National Museum staff member who admitted fantasising after seeing "tall schoolgirls"

Satriale · 16-02-2017 05:13PM

Are the Indo lifting stories from Waterford Whispers now?

newacc2015 · 16-02-2017 05:19PM

Candie wrote: »

Hard to believe that a person who openly admitted to fantasizing about schoolchildren on the premises is allowed to stay in a job where school tours make up a great deal of weekday business, without censure or even proper investigation. It's like nothing was learned from the past, at all.

There is a big difference between thinking about something and acting on something. If some says "God, I would love to smack the manager for pissing me off". Should they be handed the P45 for their thoughts?

I sure this employee was garda vetted before his employment

Wanderer2010 · 16-02-2017 05:24PM

Why on earth CANT you be sacked in the public sector? I just don't get it. If you are paid to do a job and you screw up, are always late or you steal then surely you should, after you follow the procedures, be able to sack someone. I work in the private sector and there have been people fired at my job but every single procedure had been followed and the person given a chance to change.

Is the public sector handbook so deliberately confusing and muddled that it prevents anyone from getting the sack or what is the reason? Are other countries this precious with their public sector workers? That guy is a weirdo and shouldn't still have his job. Moving to other duties is a big cop out.

16-02-2017 05:30PM

newacc2015 wrote: »

There is a big difference between thinking about something and acting on something. If some says "God, I would love to smack the manager for pissing me off". Should they be handed the P45 for their thoughts?

I sure this employee was garda vetted before his employment

I completely agree, there is a difference. This man has already sexually harassed someone, and that's also a difference.

Few people would think its wise to have someone who admits to fantasizing about schoolchildren working in a place that brings them into regular contact with schoolchildren. Particularly someone who's already admitted inappropriate sexual behaviour by harassing a colleague.

I'm not sure museum workers need garda clearance.

16-02-2017 05:33PM

newacc2015 wrote: »

There is a big difference between thinking about something and acting on something.

I agree absolutely but, if it's true, this situation stinks to high heaven.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/man-keeps-job-at-museum-despite-sexually-harassing-colleague-35455704.html

An investigation commissioned by the museum concluded the man kissed a woman and touched her buttocks on a number of occasions in the workplace.

The man denied knowingly sexually harassing his work colleague ... However, he admitted his work colleague had been "a foil for his fantasies".

when the woman initially made an informal complaint about the harassment, the man was given other duties. But he was not told the real reason at the time.

Some time after the investigation was completed the woman left the museum when her contract was not renewed. The man was then allowed to resume his earlier role.

When questioned by the consultants, the man claimed he was a "naturally touchy feely" person and had not realised the woman's discomfort at his behaviour. He said he was told he was being reassigned due to increased workload.

While there had been "a chat" with a more senior colleague at the time about his misuse of the internet and his behaviour with female staff, no names were mentioned.

16-02-2017 05:33PM

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

There is no law against fantasising about tall schoolgirls. We haven't entered the realm of thought crime quite yet in Western society thankfully.

No, he acted out and assaulted a colleague after noticing - and lets call a spade a spade - schoolchildren in the cafe. Minors, tall or otherwise.

That behaviour is concerning, especially in someone who comes into regular contact with schoolkids.He didn't think about sexually touching a colleague, he did it. And he did it after fantasizing about schoolkids, as he admits.

I don't think it's unreasonable to be concerned about that.

Arcade_Tryer · 16-02-2017 05:33PM

Candie wrote: »

Few people would think its wise to have someone who admits to fantasizing about schoolchildren working in a place that brings them into regular contact with schoolchildren. Particularly someone who's already admitted inappropriate sexual behaviour by harassing a colleague.

I think you underestimate the amount of people who fantasise about tall schoolgirls. They are doctors, accountants, lawyers, Guards, Teachers, Office workers and so on. It's either ok to fantasise, or it's not. Admitting it is simply speaking the truth. And a person should not be punished simply for telling the truth, when they have not committed any actual crime.

