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

sexual assault or apprentice prank?

Options
2

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Arcade_Tryer
    Registered Users Posts: 2,021 ✭✭✭Arcade_Tryer


    Idiots.

    Though I disagree with claims that there is a case for sexual assault here. As soon as the lad agreed to be blindfolded, he was complicit in what happened. Not once did he attempt to push the boss away or move away himself either.

    Reminds me of that movie The Crying Game actually.


  • Options
    #33
    Musketeer4
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 657 ✭✭✭Musketeer4


    AT, I get your drift in that in agreeing to be bound and blindfolded he gave what could reasonably be interpreted as consent to some form of sex act. However he could argue that he gave consent on the implication that it would be a female stripper engaging him and that he did not give any consent to being molested by a cross dressing male superior. I wonder how a court would interpret this one.
    Ie he did not push the boss away because he didn;t know it was a male or his boss, blindfolded he was blissfully unaware of the fact that it was not an female striper


  • Options
    #34
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Musketeer4 wrote: »
    AT, I get your drift in that in agreeing to be bound and blindfolded he gave what could reasonably be interpreted as consent to some form of sex act. However he could argue that he gave consent on the implication that it would be a female stripper engaging him and that he did not give any consent to being molested by a cross dressing male superior. I wonder how a court would interpret this one.

    In the UK, pretending to be the opposite sex has been grounds to vitiate consent, on the basis that it was obtained by deceit and the consent was not informed.


  • Options
    #35
    Arcade_Tryer
    Registered Users Posts: 2,021 ✭✭✭Arcade_Tryer


    Musketeer4 wrote: »
    AT, I get your drift in that in agreeing to be bound and blindfolded he gave what could reasonably be interpreted as consent to some form of sex act. However he could argue that he gave consent on the implication that it would be a female stripper engaging him and that he did not give any consent to being molested by a cross dressing male superior. I wonder how a court would interpret this one.
    Ie he did not push the boss away because he didn;t know it was a male or his boss, blindfolded he was blissfully unaware of the fact that it was not an female striper
    Once he agreed to the blindfold, I think he implicitly agreed to what happened next. The lapdance that was provided was a fairly typical one tbh. His problem was in agreeing to wear the blindfold. Personal responsibility must come into play here.


  • Options
    #36
    Musketeer4
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 657 ✭✭✭Musketeer4


    ^ Exactly.

    An conor, your post just reminded me of that case a year or so ago where some girl took a case against who she thought was her [ex]boyfriend when it turned out that the boyfriend wasn't a fella but was in fact another girl pretending to be a fella.
    Once he agreed to the blindfold, I think he implicitly agreed to what happened next. The lapdance that was provided was a fairly typical one tbh. His problem was in agreeing to wear the blindfold. Personal responsibility must come into play here.
    No he didn't give consent. When a young fella is told he will be getting a lapdance I think most would reasonably assume that the lapdancer will be female.

    But hey, don't let reason get in the way of your shameless victim blaming.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Arcade_Tryer
    Registered Users Posts: 2,021 ✭✭✭Arcade_Tryer


    Musketeer4 wrote: »

    No he didn't give consent. When a young fella is told he will be getting a lapdance I think most would reasonably assume that the lapdancer will be female.
    No. Once a young fella agrees to be blindfolded, and then sits quietly still and allows anything that happens next to happen without the slightest complaint or issue, I think most would reasonably assume that he is responsible for his own actions.
    But hey, don't let reason get in the way of your shameless victim blaming.
    Off topic. And nonsense.


  • Options
    #38
    Musketeer4
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 657 ✭✭✭Musketeer4


    Arcade_Tryer wrote: »
    No. Once a young fella agrees to be blindfolded, and then sits quietly still and allows anything that happens next to happen without the slightest complaint or issue, I think most would reasonably assume that he is responsible for his own actions.

    Well a court could easily determine that by asking the chap what he thought was going to happen while he was blindfolded.
    - What gender of person did you think would be preforming the sex act on you?
    - Had you known that the "dancer" was male would you have continued or would you have wanted it to stop?

    I would bet my bottom dollar the the chap concerned would answer female and wanted it to stop respectively.

    The absence of protest =/= to the giving of consent.

    By your logic it would follow that someone who has sex with someone who is passed out drunk is not guilty of rape because the victim did not give any protest to the act.

