Accusations of sexual assault on "reality" tv show, double standards?

Special Circumstances wrote: »

ah, dodging the question and saying you've already answered it.

A once-off incident is ok, regardless of sex?
Or a once-off incident is allowable for one sex and not the other?

How did I dodge the question. I outlined my thoughts. Show me my doublethink. Point out where I'm contradicting myself.

Special Circumstances wrote: »

I strode up to "insert close female relative of yours here" who happened to be in a crouched/kneeling position and proceeded to rub my bare arse off their head - it would be fine with you if it was just that one time? She was practically asking for it shur?

This is shaping up to be a classic lads. We have all the right ingredients here.

I'd tell you to fúck off just like I'd tell a girl to fúck off if a girl did it to me. If you repeated it I'd probably deck you for harassing her.

Mr. FoggPatches

The issue, for me, is that, according to the article, whichever of the jedwards it is asked 'why are you doing this to us?'
Are they some kind of gollum character?

tupenny

For me jeward are like fukcin kids (yeah I know they're grown men but..) it was a scummy thing she did , he was so uncomfortable yet she continued. . Sexual assault 100% imo

Repeated action would be harassment which I already stated. Where's the contradiction?

kunst nugget wrote: »

But your man allegedly repeatedly flashed her even after she repeatedly told him to stop. That's where you cross the line imo.

If the Geordie one repeatedly engaged in the behaviour despite being told not to then she'd be as bad as your man.

Special Circumstances wrote: »

So a one-off by either sex is OK? Or just one sex is allowed to get away with it?

I love these threads where the real double-think and contradictions come out.

kunst nugget wrote: »

Where's the doublethink or contradictions.
I already said in previous posts anything involving penis or vagina/vulva etc was a no-no.

The actions of the Geordie were very mild imo but if the other person told her to stop and she repeated the action then I'd call it harassment. If there's contradiction or doublethink in that please point it out.

Special Circumstances wrote: »

ah, dodging the question and saying you've already answered it.

A once-off incident is ok, regardless of sex?
Or a once-off incident is allowable for one sex and not the other?

I strode up to "insert close female relative of yours here" who happened to be in a crouched/kneeling position and proceeded to rub my bare arse off their head - it would be fine with you if it was just that one time? She was practically asking for it shur?

This is shaping up to be a classic lads. We have all the right ingredients here.

kunst nugget wrote: »

How did I dodge the question. I outlined my thoughts. Show me my doublethink. Point out where I'm contradicting myself.

I'd tell you to fúck off just like I'd tell a girl to fúck off if a girl did it to me. If you repeated it I'd probably deck you for harassing her.

You just dodged it again.

A once-off incident is ok, regardless of sex?
Or a once-off incident is allowable for one sex and not the other?

At this stage I'm usually mod-warned as punishment for showing up the inconsistencies in "on message" posters arguments. Which mod will it be today?

Special Circumstances wrote: »

A once-off incident is ok, regardless of sex?
Or a once-off incident is allowable for one sex and not the other?

Regardless of sex. Read back through my posts. I haven't said anything that's inconsistent to that.

Previous posts on it:

I'm not burying my head in the sand, thanks. I just don't feel the need to get worked up about it and be hysterical. She should be called in by Big Brother and told to cut it out for sure and if one of the Jedwards did it I'd want the same to happen to them.

I wouldn't have an issue if the roles were reversed. If a penis or vagina was brought into the mix I would…

Have I applied doublethink here?

kunst nugget wrote: »

Regardless of sex. Read back through my posts. I haven't said anything that's inconsistent to that.

It's OK full stop, or
It's OK but you'd tell me F off and don't do it again?

But if it's "OK", why would you tell me to F off?

Special Circumstances wrote: »

It's OK full stop, or
It's OK but you'd tell me F off and don't do it again?

But if it's "OK", why would you tell me to F off?

I really don't know what you're trying to get out of me at this stage but it's getting tiresome…

If we go with what happened in the big brother house and a woman put her bare arse on my back momentarily I'd tell her to fúck off and stop being a prat. I wouldn't consider it a sexual assault and not think too much about it. If she repeated the action knowing I'd already told her to fúck off then she would be harassing me.

Is that enough to clarify it or do you still want to pick something apart in it? For the record I never said it was 'OK' - that's you - but that I didn't consider what happened sexual assault.

He can search through my posts if he's inclined, he doesn't have to read the whole thread.

kunst nugget wrote: »

I really don't know what you're trying to get out of me at this stage but it's getting tiresome…

If we go with what happened in the big brother house and a woman put her bare arse on my back momentarily I'd tell her to fúck off and stop being a prat. I wouldn't consider it a sexual assault and not think too much about it. If she repeated the action knowing I'd already told her to fúck off then she would be harassing me.

