“Ireland has a rape culture”

El_Duderino 09

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I’m being serious El_D. The best way for people to learn about sex is from the people who they are interested in having sex with.

Education in basic manners is already practiced, and where parents consent, their children are permitted to participate in relationships and sex education in school. Nobody is replacing education in basic manners with education in relationships and sex education, it’s offered to parents as an option to which they can either give their consent or not.

If you really want the most accurate information as to how someone feels about anything, then surely you go to the source which is the individual or individuals as opposed to getting it second hand from someone teaching about it from their perspective as though their opinions are representative of the infinite experiences and perceptions of people who aren’t them. That’s where as much as I know you don’t like the idea - people learn from their experiences based upon trial and error based upon judgment formed of their lived experiences as opposed to hypothetical circumstances they may never experience and elevating those circumstances to the point where they impact in a negative way upon their relationships with other people by assuming the worst of other people.

Yeah. I’m not sure you’re being serious. I asked if you would replace sex and relationships education with “basic manners”, since you’re claiming that’s all children need. Basic manners are great. But it doesn’t really explain the intricacies of sexual consent.

And since you don’t think there’s any need for any sexual consent education, is it fair to say to think “basic manners” are practiced by everyone in everyday life? You don’t see bad manners being practiced?

Anyway, your wacky solution is in no danger of being taken seriously. There are groups who actually care about the topic who are actively engaging with government. Lobbying to get consent included in children’s education. I’m not sure you’ll agree with those groups either.

El_Duderino 09

Veritas Libertas wrote: »

Remember the context here I keep having to keep this on topic, you keep flagrantly throwing it off.

I was asking you to supply evidence why consent classes are a good thing. Every time you propose it, I challenge it with questions.

Then you answer my questions with questions that insinuate I'm the bad guy in some way. Every time attacking me. I'm done with this, if you can't explain your position to someone willing to change their mind, then maybe you might need to retake a look at your position.

Yes. You said you think 13 year olds understand sexual consent. If you think that, then you’re miles off the mark.

If you think 13 year olds understand sexual consent consent then there wouldn’t be any news for consent discussions. But obviously 13 year olds don’t understand sexual consent. That’s why they should have the opportunity to discuss sexual consent with an adult trained to answer their questions.

It’s simple really. But since you think everyone already knows everything about consent, then there won’t be any convincing you. You’re wrong obviously, but you don’t be convinced by me anyway.

One eyed Jack

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Yeah. I’m not sure you’re being serious. I asked if you would replace sex and relationships education with “basic manners”, since you’re claiming that’s all children need. Basic manners are great. But it doesn’t really explain the intricacies of sexual consent.

Again, since you don’t appear to accept what I told you the first time - I’m being serious, and I’m extending you the courtesy of taking you seriously. That’s just basic manners in action. Your question about replacing basic manners with sex and relationships education doesn’t arise, because sex and relationships education is an additional service offered to parents and they have the choice of whether or not to consent to their children participating in the program. Again - basic manners in action - asking parents do they consent to their children receiving education about sex and relationships. Some parents give their consent, some parents do not. The same principle of consent applies to sex - basic manners to ask someone do they want to have sex, and it’s also basic manners to take them seriously when they say no. There are no intricacies to sexual consent that you haven’t just made up, and the list you come up with constitutes an infinite amount of potential scenarios given the intricacies and nuances of each and every scenario. Even if you were to opine every scenario you could think of, I can guarantee you wouldn’t be able to cover them all.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

And since you don’t think there’s any need for any sexual consent education, is it fair to say to think “basic manners” are practiced by everyone in everyday life? You don’t see bad manners being practiced?

Of course I observe instances where people ignore what they have been taught and practice bad manners. I don’t imagine it’s all that different to people who choose to ignore what they have been taught about anything, including if they have been taught about the intricacies of sexual consent and choose to ignore what they have been taught.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Anyway, your wacky solution is in no danger of being taken seriously. There are groups who actually care about the topic who are actively engaging with government. Lobbying to get consent included in children’s education. I’m not sure you’ll agree with those groups either.

