timmy880 wrote: » The issue with O'Neill is that she wants the topic discussed in further detail which her documentary has definitely achieved, no question about that. But the problem is if you make an argument against the points she raised she immediately goes off on one and encourages her following to feed this person to the wolves. This is where she loses it. If you want a public conversation raised about very sensitive topics, surely you have to accept that there will be different opinions on said topic......?
ZeroThreat wrote: » did she actually describe herself as this? Also I never watch the programme, sounds like a load of rubbish to me, is she lesbian?
TaosHum wrote: » I don't understand how someone who has proclaimed herself as being a misandrist can be expected to make an unbiased documentary on such a sensitive subject. This woman has books to sell, so of course she is going to pedal the existence of a rape culture in Ireland argument. Even if her argument is not financially motivated, the viewers skepticism of her motivation is still warranted. If a documentary is to made on this subject, I'd rather it be done by someone who doesn't have something to gain from it. An unbiased piece of journalism, where the question of rape culture in Ireland can be evenly argued and also taking into account that men are also the victims of such abuse.
Gunslinger92 wrote: » So... just because someone somewhere else has it worse, we should just ignore the fact that "lesser" assaults happen?
Mortpourvelo wrote: » Seriously, I would never wish to negate an "assault" - if that is what someone BELIEVES happened; but there is a huge difference between you boyfriend taking advantage when you are sleeping in the bed with him - and the use of rape as a weapon of war as in Bosnia, ISIS and Boko Harum. Honertly - someone you have had sex with before and will do again - versus a child enduring FGM and then married off to a man older than her grandfather to be raped daily ? Just no. Oh and female here btw, before the rampant misandry starts.
ash23 wrote: » You can't see any victim blaming in those comments? At all?
The incredulous way you ask why a woman might be confused about whether she'd been assaulted?
The way you disbelieve me when I said I wasn't drunk - How did he get my clothes off without me noticing?
The way you'll make out that because I knew him it made it less predatory and different than a guy I didn't know doing the same thing?
The saying it's understandable that he thought it wasn't a boundary because I knew him, liked him, had slept with him before and kissed him earlier that night?
Putting the blame for it on me but dismissing what he did as "crossing a boundary" as opposed to the sexual assault that it was.
You're minimising what he did and putting the onus on me for what happened.
cloudatlas wrote: » Please provide us with example of all of these cases. If that is indeed the case in small instances then explain why it is not effective to be supportive to people who are genuine. The university obviously produced these posters for a reason and it wasn't because the threat was small.
Hang on a cotton picking second.. How in god's name does one not realise one has been assaulted? In any manner? It also begs the question - and heaven forfend I suggest some personal responsibility here - if I had been beaten up "several times" when I was drunk, yes I would have a major issue with those who beat me up and they would be directly responsible for the beatings, but I would think to myself "hang on, maybe I shouldn't get so drunk that being beaten up becomes a "thing" in my life". OK not remotely past tipsy, yet this guy apparently stripped you of your clothing and you didn't notice? Secondly "a man" doesn't quite describe this guy does it? Makes him sound all random and predatory. This is a guy who you knew so well you wanted to be in a relationship with him at one point, who you had sex with a few times beforehand and who you "had a kiss" with that night. Did he cross a boundary? Hell yes he crossed a bloody boundary. Is it understandable why he might have thought this wasn't a boundary? Again yes.
midlandsmissus wrote: » Wibbs you say that with all the flippancy and buoyancy of a man who does not want to see. How could you know!Every woman, and I mean every woman I know has been sexually assaulted, and it is usually along the lines of what that girl said earlier on this thread: with a man that she knows who she may have been intimate with before, like a partner, who then a different time : assumes he can have what he wants and does not get her consent. Consent is every time. Ongoing and every time. And I'm not blaming men here: I'm blaming culture, we have Donald Trump saying it's ok to grab women by the pussy, and then I was listening to an Irish radio show where rugby players were ringing in afterwards saying that it was normal locker room talk! There's a great article I read recently: '7 reasons men don't understand consent' written by a man, where he said some really relevant points. These are vital conversations that need to be had. Vital.
ligerdub wrote: » No, it was you who refered to the universities approach and that it what I had a problem with. I've no problem in them insisting on going forward to the guards, in fact I think they should. I also wouldn't contest the stat about prosecuted cases so I've nothing to add there. We've had several instances on this board where people have claimed to have been assaulted or heard of rapes that have been acted on people they know. How many of these have been reported to the gardai? This is the action that needs taking. What I have a problem with is a situation where organisations take these cases, believe the accuser, take action internally, but do nothing beyond that. Basically the accused is tarnished or kicked out of school. If he's guilty that's not enough, if he's innocent then he his life is in tatters through no fault of his own.
ash23 wrote: » Your comments about women being sexually assaulted and the blame you lay at their door is absolutely disgraceful and if other men in Ireland feel similar then we absolutely have a problem.
You bringing the amount I drank that night into it is exactly the problem.
when he lifted my skirt, pulled aside my underwear
Whether I knew him or not, whether I had slept with him a hundred times or not, whether I was drunk or not is an aside. I am a heavy sleeper so it's partly my fault? I kissed him and had sex with him before so I was giving him the wrong idea?