Is that enough to clarify it or do you still want to pick something apart in it? For the record I never said it was 'OK' - that's you - but that I didn't consider what happened sexual assault.

As long as you'd be OK with a fella doing it to your sister/mam without their consent implied or otherwise then at least you are being consistent.

I don't think you yourself would get very far doing it to Una mulally or the one that writes for the examiner to be honest.

You probably shouldn't go making a habit of it just because you personally don't feel that it's sexual assault to rub your bare arse off people you don't know very well!

Special Circumstances wrote: »

You probably shouldn't go making a habit of it just because you personally don't feel that it's not sexual assault to rub your bare arse off people you don't know very well!

It's not something I'd ever dream of doing to another human being in a million years so if it happened to me my gut reaction would that the person must be a complete and utter moron with absolutely zero social tact and base my reaction on that. If it becomes a repeated action that where it would become harassment

SnakePlissken

kunst nugget wrote: »

How can you consider what she did and what you describe as being comparable?

Very easily, how can you consider a woman rubbing her bare backside against someone's head, as being incomparable to a man rubbing his genitals off someone? Both are clear cases of sexual assault in my opinion.

professore wrote: »

I think men's rights groups are more interested in serious disadvantages that men have compared to women, such as the heavily family rights courts, longer sentences for men for the same crimes, the automatic assumption of guilt if accused of domestic abuse or rape, the amount of suicides and the under - representation of men at third level etc than to be even bothered by something like this.

Not saying that women don't have disadvantages with respect to men, but most of these have been addressed, and modern feminism is largely hysteria.

Did you seriously dismiss feminism and call it hysteria in the same sentence. Really?? I'm not even a feminist and I see the silliness in that.

py2006 wrote: »

I agree...

Do the rational people of the world a favour and explain that to your feminist pals who think it somehow relates to equality.

Since when do I have "feminist pals"?

kunst nugget wrote: »

It's not something I'd ever dream of doing to another human being in a million years so if it happened to me my gut reaction would that the person must be a complete and utter moron with absolutely zero social tact and base my reaction on that.

Let's put the "it's definitely wrong if it's repeated unwanted naked pestering" thing to bed. We can both agree there. Even if others on thread wouldnt have an issue with me repeatedly rubbing my bare arse off their mam/sister.

Would you think all these negative things you said in your last post about me even if if it was "just a once off"? Why? I thought you said these things were OK once off like?

Or just when it's a fella on the receiving end?
Or just when it's one half of jedward?

professore

PucaMama wrote: »

Did you seriously dismiss feminism and call it hysteria in the same sentence. Really?? I'm not even a feminist and I see the silliness in that.

I dismissed MODERN feminism. The kind that needs safe spaces and portrays women as innocent victims incapable of doing wrong and men as evil monsters. Basically misandry personified. That kind of feminism can f1ck off.

The kind that worked for equal opportunities and equality I've no problem with.

RobertKK

Chloe who is at the centre of this, also last night, asked the other women 'which of the men did they think has the biggest penis?'.
That is something women hate - being objectified and with very good reason, but last night the women were discussing the above question as the men were objectified.

professore wrote: »

I dismissed MODERN feminism. The kind that needs safe spaces and portrays women as innocent victims incapable of doing wrong and men as evil monsters. Basically misandry personified. That kind of feminism can f1ck off.

The kind that worked for equal opportunities and equality I've no problem with.

They worked for opportunities for women. That's all feminists should be about. Men have their own groups. Let the men's groups look after men. Why do feminists have to include men? Men's rights groups definitely don't worry about women.

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Let's put the "it's definitely wrong if it's repeated unwanted naked pestering" thing to bed. We can both agree there. Even if others on thread wouldnt have an issue with me repeatedly rubbing my bare arse off their mam/sister.

Would you think all these negative things you said in your last post about me even if if it was "just a once off"? Why? I thought you said these things were OK once off like?

Or just when it's a fella on the receiving end?
Or just when it's one half of jedward?

Ah. you know what. I think I've said everything I'm bothered to say on this topic at this stage and life's too short. It looks like you're trying to prolong a pointless argument at this stage. G'luck.

kunst nugget wrote: »

Ah. you know what. I think I've said everything I'm bothered to say on this topic at this stage and life's too short. It looks like you're trying to prolong a pointless argument at this stage. G'luck.

Ah jeez we didn't even get to the good stuff yet.
What if two gender fluid carbon based life forms were involved?