On the contrary - if what you call my wacky solution weren’t already taken seriously, there would be no need for lobby groups actively engaging with Government to get their ideas about relationships and sex education being mandatory on the curriculum regardless of the characteristic spirit of the school. It’s those lobby groups are in no danger of being taken seriously, and that’s precisely why while I don’t take them seriously, it’s bad manners at the same time to make fun of them. I do that sometimes, like when Ruth Coppinger is waving her knickers about in the Dail because she either isn’t aware of, or chooses to ignore the concept of the separation of powers in Irish legislation. It was also a good example of bad manners and why when someone is displaying bad manners, they don’t deserve to be taken seriously. I consider it would be a waste of my time to try and educate her about her manners when as an adult she chooses to behave like a spoilt child who isn’t getting things their own way.

She is one of the lobbyists behind the proposed sex education bill btw, and frankly given how she chooses to conduct herself in office, children are learning an example of how not to behave towards other people, without her ever even opening her mouth to teach anyone anything, whether it be about having basic manners and respect for other people, or what you propose are the intricacies of sexual consent. There are better ways to educate people on any topic than women waving their knickers about in public - that’s nothing more than a crass display of bad manners, a wacky idea, and it’s no wonder nobody could take her seriously. She doesn’t help her cause with that sort of behaviour IMO.

Reviews and Books Galore

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Yes. You said you think 13 year olds understand sexual consent. If you think that, then you’re miles off the mark.

If you think 13 year olds understand sexual consent consent then there wouldn’t be any news for consent discussions. But obviously 13 year olds don’t understand sexual consent. That’s why they should have the opportunity to discuss sexual consent with an adult trained to answer their questions.

It’s simple really. But since you think everyone already knows everything about consent, then there won’t be any convincing you. You’re wrong obviously, but you don’t be convinced by me anyway.

I have experience with 13 year olds and they do understand consent. They know no means no, and not to touch somebody without consent (The girls are a little bit worse in regards to this).



What tjey don't know is so weird hocus pocus in regards to consent where the woman is apparently always afraid, submissive or pressured.

Lillyfae

Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »

What tjey don't know is so weird hocus pocus in regards to consent where the woman is apparently always afraid, submissive or pressured.

Like porn?

Reviews and Books Galore

Lillyfae wrote: »

Like porn?

I watch porn and I read erotica. In erotica the women are always passive objects (if they are not degredaded objects) that are waiting for the man to pleasure them. In porn, they seem to be mostly active partners who are participants in the flow of the ocean so to speak.



Sure, if you have issues with men/women, you would see an aggresive man with large hands 'degredaing', but, if you don't, then you will see an aggresive man with large hands as not in anyway being bad for women :P

Lillyfae

Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »

I watch porn and I read erotica. In erotica the women are always passive objects (if they are not degredaded objects) that are waiting for the man to pleasure them. In porn, they seem to be mostly active partners who are participants in the flow of the ocean so to speak.

Sure, if you have issues with men/women, you would see an aggresive man with large hands 'degredaing', but, if you don't, then you will see an aggresive man with large hands as not in anyway being bad for women :P

This is all fine if you're an adult who understands the above and who would have had less access to it as a child. It is more accessible now than it ever was and your erotica/porn analogy doesn't really ring true when examples such as fake taxi, babysitter and casting couch come in, does it?

Antares35

biko wrote: »

Ireland doesn't have a pedo culture, the catholic church does.

Lots of people have been sexually abused by relatives, neighbours etc. people who are not involved with the Catholic church in any way.

Suttree

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

It ruins the mood? Seriously? That’s probably what people said about condoms back in the 80s and 90s when there was a big push to encourage conform use.

I'm only briefly going to drop into this thread as I agree with what the quoted poster above had said, in that I don't believe a lot of people here are discussing in good faith (I'm coming to the conclusion that's the case with a majority of these threads), but I wanted to pick up on this point, as it seems to keep coming up - this thing about "ruining the mood" - if when to your mind you're being intimate with a woman and you think things are heading in a particular direction, you think a quick "You're sure about this, yeah?" would kill the mood?

