a mere apology, if true then he should be brought to court.

orangerhyme

Goodshape wrote: »

That does stand out for me in this story. Al Porter is 24, maybe 25? And he's been working for at least 5 years. That's very young.

He's a feckin' eejit, obviously, but maybe (just maybe) doesn't need his entire career and reputation publicly and irrevocably destroyed.



That is the, huge, difference here. I know the kind of lads and mates you're talking about but there's a massive difference between a group of mates and someone you work with.

Yeah I'm not so sure also.

Was it just misguided outrageous behaviour with guys who weren't really as good mates with him as he thought?

Guys do really weird stuff with mates when drunk or on lads holidays or stags etc...

I've seen it and being part of it.

Stuff that if you did to a woman would be horrendous but to a mate is just harmless fun.

Like a guy passes out and photos are taken of other guys penis on his face and in his hands....

Stupid childish stuff I know

Goodshape

Ah, I'm not really defending his behaviour to be honest. What a group of mates might deem acceptable in their own company on holidays or on a stag night is a world away from what is acceptable behaviour towards work colleagues or strangers/acquaintances.

But maybe at 24 he's young enough to be dumb enough to think it was "just a laugh", and young enough to learn from his mistakes.

Annasopra

orangerhyme wrote: »

Yeah I'm not so sure also.

Was it just misguided outrageous behaviour with guys who weren't really as good mates with him as he thought?

Guys do really weird stuff with mates when drunk or on lads holidays or stags etc...

I've seen it and being part of it.

Stuff that if you did to a woman would be horrendous but to a mate is just harmless fun.

Like a guy passes out and photos are taken of other guys penis on his face and in his hands....

Stupid childish stuff I know

I still dont get your point at all. Do you really think putting your hand down someones boxer shorts to feel their penis and/or anus is "harmless fun" - Have you seen your mates do that? Have you been part of that kind of thing? And I still completely and utterly struggle with your inegalitarian view that if something is done to a woman she is a victim but if something is done to a matter it is only "stupid harmless fun" - this makes no sense to me at all.

RabbleRouser2k

orangerhyme wrote: »

That's the big difference I guess; he actually groped inside the underwear, whereas the incidents I'm talking about were always outside.

I agree it's hypocritical but just reality. The difference is men can generally physically defend themselves from women and are very rarely raped by women and obviously the opposite is true the other way.
Just the sense of threat and disgust and probably fear a woman would feel, whereas a man in that situation would in general just laugh it off.

I'll probably be killed for saying this but what Al Porter was described as doing doesn't seem too big of a deal to me really.
If it happened to me I wouldn't care. They're grown men, then can handle it.

They're not women or children.

Like how bad did the victims feel? Actually traumatised or was it just an annoyance?

Sorry, I've read your other post-and I think you are completely messed up in your thinking.
Seriously-'just the craic' is what you deem sexual assault.

Have you read Terry Crews account of being groped? The dude he was groped by was in such a position of power, he could ruin him. So Crews could not thump the guy like he so deserved to have been. And Crews is a muscular guy, played football, could probably knock a guy out in one punch.

The 'raped by women' stat is also one that is heavily, heavily disputed-since one can argue it's actually roughly the same as women raped by men. The difference is mean are less likely to report. You act as if it's all about defence, but again, in cases like Crews-it's not strength, it's power, position. He didn't laugh it off afterwards. Neither did James Van der Beek.

What he's described as doing is a majorly big deal to me-it's unwanted, uninvited groping. Nobody can 'handle it' when it comes to harassment or assault and that kind of thinking has gotten us into mental illness epidemic.

They felt bad enough that they spoke up-or avoided him entirely before this. So that indicates some element of trauma.

OhChicken

http://waterfordwhispersnews.com/2017/11/20/we-spent-the-day-disguised-as-a-flamboyant-man-to-see-what-we-could-get-away-with/

Manion

Goodshape wrote: »

But maybe at 24 he's young enough to be dumb enough to think it was "just a laugh", and young enough to learn from his mistakes.

If he admits what he did, spends a reasonable amount of time in prison, is registered on the sex offenders register and attends counselling I'm happy to say welcome back to society. Until then fuk this guy.

368100

Manion wrote: »

If he admits what he did, spends a reasonable amount of time in prison, is registered on the sex offenders register and attends counselling I'm happy to say welcome back to society. Until then fuk this guy.

That's the thing....have the guys that made the allegations reported to the Gardaí for charges to be made? If it was me it happened to and i felt violated in some way, Id want to see him charged for the assault.

Manion

368100 wrote: »

That's the thing....have the guys that made the allegations reported to the Gardaí for charges to be made? If it was me it happened to and i felt violated in some way, Id want to see him charged for the assault.

You don't need a victim to press charges to admit guilt. If there is one thing we know for sure is that victims of sexual assault massively under report.

Sh!teinabucket

Haven't been following this at all but after reading these allegations...jesus fcukin Christ!

I'm no meself and have been groped before by both male and females a couple of times over the years,have laughed it off tbh.

By if anyone jammed their hand down me bleedin bags to cop a feel I'd be royally pissed off and if it was a bloke I'd be attempting to break his fcukin fingers/wrist for his troubles whilst removing said hand...

That sh!t is not on at all(and in a work setting?!? The mind boggles...)

I've heard him say he's not particularly liked amongst the Irish comedy scene as he rose to such dizzying heights so quick,It's almost certainly because of behaviour like this I'd imagine.

Besides he's not in the slightest bit funny."ooh,look at me!I'm an outrageous gay who lives with my parents!"
That's the entire sum of his act, it wasn't funny when he first came to prominence,It sure as **** ain't funny now.

Personally I hope he gets the book thrown at him for this crap.