Arcade_Tryer · 16-02-2017 05:36PM

Candie wrote: »

No, he acted out and assaulted a colleague after noticing - and lets call a spade a spade - schoolchildren in the cafe. Minors, tall or otherwise
.

Ah, that's a separate issue however in the context in which you originally said it. Assaulting a colleague is a crime. Fantasising about tall schoolgirls is not. And the latter should not automatically be a cause for concern. That's my point.

16-02-2017 05:36PM

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

I think you underestimate the amount of people who fantasise about tall schoolgirls. They are doctors, accountants, lawyers, Guards, Teachers, Office workers and so on. It's either ok to fantasise, or it's not. Admitting it is simply speaking the truth. And a person should not be punished simply for telling the truth, when they have not committed any actual crime.

I don't think many men fantasize about schoolkids.

They might fantasize about adult women dressed as schoolgirls, but this guy didn't say that.

Arcade_Tryer · 16-02-2017 05:43PM

Candie wrote: »

I don't think many men fantasize about schoolkids.

They might fantasize about adult women dressed as schoolgirls, but this guy didn't say that.

That's a fair point. But you'd be surprised at how many men rarely miss an opportunity to have a nice stare at a schoolgirl walking along while driving and so on. It's human nature. I'm sure there are male teachers who have fantasies about some of their female students also. That's life. That's why we create laws on sexual consent. And civilise ourselves in accordance with those laws.

anitaca · 16-02-2017 07:25PM

Candie wrote: »

I don't think many men fantasize about schoolkids.

They might fantasize about adult women dressed as schoolgirls, but this guy didn't say that.

And if the article is anything to go by he never claimed to fantasize about schoolkids.

wakka12 · 16-02-2017 07:49PM

newacc2015 wrote: »

There is a big difference between thinking about something and acting on something. If some says "God, I would love to smack the manager for pissing me off". Should they be handed the P45 for their thoughts?

I sure this employee was garda vetted before his employment

You're right, but fantasising about minors (presumably...?) means he is a possible danger to the public. Thinking about hitting somebody when you're angry is more natural thought..and also I think it would not go well if that person was open about the fact they wanted to hit their manager, even if they didnt act on it.

Summer wind · 16-02-2017 07:58PM

Nobody should have to or be expected to put up with this behaviour in their place of work. He should have been sacked.

Arcade_Tryer · 16-02-2017 10:57PM

wakka12 wrote: »

You're right, but fantasising about minors (presumably...?) means he is a possible danger to the public. Thinking about hitting somebody when you're angry is more natural thought..and also I think it would not go well if that person was open about the fact they wanted to hit their manager, even if they didnt act on it.

That's a very dangerous presumption to make. Fantasy is fantasy. Reality is reality.

Many people have rape fantasies. Does that mean they are more of a danger to the public than those who don't? And further, should they be reprimanded simply for having those fantasies?

RayCun · 16-02-2017 10:59PM

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

His union would have more power than common sense, they could close every musuem in the country over a sacking of him.

You assume he is in a union. What about the woman he groped? Is she not in the same union?

Galway_Old_Man · 16-02-2017 11:16PM

Fuc(ker should be locked up. Disgrace.

Realt Dearg Sec · 17-02-2017 12:42AM

Galway_Old_Man wrote: »

Fuc(ker should be locked up. Disgrace.

If everyone who grabs a woman's ar$e is to be locked up then you could pretty much put half the male population in the clink tomorrow.

_Whimsical_ · 17-02-2017 12:58AM

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

That's a very dangerous presumption to make. Fantasy is fantasy. Reality is reality.

Many people have rape fantasies. Does that mean they are more of a danger to the public than those who don't? And further, should they be reprimanded simply for having those fantasies?

Those whose sexual fantasies involve minors or children who happen to work somewhere that they are mixing with minors and who have demonstrated a problem with sexual impulse control should definitely not be let continue working in situations where they encounter children.

Do you leave your child with someone who's told you they fantastise about raping your child? Do you say "hey , it's only a fantasy buddy!" and clap them on the back?
If there's a definitive line it's where children are concerned, you don't take the chance if you know for an absolute fact that someone is that way inclined.