    Off topic. And nonsense

    Explain? You suggested the the fella shouldered some of the blame for his own molestation. ie, you are blaming the victim for what happened to them.


  • Options
    #39
    Arcade_Tryer
    Registered Users Posts: 2,021 ✭✭✭Arcade_Tryer


    Musketeer4 wrote: »
    By your logic it would follow that someone who has sex with someone who is passed out drunk is not guilty of rape because the victim did not give any protest to the act.
    Oh ffs. That's a scandalous statement.

    By my logic it would follow that someone who agrees to be blindfolded by their girlfriend and given fellatio is instead given fellatio by a man while the girlfriend records it.

    Moral of the story: Don't allow yourself to be blindfolded. Especially not by total idiots.
    Explain? You suggested the the fella shouldered some of the blame for his own molestation. ie, you are blaming the victim for what happened to them.
    I'm not blaming the victim. I'm saying he isn't the victim of a criminal offense. He's the victim of a prank. A perverted prank admittedly. But nonetheless a prank.


  • Options
    #40
    Musketeer4
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 657 ✭✭✭Musketeer4


    Oh ffs. That's a scandalous statement.

    By my logic it would follow that someone who agrees to be blindfolded by their girlfriend and given fellatio is instead given fellatio by a man while the girlfriend records it.

    No, there you go again. Someone who agrees to be blindfolded and have an act performed on them by their gf agrees to just that - not to have her pull a fast one and unknowingly have a sex act performed by a guy and her recording it. The gf and the guy would be guilty of sex crime in my opinion.

    I'm making a scandalous statement? That pretty f-ing rich! I mean you're the suggesting above that its OK to have someone agree to something and then do something completely different to them without their prior knowledge! That's pretty damn deviant opinion to have! Pal.


    Moral of the story: Don't allow yourself to be blindfolded. Especially not by total idiots.

    Agreed.
    I'm not blaming the victim. I'm saying he isn't the victim of a criminal offense. He's the victim of a prank. A perverted prank admittedly. But nonetheless a prank.

    Yes you are. You are basically saying "well if he didn't want to be groped by a man he shouldn't have agreed to being roped into a chair and blindfolded". That's not too far removed from "well if she didn't want to be raped she shouldn't have walked down that laneway wearing a miniskirt"

    I wonder would you be so quick to dismiss it as a mere prank if it was a your sister or a female cousin who was roped into a chair and had their private parts relentlessly mauled by a senior malework colleague? I doubt it.


  • Options
    #41
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Arcade_Tryer wrote: »
    No. Once a young fella agrees to be blindfolded, and then sits quietly still and allows anything that happens next to happen without the slightest complaint or issue, I think most would reasonably assume that he is responsible for his own actions.

    Off topic. And nonsense.

    Oh he is responsible for his own actions.

    But he is not responsible for the actions of another.

    Remember whose actions we are analysing. There is no suggestion that he sexually assaults anyone. The question is whether the "stripper" does it. That person may claim that there is consent, but the UK Courts have said that where the consent is obtained by deception it is vitiated.

    Either way, we are getting very technical. There is no suggestion he is taking the matter further, he suffered any loss, that he has done anything other than laugh it off. But he certainly did not consent to being groped. Incidentally, it could be argued that he did not even consent to being groped by a female stripper.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    kowloon
    Registered Users Posts: 13,385 ✭✭✭✭kowloon


    That was very creepy, whatever happened to sending them off for a long weight or some tartan paint?


  • Options
    #43
    wakka12
    Registered Users Posts: 9,786 ✭✭✭wakka12


    Not funny , I wouldnt go suing him though but I would never find myself alone in a room with him either ever again.


  • Options
    #44
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 26,052 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Poor guy was definitely assaulted, perhaps it's the lower end of the scale but it's still unwanted sexual touching and he has every right to take it further if he chooses. It was an attempt to humiliate and discomfort him, and is all kinds of wrong.


  • Options
    #45
    B.A._Baracus
    Registered Users Posts: 11,187 ✭✭✭✭B.A._Baracus


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    There is also a hint of "ewwww, being touched by a gay" off some posts here...