Reviews and Books Galore

Lillyfae wrote: »

This is all fine if you're an adult who understands the above andwho would have had less access to it as a child. It is more accessible now than it ever was and your erotica/porn analogy doesn't really ring true for examples such as fake taxi, babysitter and casting couch come in, does it?

Who would have had less access to it as a child? :rolleyes: Men aren't dogs. They're not going to lose control if they think about sex.





How about Annie Rice's controversial erotica or the various quite intense erotica on amazon marketplace? Or the intense fantasies on fanfiction about the characters that a lot of teen girls are reading that are actually portrayed as underage?



If you want to have a battle of intensities, then erotica will always win as it is more extreme as a rule.

Suttree

Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »

I watch porn and I read erotica. In erotica the women are always passive objects (if they are not degredaded objects) that are waiting for the man to pleasure them. In porn, they seem to be mostly active partners who are participants in the flow of the ocean so to speak.



Sure, if you have issues with men/women, you would see an aggresive man with large hands 'degredaing', but, if you don't, then you will see an aggresive man with large hands as not in anyway being bad for women :P

You don't think violent and degrading pornography isn't becoming more common these days?

OMM 0000

Lillyfae wrote: »

Yes, I've told you based on my experience (which is not unusual experience) why I think society has work to do in terms of protecting women, and you have dismissed my experience as my problem. I am in no way to blame for the things that have happened to me, and I am not sexist. There have been historic lenient sentences for the perpetrators of sexual assault. Most if not all women have been subject to some form of harassment/ assault of a sexual nature at some point in their lives, making rational desicions to modify their behaviour because of it. This doesn't make me hate men.

I am not arguing for consent classes either. Teaching consent even sounds weird because what we're really talking about is how to both consent and deny and to learn to read consent or denial depending on the situation. I think it should be discussed in an open forum, or even a closed one such as this. I think this could happen in secondary schools during sexual education or cspe, should be used as material for debating societies etc etc. It just needs to be discussed because everyone's experience is subjective- and we need to listen to other people's views.

You're obviously a sexist and have created a fake narrative that half of men are evil.

I don't waste time with extremists so welcome to my ignore list.

Reviews and Books Galore

Suttree wrote: »

I'm only briefly going to drop into this thread as I agree with what the quoted poster above had said, in that I don't believe a lot of people here are discussing in good faith (I'm coming to the conclusion that's the case with a majority of these threads), but I wanted to pick up on this point, as it seems to keep coming up - this thing about "ruining the mood" - if when to your mind you're being intimate with a woman and you think things are heading in a particular direction, you think a quick "You're sure about this, yeah?" would kill the mood?

Well, I know a lot of women on the feministic bent and, yeah, they cringe and tease those kind of men.

Reviews and Books Galore

Suttree wrote: »

You don't think violent and degrading pornography isn't becoming more common these days?

Yeah, I don't see porn as degrading any more than erotica is and I have never, in all my life, have seen violent pornography.



Again, if you have issues with women and see them as weak, then sure, sex is degrading and you are entitled to your opinion.

Edit: What's your opinion on teenage girls reading fanfiction that has some pretty intense stuff going on? This includes, straight, slash and lesbian.

Suttree

Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »

Yeah, I don't see porn as degrading any more than erotica is and I have never, in all my life, have seen violent pornography.



Again, if you have issues with women and see them as weak, then sure, sex is degrading and you are entitled to your opinion.

You have a very strange viewpoint.- I don't view sex as degrading to women - I see spitting, choking, etc. as quite degrading when it's viewed as a.default approach to sex.

Suttree

Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »

Edit: What's your opinion on teenage girls reading fanfiction that has some pretty intense stuff going on? This includes, straight, slash and lesbian.

Can't say I have one.

Suttree

Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »

Well, I know a lot of women on the feministic bent and, yeah, they cringe and tease those kind of men.

You know a lot of feminist women (I'm guessing the type who advocate explicit consent) and they tease the kind of men who ask for explicit consent? Weird.

