Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Gendered attack at bus stop in Limerick

Options
13»

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    martingriff
    Registered Users Posts: 10,700 ✭✭✭✭martingriff


    Kimsang wrote: »
    'Victims' say a lot of things in our victim-hood culture.

    I'm not disputing the fact that those people were attacked in London.
    I dispute the motivation for those attacks.
    Using hateful slurs during an attack doesn't constitute a hatecrime,

    The motivation for the attack is what constitutes a hate crime. Nazis rounded jews up in systematically gassed them to death based on their religion. That is a hate crime.

    No that's Genocide


  • Options
    #63
    jam_mac_jam
    Registered Users Posts: 4,719 ✭✭✭jam_mac_jam


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    The fact that so many people here missed the point OP was making is evidence enough to support that very point.

    I think that the point is clear enough and it's pathetic. They can't make it in the other thread so they are trying to do it here.

    It's not subtle. We get it.


  • Options
    #64
    Kimsang
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,170 ✭✭✭Kimsang


    martingriff wrote: »
    No that's Genocide

    So genocide is not a hate crime? What type of crime is genocide exactly?


  • Options
    #65
    martingriff
    Registered Users Posts: 10,700 ✭✭✭✭martingriff


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    The fact that so many people here missed the point OP was making is evidence enough to support that very point.

    Care to point it out as I can not see where he has any evidence


  • Options
    #66
    Kimsang
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,170 ✭✭✭Kimsang


    martingriff wrote: »
    Care to point it out as I can not see where he has any evidence

    The first page where everyone questioning what gender had to do with it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    martingriff
    Registered Users Posts: 10,700 ✭✭✭✭martingriff


    Kimsang wrote: »
    So genocide is not a hate crime? What type of crime is genocide exactly?

    Actually I agree it can be called a hate crime. Can I have your definition of a hate crime here is mine

    a crime, typically one involving violence, that is motivated by prejudice on the basis of race, religion, sexual orientation, or other grounds. So that assault in London is classified as a hate crime. The 1 in Limerick while awful and should not be used by you for your own logic is not classed as 1.


  • Options
    #68
    Kimsang
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,170 ✭✭✭Kimsang


    What is a gendered attack
    Scum bags attack innocent victim. What's the gender got to do with it? The scum bag trait exists among men and women.
    what difference does gender make (surely irrelevant??).
    What has gender to do with it? And apart from the gender of the victim and perpetrators have I missed something?
    Why is that clear?
    Why is it a hate crime?

    just a few nuggets


  • Options
    #69
    martingriff
    Registered Users Posts: 10,700 ✭✭✭✭martingriff


    Kimsang wrote: »
    The first page where everyone questioning what gender had to do with it.

    But you have not pointed why gender has anything to do with it. 5 people decided to attack a lone person waiting for a bus. It could very well have been a lone small guy they thought they could have taken on. you have not shown her been a women was the PRIMARY motivator.


  • Options
    #70
    banie01
    Registered Users Posts: 16,510 ✭✭✭✭banie01


    martingriff wrote: »
    . you have not shown her been a women was the PRIMARY motivator.

    I'd say that they have not shown the fact it was a woman to be ANY motivation.
    A group of people, predominantly female happened upon a lone victim and took advantage.
    Gender had nothing to do with it.

    Similar to wolves taking down a caribou, size isn't an issue when the predator is in a pack.


  • Options
    #71
    Kimsang
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,170 ✭✭✭Kimsang


    martingriff wrote: »
    Actually I agree it can be called a hate crime. Can I have your definition of a hate crime here is mine

    a crime, typically one involving violence, that is motivated by prejudice on the basis of race, religion, sexual orientation, or other grounds. So that assault in London is classified as a hate crime. The 1 in Limerick while awful and should not be used by you for your own logic is not classed as 1.

    Thanks for this, I believe this can highlight where we fundamentally disagree.

    Although I agree with your definition of hate crime, it might be more useful to use examples to see if that fits our definitions.

