Belfast rape trial discussion thread II

Mrsmum

ArthurDayne wrote: »

The only thing more impressive than your politician-like refusal to answer my question with a Yes or No is how oblivious you are to your own blatant hypocrisy. You delve into theatrics about feeling sexist insults in your flesh and pores etc and then you engage in blatant sexism by saying that I am 'mansplaining' -- inferring that the value of my opinions is lessened in your perspective by the mere fact that I am a man?

We may disagree on matters, and I don't believe myself to be any fairer-minded than anyone else (we are all the biased products of our personal circumstances, myself included) but I have been nothing but sincere with you. Yet, your response to my sincerity is to say that I am mansplaining to you?! That is an infuriating cop-out, both because you are devaluing my view purely because I am male and also that you are being astoundingly hypocritical.

Having said that, I don't believe you deserve to lose your job over your sexist remarks towards me there. You didn't mean to be sexist right? You saying that I'm mansplaining doesn't encapsulate your view on men I'm sure.

I do not think you are sexist purely because you made a remark that in writing may appear sexist. Perhaps you might extend the same courtesy to all those men you criticise for making sexist remarks that weren't meant with malice or hurtful intent?

Oh dear, you really don't like getting a woman's pov do you.

Faugheen

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Faugheen wrote: »

That's the key word. Opinion.

Look at his reaction. He looked like a man who was embarrassed.

Judging by what he said, he might not have gone unless he was asked to. So it's not a completely 'bogus' opinion.

Again, you've not given me any type of rebuttal. You've just got offended and dismissed my opinion.

I don't have any interest in rebutting because it was then and is now a non-issue.

What is interesting is your clingy need to under mine everything on the defendant's side of the events. By bogus guesswork and sensationalising.

How am I undermining the defence?

How was the idea them getting Best to go to a trial undermining them?

How were any of the facts that she was bleeding and hysterical undermining the defence?

How are they sensationalist? We have three members of the defence saying she was upset, and we have a photograph of her blood on his bed. No sensationalism there.

I am absolutely allowed to question the character of Jackson and Olding based on the events of the night in question. I do so by looking at facts and I form an opinion based on those facts. All of my opinions are based on the evidence that was presented in court.

Have I said anywhere in the thread that my opinion is the right one? No.

Do I demonstrate my opinion as fact? No.

Do you? Yes.

Now who is undermining who?

FrancieBrady

Faugheen wrote: »

How am I undermining the defence?

How was the idea them getting Best to go to a trial undermining them?

How were any of the facts that she was bleeding and hysterical undermining the defence?

How are they sensationalist? We have three members of the defence saying she was upset, and we have a photograph of her blood on his bed. No sensationalism there.

I am absolutely allowed to question the character of Jackson and Olding based on the events of the night in question. I do so by looking at facts and I form an opinion based on those facts. All of my opinions are based on the evidence that was presented in court.

Have I said anywhere in the thread that my opinion is the right one? No.

Do I demonstrate my opinion as fact? No.

Do you? Yes.

Now who is undermining who?

An opinion formed on sensationalised 'facts' such as a bed 'COVERED in HER blood'.

Go on outta that.

meeeeh

FrancieBrady wrote: »

How would he even begin to defend himself when you insist on guessing.
You previously with Grayson sensationalized parts of the evidence.

Completely bogus opinion.

Actually this one of the things that were after the order not report certain things was lifted. Irish Times states that because there was so much uproar that tgey issues statement he was there on the request of defence. It is also implied that some character witness who were listed at the beginning became reluctant. I don't know if that includes Rory Best and if it does, why he wasn't prepared to issue the statement but he was not used as character witness.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/belfast-rape-trial-the-legal-arguments-revealed-1.3458269?mode=amp

ArthurDayne

Mrsmum wrote: »

Oh dear, you really don't like getting a woman's pov do you.

You were the one who made the sexist insinuation that, simply because I am a man, my opinions on this matter are invalid or less valuable to you.

That makes you a hypocrite.

You could have at least attempted to defend your use of the term 'mansplaining' but instead have chosen the easy way out with a petty swipe. I hope we can debate again sometime without you telling me that my gender renders my opinions of lesser worth to you. Instead, I can only extrapolate that you're somewhat irked at having your hypocrisy called out and thrown back at you.

Faugheen

FrancieBrady wrote: »

An opinion formed on sensationalised 'facts' such as a bed 'COVERED in HER blood'.

Go on outta that.

There was blood on his bed. Yes or No?

The amount is immaterial, so shut up blathering on about a word when you know exactly what the point is.

meeeeh

ArthurDayne wrote: »

You could have at least attempted to defend your use of the term 'mansplaining' but instead have chosen the easy way out with a petty swipe. I hope we can debate again sometime without you telling me that my gender renders my opinions of lesser worth to you.

So tell me how does a woman with her life experience as a woman feel being called a slut. And how should she feel?

Yeah_Right

Faugheen wrote: »

There was blood on his bed. Yes or No?