Reviews and Books Galore

Suttree wrote: »

You have a very strange viewpoint.- I don't view sex as degrading to women - I see spitting, choking, etc. as quite degrading when it's viewed as a.default approach to sex.

:rolleyes:


Okay. Your entitled to your opinion and how you are talking about niche (in regards to gentle choking oddly common in real life) activites that women consent to as being degrading.



I'll probably just leave it as is as I don't particularly care about changing your mind.

Suttree wrote: »

You know a lot of feminist women (I'm guessing the type who advocate explicit consent) and they tease the kind of men who ask for explicit consent? Weird.

Yes, because of my job a lot of the women I know are on femenist bent and, bizarely, a lot of my partners have been feminist also. And, yes, they do find is personally cringy (imo, more if it comes across as condescending) even though they advocate for it.

Edit: Eh, they're actually too busy to advocate for it, but they do 'agree' with it.

Suttree

Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »

:rolleyes:


Okay. Your entitled to your opinion and how you are talking about niche (in regards to gentle choking oddly common in real life) activites that women consent to as being degrading.



I'll probably just leave it as is as I don't particularly care about changing your mind.






Yes, because of my job a lot of the women I know are on femenist bent and, bizarely, a lot of my partners have been feminist also. And, yes, they do find is personally cringy (imo, more if it comes across as condescending) even though they advocate for it.

Well that's my point, I don't believe it's niche anymore - that kind of activity is becoming quite mainstream from what I can see - so long as people happipy consent ive very little problem with anything, im not going to judge what people get off to. Where it becomes a problem is when this kind of stuff is expected as default (and two experiences involving friends on both sides of the coin come to mind).

What's your job , out of interest?

Lillyfae

Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »

Who would have had less access to it as a child? :rolleyes: Men aren't dogs. They're not going to lose control if they think about sex.

Men are of course not dogs- but I referred to children (of both sexes), who would find it difficult to process the fact and fiction of what they see in porn.

Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »

How about Annie Rice's controversial erotica or the various quite intense erotica on amazon marketplace? Or the intense fantasies on fanfiction about the characters that a lot of teen girls are reading that are actually portrayed as underage?

What's your question . If you are trying to link this to access, I didn't have internet as a child, anyone mid 30s and older wouldn't have had.

Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »

If you want to have a battle of intensities, then erotica will always win as it is more extreme as a rule.

Semantics, I don't spend my time thinking about the difference between porn and erotica. If they're derogatory or portray violence against women then they should be available only to adults full stop. That's not to say that I condone that, but I am aware some people have certain preferences. If anyone is in any way coerced in the material themselves then it is illegal.

OMM 0000 wrote: »

You're obviously a sexist and have created a fake narrative that half of men are evil.

I don't waste time with extremists so welcome to my ignore list.

Please attack the post, not the poster. The poster is a great lover of men

Reviews and Books Galore

Lillyfae wrote: »

That's not to say that I condone that, but I am aware some people have certain preferences. If anyone is in any way coerced in the material themselves then it is illegal.

Fair enough LillyFae.



This is a discussion for another day and I probably won't be continuing down this tangent.

One eyed Jack

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Yes. You said you think 13 year olds understand sexual consent. If you think that, then you’re miles off the mark.

If you think 13 year olds understand sexual consent consent then there wouldn’t be any news for consent discussions. But obviously 13 year olds don’t understand sexual consent. That’s why they should have the opportunity to discuss sexual consent with an adult trained to answer their questions.

It’s simple really. But since you think everyone already knows everything about consent, then there won’t be any convincing you. You’re wrong obviously, but you don’t be convinced by me anyway.

What makes you so certain that 13 year olds don’t understand sexual consent? They have an infinite amount of opportunities to discuss any questions they have with people who are best qualified to answer their questions already - their parents.

It really is very simple, and it’s because you’re trying to complicate matters, that you imagine there is a need for adults who share your ideas to share their ideas about sexual consent with children, without the parents consent.

