Widdershins wrote: » Hang on, what? I just watched the video of Baby, it's cold outside. They are clearly being coy and teasing each other. Cerys starts out sweet and innocent but her inner bad girl comes out at the end. There's a difference between trying to charm a woman and trying to force her. Try re-composing the song along more right on lines with Tom Jones formally seeking her consent..it doesn't work. There is such a thing as poetic license for songs etc
Potatoeman wrote: » I know someone it happened to. They had a fyb and she intentionally got pregnant. He told her he didn't want it. She kept it and thought he would come around. He was involved with the child but had no interested in a relationship with her. She admitted it two years later, she was finding it though being a single parent. Her family hated him and had no idea how the whole thing had gone down.
ZeroThreat wrote: » What's fyb mean?
FortySeven wrote: » Fund your baby?
Dr Jakub wrote: » The daughter of a EU official was raped and murdered in Germany recently by an Afghan migrant 'teenager'. Will Louise O'Neill speak out against this?
Connacht2KXX wrote: » Of course not. It's the patriarchal EU's fault for not imposing Sharia law. How else was the migrant supposed to react?
FortySeven wrote: » The eu is slowly coming around to sharia law. A group of Muslims who were patrolling in Germany implementing sharia in a vigilante type fashion recently were deemed to be 'exercising their right to free speech' by a judge. This means they are free to continue.
"We see rapists as these monsters, almost inhuman..".
Dr Jakub wrote: » And in Sweden it was ruled not an offence to fly the ISIS flag. Meanwhile there have been cases of Swedish schools banning the Swedish flag. In the Netherlands you can send death threats to gay people as long you're a Muslimhttp://www.express.co.uk/news/world/739275/Dutch-watchdog-OK-send-gay-people-death-threats-Muslim
He added that when the complaint involved calling for violence against a particular group, the beliefs of the person making the threats should not matter.
Grayson wrote: » So you're expecting her to make an individual statement about every single rape that occurs in the world. That may be the dumbest thing I've ever heard.
Connacht2KXX wrote: » I think what the poster was trying to get was how O'Neill has bought into an ideology that permits criticism of white people but completely whitewashes (pun not intended) the actions of Muslims. She goes on and on about how bad white men are and how they are responsible for the pervasive rape culture in Ireland yet won't say anything about the atrocities committed by Muslims, who actively promote a real rape culture.
Sand wrote: » I think the correct terminology is 'child', not teenager.
Grayson wrote: » It's not "allowed". There's no law allowing it. Nothing of the sort exists. So you either didn't bother reading the article or you're just lying outright. .
FortySeven wrote: » Depends, 19 is not a child. How old was this one or are we waiting for teeth xrays?
Widdershins wrote: » R.E The flag, that was a ridiculous judgement and the law is clearly an ass in that instance. R.E the threats, it's not allowed by law but it was described as acceptable by an anti discrimination group so it's quite serious. And like the flag ruling, should be taken very seriously.These are the ways in which societies are changed.
Grayson wrote: » That doesn't mean that she thinks it acceptable. I'm allow say that US elections (the electoral college etc) is dysfunctional. Saying that and not commenting on every other election in the world does not mean I support "elections" in places like North Korea. Likewise saying that rape in Ireland is wrong does not imply that rape anywhere else is OK. Demanding that someone comment on every other instance of rape is bloody stupid. Implying that she is insincere because she hasn't commented on other rapes is stupid.
Connacht2KXX wrote: » I fully get your point. However, no one was demanding that she should make a comment about this particular incidence of rape. People were pointing to her utter hypocrisy when it comes to rape, which is due to her ideological beliefs. She has made comments about Muslims in the past, saying that she is terrified for the Muslims of America now that Trump is president as both his policies and the islamophobic sentiment in the country will potentially harm them. This indicates she has some awareness about Muslims. My issue is that her comments about Muslims are not in the slightest way authentic, just like the rest of her opinions. They are clearly plagiarised and stem from this ideology she has bought into. She is a very intelligent person who has been brainwashed by left wing ideologues. This is deeply depressing as she has a platform to address rape but this opportunity is completely wasted as her moral compass is so disjointed. For the third time, all of this is down to her ideological beliefs. Identity politics, ideologies and religion poison perfectly sane, intelligent and righteous people. I have no doubt that O'Neill believes that she is doing good in the world, much like the ISIS fighters who behead aid workers, yet these 2 classes have been morally corrupted by 2 separate ideologies. Basically, this makes good people bad.
Grayson wrote: » In Sweden the law stated that you cannot display an emblem that encourages discrimination against a particular group. The court ruled that since ISIS hates everyone it's not targeting anyone. It was an interpretation on the law and not an endorsement of ISIS. It's just the way the law was written and has nothing to do with favouring one group over another. Did you read the article you posted? At the very bottom it says you can't send death threats. It's not "allowed". There's no law allowing it. Nothing of the sort exists. So you either didn't bother reading the article or you're just lying outright. So you're expecting her to make an individual statement about every single rape that occurs in the world. That may be the dumbest thing I've ever heard.
Dr Jakub wrote: » Good job Sweden so, very tolerant altogether. I would expect Louise and her fellow Third Wave feminists to speak out about the rape culture that has been imported into the West. 1400 girls raped and abused in Rotherham alone while the Sate turned a blind eye. Or maybe the mass rape of German women in Cologne that Merkel and her cronies tries to cover up? I'd also expect her to speak about countries like Pakistan and how women are treated there. But hey that would involve criticizing brown people. That's not going to happen, she might get accused of racism and lose some twitter followers.
Grayson wrote: » It's perfectly possible to be against discrimination and be against rape.
sashafierce wrote: » This post has been deleted.
Connacht2KXX wrote: » Louise O'Neill is only concerned about Muslims because her ideology and the echo chamber she resides in tells her to be. The only reason she uses the term "rape culture" is for the same reason. That is very dangerous.