The amount is immaterial, so shut up blathering on about a word when you know exactly what the point is.

You seem obsessed by there being some blood on the bed. Have you never had a sexual encounter that resulted in some bleeding? Because I find that really surprising.

ArthurDayne

meeeeh wrote: »

So tell me how does a woman with her life experience as a woman feel being called a slut. And how should she feel?

My apologies -- I don't understand what you're asking me there, or why. Would you mind elaborating and I'd be happy to hopefully give you a more fulfilled answer?

meeeeh

ArthurDayne wrote: »

My apologies -- I don't understand what you're asking me there, or why. Would you mind elaborating and I'd be happy to hopefully give you a more fulfilled answer?

You got very uppity around statement that you have no clue what woman feels when she is called a slut. I don't like term mansplainng but being told constantly here how being called slut is not disrespectful, like it's some sort of a term of endearment is a bit tiring.

I am just giving you a chance how woman with her experiences as woman should feel being called a slut. I wouldn'twant to hurt your feelings by telling you don't have a clue as a man. That would be sexist.

NAGDEFI

mfceiling wrote: »

Good lad....the first ever person I've put on my ignore list.

Great i've done the same. Every poster i've replied to here dealt with the issues and didn't get personal and insulting bar yourself.

NAGDEFI

tritium wrote: »

Thing is ‘at this time’ there’s no chance they’ll represent Ireland. With two years out of competitive action they’ll be well off the pace. If I was the irfu I’d put something out like they won’t be considered for 6 months knowing that they wouldn’t be ready anyway. Then again I’m of the view that what they’ve gone through to get to a not guilty verdict is more than enough if punishments required for the WhatsApp stuff in terms of time served

Competitive action at provincial level, wherever, though Tritium?

Yeah_Right

meeeeh wrote: »

So tell me how does a woman with her life experience as a woman feel being called a slut. And how should she feel?

I know you weren't asking me but if you were, I would need more info.
Who is calling her a slut?
What is the context of the conversation?
Once I know that then I would be able to determine whether she should give a **** or not.

NAGDEFI

Hopefully the IRFU and Ulster deal with the lads careers quickly. For everyone's sake.

For me the whole episode has taken away from what should have been a really positive year for Ireland with the Grand Slam win. It should be clocking up the pages on boards rather than being dwarfed by this very unfortunate night.

Anyone know of a timeline for decision making on the duo?

Calina

Yeah_Right wrote: »

meeeeh wrote: »

So tell me how does a woman with her life experience as a woman feel being called a slut. And how should she feel?

I know you weren't asking me but if you were, I would need more info.
Who is calling her a slut?
What is the context of the conversation?
Once I know that then I would be able to determine whether she should give a **** or not.

You don't get to determine that. She does.

tritium

NAGDEFI wrote: »

Competitive action at provincial level, wherever, though Tritium?

Im not sure I understand your question?

NAGDEFI

tritium wrote: »

Im not sure I understand your question?

You were saying 2 yrs away from Ireland and they've lost sharpness. I'm saying they'd be playing provincial equivalent rugby..

tritium

Calina wrote: »

You don't get to determine that. She does.

Do the folks being called rapists and misogynists also get to determine whether they should be offended by it? Only meeeh seems to think that’s different for some reason......

tritium

NAGDEFI wrote: »

You were saying 2 yrs away from Ireland and they've lost sharpness. I'm saying they'd be playing provincial equivalent rugby..

The point was around Jackson representing Ireland again (I suspect it’s a bit of a moot point for Olding tbh). You could apply it to Ulster too though, keep them “suspended” till end of season. Neither would be ready for match intensity straight away in all likelihood so it’s an approach that gives everyone something

OwlsZat

Any chance we can have a poll for the complainant

A) Was raped but not believed
Wasn't raped but lied when afraid of slut shaming


Are they the only possibilities?

ArthurDayne

meeeeh wrote: »

You got very uppity around statement that you have no clue what woman feels when she is called a slut. I don't like term mansplainng but being told constantly here how being called slut is not disrespectful, like it's some sort of a term of endearment is a bit tiring.

I am just giving you a chance how woman with her experiences as woman should feel being called a slut. I wouldn'twant to hurt your feelings by telling you don't have a clue as a man. That would be sexist.

Honestly, I will really have to go back and read my previous posts to identify where along the line I have been dictating to people how they should and should not feel about being called a slut or any other word for that matter. Even at that, when did I ever say that the word slut was not disrespectful ? All I have said, consistently, is that the use of bad language (most especially of all in private conversation) is highly context-sensitive and we have to be careful about using people's private statements as being definitive reflections of their views and opinions.

For fear of being called presumptuous, and in accordance with Mrsmum's logic that I simply could never hope to understand women, perhaps I can use a personal example from a different type of discrimination. I grew up in the North and right from early childhood have experience of being subjected to sectarian slurs. 'Fenian c*nt / Kill all Taigs smeared on a wall beside my primary school / walking past towering bonfires with all my cultural emblems engulfed in flames -- all in a context of political violence and killing. I lived in a majority Loyalist town and there was very little I could do about it. Did I like it if someone drove past and shouted 'Fenian c*nt' as I walked down the street? No. Did it hurt or make me feel angry? Yes.