    When I made my post last night i knew someone would make a homophobia reference to other posts.
    Guess it was your turn Conor74 to be the moral brigade. This world really is going pc or maybe it's just boards.ie being predictable. I mean, if you're not comfortable with another man touching your balls then you're a homophobe.


  • Options
    #46
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    B.A._Baracus wrote: »
    When I made my post last night i knew someone would make a homophobia reference to other posts.
    Guess it was your turn Conor74 to be the moral brigade. This world really is going pc or maybe it's just boards.ie being predictable. I mean, if you're not comfortable with another man touching your balls then you're a homophobe.

    There is nothing PC about pinting out that, when it comes to sexual assault, the sexuality of the perp is irrelevant.

    If a fellow rubbed my groin, I wouldn't run after them and say "are you gay or straight". In cases of sexual assault you never see "the accused, who is gay...". It is of no relevance to the act.

    Incidentally, not sure about your last sentence. I presume you confused me with some other poster, I made no connection between the act and homophobia at all. I spoke very directly about those who said "gross...AND he's gay".


  • Options
    #47
    Galwayguy35
    Registered Users Posts: 16,413 ✭✭✭✭Galwayguy35


    B.A._Baracus wrote: »
    When I made my post last night i knew someone would make a homophobia reference to other posts.
    Guess it was your turn Conor74 to be the moral brigade. This world really is going pc or maybe it's just boards.ie being predictable. I mean, if you're not comfortable with another man touching your balls then you're a homophobe.

    +1

    No straight man wants another fella touching his crotch, regardless of the sexuality of the guy doing it.

    In fact the guy doing it should be prepared for a few thumps for his trouble.


  • Options
    #48
    Musketeer4
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 657 ✭✭✭Musketeer4


    Candie wrote: »
    Poor guy was definitely assaulted, perhaps it's the lower end of the scale but it's still unwanted sexual touching and he has every right to take it further if he chooses. It was an attempt to humiliate and discomfort him, and is all kinds of wrong.

    Here we go again, minimising it agian.

    If this was your sister I doubt you'd be saying "ah sure its only the lower end of the scale".


  • Options
    #49
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 26,052 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Musketeer4 wrote: »
    Here we go again, minimising it agian.

    If this was your sister I doubt you'd be saying "ah sure its only the lower end of the scale".

    I've had similar happen to me (random stranger groping my private parts in clubs/pubs), and if I called it a serious assault, I'd be laughed out of it.

    He was assaulted and has every right to pursue it further, that's not minimising it, it's recognising where it lies on a vast scale that starts with this kind of thing and ends in rape.

    I've nothing but sympathy for the poor guy.


  • Options
    #50
    tomwaterford
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,768 ✭✭✭✭tomwaterford


    kowloon wrote: »
    That was very creepy, whatever happened to sending them off for a long weight or some tartan paint?

    Or to local shop for a long stand :pac:


  • Options
    #51
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Galwayguy35 wrote: »
    +1

    No straight man wants another fella touching his crotch, regardless of the sexuality of the guy doing it.

    In fact the guy doing it should be prepared for a few thumps for his trouble.

    But uninvited sexual contact is just that, the sexuality of neither party is of relevance in determining whether an act constitutes sexual assault.

    For all that, as I have said, it is a matter for the individual to decide if it was acceptable to them. Hence I wouldn't be prescribing that should sue or go to the police. He may laugh it off, he may be devastated. It is easy to think of an example where it might be worse for a gay man...if for example he had been teased about his sexuality he may find the prank particularly cruel.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    Olishi4
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,469 ✭✭✭Olishi4


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    There is nothing PC about pinting out that, when it comes to sexual assault, the sexuality of the perp is irrelevant.

    If a fellow rubbed my groin, I wouldn't run after them and say "are you gay or straight". In cases of sexual assault you never see "the accused, who is gay...". It is of no relevance to the act.

    I don't think the boss's sexuality is irrelevant. It has an impact on the motive for assault. For example in this case if there had been similar pranks or comments made towards the employee before, it could be sexual harassment escalating rather than an ill thought out "joke". Or if the boss was sexually aroused by humiliating the employee, that may have further impact on the employees reaction.

    The whole basis of the "joke" is laughing at the employees sexuality by humiliating him.

    I personally think this probably was a stupid joke taken too far by an immature boss trying to be funny where there were probably pranks going on a lot between the employees and the boss doesn't seem to be aware of his responsibility and encouraging it. I mean they must have thought "oh this is funny, it might go viral" ? I'd say they regret that now.