In what world can you justify a man getting into bed with a girl he knows and sticking his fingers in her vagina with zero invitation to do so?
You dismissing it as less because of those things is exactly the reason I went home and didn't report him. Can you imagine a woman being raped by her boyfriend and reporting it and being met with an attitude like yours? Jesus it defies belief that you think, post and reiterate your victim blaming.
cloudatlas wrote: Well you should because that is where these cases often go. It is confidential at the reporting stage. It then gets passed to the legal authorities. What bits of this do you not understand. Of course the first course of action is to listen to the victim get their side and then explore it, what kind of course of action, nothing happens until the facts are gathered, what course of action would you follow.
cloudatlas wrote: All I'm saying is that it is positive to encourage victims to come forward, victims who feel alone, isolated and are confused about what has happened to them.
cloudatlas wrote: » I take your point completely and I agree with you I didn't look at the wording of it. I suppose the mocking tone of his post put me off. Yes, if a man or woman is woken up by a partner performing unwanted sexual acts that they haven't consented to / rebuff it is unequivocally sexual assault. Thanks for pointing that out.
Advbrd wrote: » A guy I worked with reckoned that "sexual harassment" didn't actually exist, it should be referred to as "ugly sexual harassment". It all depended on the looks of the harasser.
Wibbs wrote: » If Sweetemotion identified as a woman and wrote "As a woman I've been woken up a couple of times from partners and one night stands recieving oral sex. Was I sexually assaulted?" I seriously doubt you'd have to "think" about it at all and would automatically go "of course you were sexually assaulted!"
Wibbs wrote: » OK not remotely past tipsy, yet this guy apparently stripped you of your clothing and you didn't notice? Secondly "a man" doesn't quite describe this guy does it? Makes him sound all random and predatory. This is a guy who you knew so well you wanted to be in a relationship with him at one point, who you had sex with a few times beforehand and who you "had a kiss" with that night. Did he cross a boundary? Hell yes he crossed a bloody boundary. Is it understandable why he might have thought this wasn't a boundary? Again yes. Indeed there is. However again this wasn't someone randomly walking up and punching you. This was more akin to a boxing match that went a few rounds and your opponent pulls a sucker punch after the bell rings out. Well out of order, but hardly out of the blue.
Wibbs wrote: » Fúck me. Truly Cracked.com is appropriately named. Han Solo and Indiana Jones, rape icons. Oh yes. Never mind he completely avoids the mixed signals coming from women around this. For a start damn near every romantic novel written by and for women has a hero who acts just like Han Solo and Indiana Jones in the way he notes. The plain fact is a man who acts like that will get more willing attention from women, certainly more than the same man asking for constant consent and permission.
FortySeven wrote: » 2361 sexual offences reported to garda in 2015. Women's aid website. Hardly an epidemic?
midlandsmissus wrote: » www.cracked.com/blog/how-men-are-trained-to-think-sexual-assault-no-big-deal This article.
ash23 wrote: » Some of us have explained why it took time to come to terms with being assaulted or why we struggled to accept we have. I refuse to take any personal responsibility for having a few drinks (not falling down drunk or even remotely past being quite tipsy) and going into a friends bed to sleep alone but waking up to find a man assaulting me.
There's a difference between "getting in a fight" and someone randomly walking up and punching you.
mzungu wrote: » Louise O'Neill herself partook in similar shenanigans with her tweet. Is she a part of rape culture too?
nullzero wrote: » Personally I've never groped a woman in such a manner, I wouldn't dream of it, but the double standards are incredible.
cloudatlas wrote: I think without consent yes
Ralf and Florian wrote: Gawd help us if she ever gets to a position of real influence, it'll be a criminal offense to disagree with Louise O Neill.
Wibbs wrote: » 1) I'm sorry, but personal anecdote, while of course is personally hurtful and all that may come with that, does not an actual statistic make. Not even close. We go the personal route and we risk reactive mob rule based on eff all. 2) Four in ten, where does that come from? Is it yet another perennial twist on the one in four/five/six(these things rarely agree) stat peddled to the general public since the US college campus Koss study and I use the word "study" extremely loosely? That study, taken as gospel in the Victim Church movement, is so flimsy and full of demonstrable holes it would pass decent muster as a teabag. And yes I can back that up with actual statistics. In any halfway civilised liberal democracy NO crime, no matter how trivial, never mind getting within an asses roar of sexual assault and/or rape has a victim rate even close to 20 odd per cent(well… maybe speeding). And only in the most addled mind, would someone suggest any crime comes within a rate of nearly fifty per cent. You're actually claiming half of all women have been sexually assaulted? You'd want to be a German woman in Russian controlled Berlin post summer 1945 to get near that kinda stat. I call utter nonsense, nay utter bullshít on that statistic. If one was to believe that, then the obvious conclusion would be is that nearly half of all men are guilty of sexual assault/rape. Unless scummy bastards and rapists travel around a lot. Again I call hysterical bollocks of the highest quality. We're through the looking glass here people.