I worked in a shop in the town alongside people from Protestant/Unionist backgrounds. We called eachother Fenians and Huns and all sorts -- it was a laugh. Do I have any doubt that some of those Unionist guys had ever used the term 'Fenian' among their own Unionist friends? Of course not. But these guys also hung out with Catholics / Nationalists, some had girlfriends from 'the other side'. These guys were not sectarian -- views had softened even if the divisive legacy of sectarianism lingered.

So what I am saying here is that the use of derogatory language is incredibly nuanced and context-sensitive from person-to-person. A random guy shouting 'Fenian c*nt' directly at me on the street would hurt me personally more than someone using the term in a Whatsapp group. I wouldn't just automatically assume that someone who makes a sectarian joke about me on some Whatsapp group behind my back is automatically a sectarian person who shoudl be cast from their job and their name dragged through the mud. I say 'Hun' all the time but on a serious level I couldn't care less if someone is a Protestant or a Unionist!

I'm not dictating to anyone on how they should feel -- nor am I saying that everyone should be like me. I am merely imploring people not to take the private comments that people make as being indicative of their true serious views. Imagine we enforced a world like that? A Dystopia of linguistic stringency where our every word at the dinner table or the pub is audited, scrutinised and interpreted as being utterly and completely indicative of what we believe and how we think people should be treated.

Is that the world you want? If not, then ask yourself why not. Are we to live in a world where everyone is crucified at the altar of unobtainable moral perfection ?

meeeeh

tritium wrote: »

Do the folks being called rapists and misogynists also get to determine whether they should be offended by it? Only meeeh seems to think that’s different for some reason......

I never said how men should feel when called misogynus, I said the word by itself is not a slur. That has nothing to do with my interpretation, that is dictionary definition.

Appledreams15

Yeah_Right wrote: »

You seem obsessed by there being some blood on the bed. Have you never had a sexual encounter that resulted in some bleeding? Because I find that really surprising.

I'm a woman, i never have. It would have to be fairly violent to cause bleeding

AudreyHepburn

OwlsZat wrote: »

Any chance we can have a poll for the complainant

A) Was raped but not believed
Wasn't raped but lied when afraid of slut shaming


Are they the only possibilities?

C) A misunderstanding - they genuinely believed she was consenting. She genuinely wasn’t and thought they knew but it wasn’t made clear
D) it was consensual but she regrets it

Yeah_Right

Calina wrote: »

You don't get to determine that. She does.

Apologies. I will rephrase. With the extra information, I would be able to offer an informed opinion on whether or not I think the word slut is offensive. Of course the woman in that hypothetical situation has the right to take offense no matter my opinion. And I have the right to think she is being ridiculous.

tretorn

meeeeh wrote: »

No I don't. People can have whatever conversations they want but if someone turns to be a dick when those conversations become public, then you can't force me to cheer them, to buy their sponsor products or similar.

How is it ok to refer to a man as a dick.

If you want to stop women being referred to as sluts then stop calling men dickheads and dicks.

You dont call women dicks so its derogatory to refer to a man as a dick.

Everyone woman under the age of thirty is to hand in her phone to the phone police now and if she has used the word dick in relation to a perceived fault with a person of the male gender she is to be fired.

As for people who state they are fully sure their sons dont talk derogatorily about women, you can bet the parents of the teen boys in Cork who ticked female classes names also thought their sons were whiter than white too.

Heads out of your asses you paragons of virtue, you havent a clue.

Neither Jackson or Oldings parents had a clue either, probably.

FrancieBrady

Faugheen wrote: »

There was blood on his bed. Yes or No?

The amount is immaterial, so shut up blathering on about a word when you know exactly what the point is.

Sure why not say there was 25 men there, and that she was tied to the bed.

The bed was NOT covered in her blood.

AudreyHepburn

Faugheen wrote: »

There was blood on his bed. Yes or No?

The amount is immaterial, so shut up blathering on about a word when you know exactly what the point is.

I think we will all have to accept there was some blood on the sheets - how much I don’t know.

But that doesn’t make it rape.

Yeah_Right

Appledreams15 wrote: »

I'm a woman, i never have. It would have to be fairly violent to cause bleeding

I'm not doubting you but I do find it surprising. I'm not talking about a pool of blood that soaks the mattress. Just a little bit. A few drops. I assumed everyone would have experienced that at some point.

FrancieBrady

Yeah_Right wrote: »

Apologies. I will rephrase. With the extra information, I would be able to offer an informed opinion on whether or not I think the word slut is offensive. Of course the woman in that hypothetical situation has the right to take offense no matter my opinion. And I have the right to think she is being ridiculous.

Even more ridiculous if you are a non involved third party taking offence.
The snowflake factor.