Realt Dearg Sec · 17-02-2017 01:36AM

_Whimsical_ wrote: »

Those whose sexual fantasies involve minors or children who happen to work somewhere that they are mixing with minors and who have demonstrated a problem with sexual impulse control should definitely not be let continue working in situations where they encounter children.

Do you leave your child with someone who's told you they fantastise about raping your child? Do you say "hey , it's only a fantasy buddy!" and clap them on the back?
If there's a definitive line it's where children are concerned, you don't take the chance if you know for an absolute fact that someone is that way inclined.

You're right, the best thing would be for people like that to be encouraged not to tell anyone about those fantasies. That's that problem solved. Now, what about this Garda whistleblower thing.

JupiterKid · 17-02-2017 01:48AM

It's one thing to fantasise, another to sexually assault someone (in this case, a co-worker). The guy in question sounds like a perve and a creep to me. He should at the very least be disciplined - yes, and perhaps lose his job over this.

anitaca · 17-02-2017 02:25AM

you guys are still claiming the guy fantasizes about kids. he may well do but i cant tell from the article. seeing the tall schoolgirls (who could have been mature looking 18 year olds) fuelled his fantasy of tall women and after he saw the schoolgirls he acted out the fantasy using his colleague.

me_right_one · 17-02-2017 02:28AM

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

There is no law against fantasising about tall schoolgirls. We haven't entered the realm of thought crime quite yet in Western society thankfully.

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

But you'd be surprised at how many men rarely miss an opportunity to have a nice stare at a schoolgirl walking along while driving and so on. It's human nature. I'm sure there are male teachers who have fantasies about some of their female students also. That's life.

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

That's a very dangerous presumption to make. Fantasy is fantasy. Reality is reality.

Many people have rape fantasies. Does that mean they are more of a danger to the public than those who don't?

No its not human nature, it is not "life". For most people, the complete opposite is the case - you see a schoolgirl, you think of your own sister / daughter and hope there's no weirdo perving at her and excusing himself by saying his desire to rape her is only a fantasy.

Cameo · 19-02-2017 02:51AM

I don't know if that's true for most people, me_right_one. It's not a nice idea but I'd say a lot of men fantasise about sex with a teenage girl - as long as it stays within their head, it is only a thought.

That said, if someone admitted to those fantasies, you'd be worried - although maybe the person who says nothing is more dangerous than the person who is open about it.

It's an awkward one as you can't legislate for people's thoughts.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 20-02-2017 11:54AM

me_right_one wrote: »

No its not human nature, it is not "life". For most people, the complete opposite is the case - you see a schoolgirl, you think of your own sister / daughter and hope there's no weirdo perving at her and excusing himself by saying his desire to rape her is only a fantasy.

Fantasising is most certainly human nature. And without talking about it, you can have no idea what most people are or are not fantasising about.

And no fantasy is illegal. Acting it out may well be, but imagining it is not.

Harry Palmr · 20-02-2017 11:59AM

Cameo wrote: »

It's an awkward one as you can't legislate for people's thoughts.

Only a matter of time and I'm not joking, in 30-40 years we'll all be wired to a control unit.

20-02-2017 12:21PM

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

Many people have rape fantasies...

Huh? What?

Harry Palmr · 20-02-2017 12:25PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Huh? What?

You are clearly living a sheltered sex life! My safe-word is "matron"

FishOnABike · 20-02-2017 12:49PM

Harry Palmr wrote: »

You are clearly living a sheltered sex life! My safe-word is "matron"

Ooooooooh matron (in best Kenneth Williams voice) - it just had to be said.

Arevaci · 20-02-2017 12:56PM

FishOnABike wrote: »

Ooooooooh matron (in best Kenneth Williams voice) - it just had to be said.

Is that a bone in your pocket or are you just happy to see me

20-02-2017 08:48PM

Carry On Curating

National Museum staff member who admitted fantasising after seeing "tall schoolgirls"

Comments