How would one decide if it was time for outrage in the Irish times opinion columns, or "grand grand sure it's maybe 50/50 that the victim was male, we'll take those odds"??????

py2006

PucaMama wrote: »

They worked for opportunities for women. That's all feminists should be about. Men have their own groups. Let the men's groups look after men. Why do feminists have to include men? Men's rights groups definitely don't worry about women.

You see PucaMama, a lot of modern day feminists claim they are all about equality for both MEN and women but in reality they would rather men didn't exist.

Yet when men (and women) criticise them on this they are told to get their own 'ism and/or are accused of hating women!

py2006 wrote: »

You see PucaMama, a lot of modern day feminists claim they are all about equality for both MEN and women but in reality they would rather men didn't exist.

Yet when men (and women) criticise them on this they are told to get their own 'ism and/or are accused of hating women!

I personally know a feminist who will back anybody bar a straight white man. It's far from equality feminists (that I know) are heading.

But I do believe they should just be left to it with their own groups. Like the extreme men's rights lot. Let them rot in their hateful existence.

Goya

anna080 wrote: »

My post wasn't directed to evil twin, more the feminist movement as a whole. Tis a peculiar type of feminism that decries the objectification of women and calls men rapists but which ignores a man being assaulted by a woman on national tv. I mean the first and one of the most thanked post on this thread is a comment that says "who cares". Indeed.

See, I agree with you regarding feminists who claim they are fighting for gender equality and are clearly only fighting for women to be treated differently to men (otherwise they would be critical of this woman's behaviour but they're not, however they are outraged by such behaviour from a man) but what I don't agree with is attributing the dismissal of this incident just to feminism. That post saying "Who cares?" - is there evidence that it was written by a feminist? Is there evidence that those who thanked it are feminists? The dismissal of such an incident is very much partly to do with people (many - I'd wager 50% or more - men) who are not feminists at all. Many men also think it's no big deal by a woman to a man (and that he should "man" up) but terrible if by a man to a woman. Or they think a man should be happy about a woman getting so close and personal with them.

And if the above attitude from men remains, and if the only fighting against it is "If the genders were reversed" and "Why aren't feminists outraged?", then not much is going to change. But I agree again that feminists who claim to be fighting for equality should highlight it also. Although guys, who wouldn't be bothered by it, can't be forced into being bothered by it. Equally, they shouldn't ridicule those who are bothered by it though.

ScumLord wrote: »

That they should run away crying if they see a naked woman?

Who said anything about being upset at the sight of a naked woman?

There really can be such dishonesty in online discourse.
And the twin did request that she stop, and expressed total discomfort with it. Rubbing your bare arse on someone's head when they do not request it, and continuing to do so despite objections, is maybe not assault, but it's incredibly skanky behaviour... possibly harassment.

RobertKK wrote: »

Chloe who is at the centre of this, also last night, asked the other women 'which of the men did they think has the biggest penis?'.
That is something women hate - being objectified and with very good reason, but last night the women were discussing the above question as the men were objectified.

But are the women who hate being objectified always the same women as those who discuss penis size? That Chloe one wouldn't give a hoot about being sexualised - she's happy to do a lot of the work in that regard herself.

jimgoose

PucaMama wrote: »

I personally know a feminist who will back anybody bar a straight white man. It's far from equality feminists (that I know) are heading.

But I do believe they should just be left to it with their own groups. Like the extreme men's rights lot. Let them rot in their hateful existence.

Exactly. I don't give a monkey's fcuk what those people say, because I'm a straight, white, middle-class, property-owning male aged between 35 and 55 and I can have them all killed if I want to. But only after they've rubbed their skinny little lentil-fed arses on me.

py2006

Interestingly, in the last few months it seems, some feminists have adjusted their detest of men to just straight white men. Not all but some of them. Not sure why, trump?

jimgoose

py2006 wrote: »

Interestingly, in the last few months it seems, some feminists have adjusted their detest of men to just white men. Not all but some of them. Not sure why, trump?

They're leveraging the whole "minority" thing. Anyone who feels oppressed because of their own inadequacies is actively roped into the whole Lefty/Feminist/Participation Medals thing. Fine. While they're doing that, I'll be over here chatting up their sisters.

Goya

fleet_admiral wrote: »

Where is the feminist outrage?

That was discussed at length before you posted.

Where is the men's rights activists outrage?

Goya wrote: »

That was discussed at length before you posted.

Where is the men's rights activists outrage?

Not on boards.ie anyway hahaha the mods would disappear it so fast your head would spin.

jimgoose

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Not on boards.ie anyway hahaha the mods would disappear it so fast your head would spin.

I"m outraged that the chungwan kept the towel on.