    I believe that a hate crime should be one that is motivated by a prejudice,
    so the involvement of hateful speech during an attack would not constitute one; so intent must be proven.

    If someone was attacked and called hateful slurs during attack.
    (for me not necessarily a hate crime)
    I believe you would call this a hatecrime, but by your very definition you have not proven motivation. The attacker could be opportunistic with their use of hateful words during an attack, it doesn't necessarily mean it motivated the attack.

    If a person has proven to have attacked the person because of that characteristic. i.e. they stated it in court
    (I think we agree this is a hate crime)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    Kimsang
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,170 ✭✭✭Kimsang


    martingriff wrote: »
    But you have not pointed why gender has anything to do with it. 5 people decided to attack a lone person waiting for a bus. It could very well have been a lone small guy they thought they could have taken on. you have not shown her been a women was the PRIMARY motivator.

    Please might I remind you what the OP said in the other thread:
    "Why do some men get upset, angry and offended at gay people existing, they could have just minded their own business on what other's people's sexuality is but they rather intervene in strangers lives and beat them up for being gay."

    This was a clear and obvious attack on men, and would not be tolerated if such stereotyping was applied to other protected classes.


  • Options
    #73
    ytpe2r5bxkn0c1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 32,688 ✭✭✭✭ytpe2r5bxkn0c1


    Kimsang wrote: »
    Please might I remind you what the OP said in the other thread:



    This was a clear and obvious attack on men, and would not be tolerated if such stereotyping was applied to other protected classes.

    This isn't the other thread though. Debate that over there.

    The OP here is a different scenario altogether.


  • Options
    #74
    Kimsang
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,170 ✭✭✭Kimsang


    Parker Nutritious Sometimes wrote: »
    This isn't the other thread though. Debate that over there.

    The OP here is a different scenarios altogether.

    Yes its called hypocrisy


  • Options
    #75
    ytpe2r5bxkn0c1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 32,688 ✭✭✭✭ytpe2r5bxkn0c1


    Kimsang wrote: »
    Yes its called hypocrisy

    Oh goodnight!


    Like's too short for this.


  • Options
    #76
    Kimsang
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,170 ✭✭✭Kimsang


    Parker Nutritious Sometimes wrote: »
    Oh goodnight!


    Like's too short for this.

    So unsubscribe and stop crying, or address the actual points raised. people like you are tiresome


  • Options
    #77
    Kimsang
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,170 ✭✭✭Kimsang


    martingriff wrote: »
    But you have not pointed why gender has anything to do with it. 5 people decided to attack a lone person waiting for a bus. It could very well have been a lone small guy they thought they could have taken on. you have not shown her been a women was the PRIMARY motivator.

    Exactly the point how are you missing this??? The other thread also hasn't pointed why gender has anything to do with it.

    They also have not shown why them being gay was the PRIMARY motivator.


  • Options
    #78
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 3,637 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Kimsang wrote: »
    So unsubscribe and stop crying, or address the actual points raised. people like you are tiresome

    People like you should be told to GFY a little more often.


  • Options
    #79
    KikiLaRue
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,283 ✭✭✭KikiLaRue


    Kimsang wrote: »
    Exactly the point how are you missing this??? The other thread also hasn't pointed why gender has anything to do with it.

    They also have not shown why them being gay was the PRIMARY motivator.

    Well the London police disagree with you and I’ll take their word over yours. They have been very clear that this was a homophobic attack.

    Common sense also says when you try to make a gay couple kiss and physically assault them because they refuse it’s homophobic.

    Trying to compare it with a random opportunistic attack makes no sense.

    You tried to set up a parallel to make your point but you described an entirely different situation so it didn’t work.


  • Options
    #80
    jam_mac_jam
    Registered Users Posts: 4,719 ✭✭✭jam_mac_jam


    I really don't get this? why does it bother people that homophobic attacks are being reported? I can't even begin to see the logic in this. And the same people will wonder when straight pride is.