It’s because a minority of people choose to ignore what they have been taught about consent, that the trouble arises, but most people in Irish society have a good grasp on the concept of consent, apart from the few lobbyists who try to complicate matters in an attempt to justify the proposed solution they’re offering to an issue they have identified. It really does appear to be as simple as those people can’t take no for an answer.

Why should I think someone like that could teach children anything about respect for other people who don’t share their ideas?

Reviews and Books Galore

Suttree wrote: »

Well that's my point, I don't believe it's niche anymore - that kind of activity is becoming quite mainstream from what I can see - so long as people happipy consent ive very little problem with anything, im not going to judge what people get off to. Where it becomes a problem is when this kind of stuff is expected as default (and two experiences involving friends on both sides of the coin come to mind).

What's your job , out of interest?

I probably won't be continuing down this discussion. It's probably best for another thread and I wouldn't really post on that one either :P



Out of curiousity, may I ask if you are a dude?

Suttree

Reviews and Books Galore wrote: »

I probably won't be continuing down this discussion. It's probably best for another thread and I wouldn't really post on that one either :P



Out of curiousity, may I ask if you are a dude?

Your call (consent, and all that )

I am indeed.

Lillyfae

One eyed Jack wrote: »

What makes you so certain that 13 year olds don’t understand sexual consent? They have an infinite amount of opportunities to discuss any questions they have with people who are best qualified to answer their questions already - their parents.

I'm sure some 13 year olds have a very good grasp but I think it's more than abundantly clear that lots of parents are not qualified to do anything of the sort.

Reviews and Books Galore

Suttree wrote: »

Your call (consent, and all that )

I am indeed.

Okay, that was pretty funny.

Justin Credible Darts

consenting 13 year olds mentality has little to do with this thread where some idiotic woman thinks that all irish men are complicit in some sort of rape culture.

One eyed Jack

Lillyfae wrote: »

I'm sure some 13 year olds have a very good grasp but I think it's more than abundantly clear that lots of parents are not qualified to do anything of the sort.

What appears to be abundantly clear to you, certainly isn’t abundantly clear to me.

The evidence that parents are best qualified to teach their children is in the fact that most adults, contrary to your opinion, do understand the concept of consent, and because the Irish Constitution acknowledges the family as the primary and natural educators of their children, that’s why schools have to seek parental consent for children to be permitted to participate in relationships and sex education.

I do see where you’re coming from though given your experiences you posted about earlier why you would imagine most parents aren’t qualified to teach their children about consent. Your experiences are a good argument for pointing out that even when people are taught about respect for other people, some people choose to ignore what they have been taught throughout their lives. Your experiences don’t suggest that consent classes would make any difference to those people’s behaviours and attitudes towards other people.

El_Duderino 09

Suttree wrote: »

I'm only briefly going to drop into this thread as I agree with what the quoted poster above had said, in that I don't believe a lot of people here are discussing in good faith (I'm coming to the conclusion that's the case with a majority of these threads), but I wanted to pick up on this point, as it seems to keep coming up - this thing about "ruining the mood" - if when to your mind you're being intimate with a woman and you think things are heading in a particular direction, you think a quick "You're sure about this, yeah?" would kill the mood?

Exactly. Of course it wouldn’t.

Well, it might depend on how fragile the desire to have sex it the mood actually is. But if you can’t do it without killing the mood, I’d suggest revising the technique.

Lillyfae

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I do see where you’re coming from though given your experiences you posted about earlier why you would imagine most parents aren’t qualified to teach their children about consent. Your experiences are a good argument for pointing out that even when people are taught about respect for other people, some people choose to ignore what they have been taught throughout their lives. Your experiences don’t suggest that consent classes would make any difference to those people’s behaviours and attitudes towards other people.

I don't see why my experiences would give any indication of how those people's parents taught them throughout their lives but hey ho. My point is more that parents are not an homogenous group who have the same beliefs and wishes and can ensure that all or most of their children have the same understanding as all of their peers. Like the vaccination argument, some people are just not up to making these sort of decisions for the rest of us.