  • Options
    #53
    HS3
    Closed Accounts Posts: 405 ✭✭HS3


    No! Just no! Jesus Christ that is awful. If that was a woman in the chair expecting a stripper and it turned out it was her boss touching her my god there would be uproar. Just no!


  • Options
    #54
    Musketeer4
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 657 ✭✭✭Musketeer4


    You're dead right. I'm blue in the face from telling them here but most are like "ash sure its only a bit of craic and he'll laugh it off".

    If it was a girl there would have been blue fúcking murder, and rightly so and this thread would probably have been locked long ago. There'd be arrests and prosecutions and the whole shooting gallery.


  • Options
    #55
    VonLuck
    Registered Users Posts: 2,188 ✭✭✭VonLuck


    Musketeer4 wrote: »
    You're dead right. I'm blue in the face from telling them here but most are like "ash sure its only a bit of craic and he'll laugh it off".

    If it was a girl there would have been blue fúcking murder, and rightly so and this thread would probably have been locked long ago. There'd be arrests and prosecutions and the whole shooting gallery.

    It's only sexual assault if the person themselves sees it as sexual assault. For all we know they both might get up to pranks like this the whole time. Would you call it sexual assault if a guy pulled down one of his mates trousers for a laugh? Of course not, as long as the "victim" is in on this kind of behaviour and doesn't see it as sexual assault. It's not black and white.

    I don't see how if it was a girl how it would be different. The scenario would be a bunch of women with another woman in the chair who thought a male stripper was giving her a rub down. Again, as long as she's in on these kind of jokes and she doesn't see it as sexual assault, it's not sexual assault.


  • Options
    #56
    Musketeer4
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 657 ✭✭✭Musketeer4


    I'm sorry, it IS sexual assault. He didn't give consent to being groped. There's no grey areas with this sort of thing.


  • Options
    #57
    VonLuck
    Registered Users Posts: 2,188 ✭✭✭VonLuck


    Musketeer4 wrote: »
    I'm sorry, it IS sexual assault. He didn't give consent to being groped. There's no grey areas with this sort of thing.

    What about my previous example of two friends joking about and one pulls down the others pants? That has happened to countless of men. None give consent. Have they all been sexually assaulted?


  • Options
    #58
    Thoie
    Registered Users Posts: 6,344 ✭✭✭Thoie


    Yes, it is sexual assault, but the other big question is who on earth thinks it's OK to hire a stripper to perform at work?!!?

    I wouldn't be comfortable with my colleagues hiring a stripper for me in any circumstance, but if it "has" to be done, out of work hours, not on work premises would be the bare minimum.


  • Options
    #59
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,111 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    B.A._Baracus wrote: »
    I mean, if you're not comfortable with another man touching your balls then you're a homophobe.
    Indeed. Or it matters not either way. Meanwhile in the real world…
    HS3 wrote: »
    No! Just no! Jesus Christ that is awful. If that was a woman in the chair expecting a stripper and it turned out it was her boss touching her my god there would be uproar. Just no!
    Ah didn't you know HS, only women can be victims in some narratives.
    Deleted User wrote: »
    There is nothing PC about pinting out that, when it comes to sexual assault, the sexuality of the perp is irrelevant.
    To you. You have made this clear in your posts. Don't assume the same for others. Rookie error.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Options
    #60
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 13,712 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    VonLuck wrote: »
    What about my previous example of two friends joking about and one pulls down the others pants? That has happened to countless of men. None give consent. Have they all been sexually assaulted?
    Sexual assault in English law can be as widely construed as putting a pair of shoes on a person's foot.

    So yes, of course it can. Things that can technically constitute sexual assault happen all the time, but they're taken as jokes, as they were intended.

    In the OP, though, the boss's hand lingered for far too long on the other's dick. He even went back for more. That was uncomfortable to watch.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Wibbs wrote: »
    To you. You have made this clear in your posts. Don't assume the same for others. Rookie error.

    Not just to me, but also in law.

    If people have their own take that differs from the law, so be it. But they can hardly object to someone relying on the legal interpretations. It's very simply unwanted intentional sexual contact. Whether either party is gay or straight has no bearing on that.


Advertisement