  • Options
    #81
    martingriff
    Registered Users Posts: 10,700 ✭✭✭✭martingriff


    Kimsang wrote: »
    Please might I remind you what the OP said in the other thread:



    This was a clear and obvious attack on men, and would not be tolerated if such stereotyping was applied to other protected classes.

    If you want to start a thread on that then you should have instead and this is where I find you worse then that OP you tried to use an attack on a person to further your point.

    I have been trying to have a dialogue with you here and the other thread even admitting when I was wrong but now its clear to see you do not give a **** about either attacks your only trying to further an agenda that somehow all women are against men. I am out now of this


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    Sonny noggs
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,523 ✭✭✭Sonny noggs


    Toxic femininity?


  • Options
    #83
    martingriff
    Registered Users Posts: 10,700 ✭✭✭✭martingriff


    Kimsang wrote: »
    Exactly the point how are you missing this??? The other thread also hasn't pointed why gender has anything to do with it.

    They also have not shown why them being gay was the PRIMARY motivator.

    Okay this has been mention many times in that thread so I am going slowly (this will be my last post. Like an idiot I refreshed the page and came back in.

    The five people in that thread went over because they were 2 women were lesbians (Primary motive) They were harassed by the thugs to kiss and fondle each other (again because they were gay again primary motive) and when they refused they attacked them. So yes I do believe that it has been proven in that case it was a primary motive they were gay the attack happened


  • Options
    #84
    Kimsang
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,170 ✭✭✭Kimsang


    martingriff wrote: »
    If you want to start a thread on that then you should have instead and this is where I find you worse then that OP you tried to use an attack on a person to further your point.

    I have been trying to have a dialogue with you here and the other thread even admitting when I was wrong but now its clear to see you do not give a **** about either attacks your only trying to further an agenda that somehow all women are against men. I am out now of this

    Yet you ignore the threads of conversation we had where you stated your definition of hate crime.
    Why not reply to the points I made, instead of throwing wild vitriol around?

    The cognitive dissonance here is plain for all to see, that's why you're so emotional.


  • Options
    #85
    Kimsang
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,170 ✭✭✭Kimsang


    Quote:
    Originally Posted by martingriff View Post
    Actually I agree it can be called a hate crime. Can I have your definition of a hate crime here is mine

    a crime, typically one involving violence, that is motivated by prejudice on the basis of race, religion, sexual orientation, or other grounds. So that assault in London is classified as a hate crime. The 1 in Limerick while awful and should not be used by you for your own logic is not classed as 1.
    Thanks for this, I believe this can highlight where we fundamentally disagree.

    Although I agree with your definition of hate crime, it might be more useful to use examples to see if that fits our definitions.

    I believe that a hate crime should be one that is motivated by a prejudice,
    so the involvement of hateful speech during an attack would not constitute one; so intent must be proven.

    If someone was attacked and called hateful slurs during attack.
    (for me not necessarily a hate crime)
    I believe you would call this a hatecrime, but by your very definition you have not proven motivation. The attacker could be opportunistic with their use of hateful words during an attack, it doesn't necessarily mean it motivated the attack.

    If a person has proven to have attacked the person because of that characteristic. i.e. they stated it in court
    (I think we agree this is a hate crime)

    This is where YOU gave up on the conversation because of your cognitive dissonance.


  • Options
    #86
    KikiLaRue
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,283 ✭✭✭KikiLaRue


    Kimsang wrote: »
    Yet you ignore the threads of conversation we had where you stated your definition of hate crime.
    Why not reply to the points I made, instead of throwing wild vitriol around?

    The cognitive dissonance here is plain for all to see, that's why you're so emotional.

    Tell you what, since we’re all so thick, why don’t you explain what would need to happen to Call an attack against a gay couple a hate crime?

    You’ve established that you don’t think homophobic slurs + violence = a hate crime, so in your mind, what does?


  • Options
    #87
    Skylinehead
    Registered Users Posts: 11,690 ✭✭✭✭Skylinehead


    Mod: OP, no more threads.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement