The podcast/ Facebook group

Lead · 24-06-2017 5:59am #1

Has anyone heard the latest It Galz podcast about consent and what do you think?

I'm fuming! I'm so angry at those two uneducated idiots saying you weren't raped if it wasn't violent.

idunno78 · 24-06-2017 3:34pm

Didn't listen to it but read a lot of comments about it! Read a bit on twitter to!
They come across very bad and a lot of people seem to be hurt! Thankfully the topic does not affect me but I can't imagine how it would affect people it has.
The comments on their twitter make them sound really uneducated and like they just did this to make them more in the public eye! (Just my opinion).
I read the apology and the way (from what I've read) went on about Rosemary was terrible seeing as one of the girls experience was really similar to Rosemarys. Hopefully she is ok and gets an apology aswell!

Lead · 24-06-2017 5:17pm

Don't think there's a way of listening to it now. You really wouldn't want to, it was awful

Jthreehats · 24-06-2017 5:18pm

Lead wrote: »

Has anyone heard the latest It Galz podcast about consent and what do you think?

I'm fuming! I'm so angry at those two uneducated idiots saying you weren't raped if it wasn't violent.

They never said that, what they spoke about was consent, if there is no threat to you physically or otherwise and you have a choice to stop the encounter but choose to consent, and then regret it later. Some people are calling that rape. And that's wrong. If you have a choice. Like in rosemaries article, she chose to have sex rather than tell the guy she wasn't interested. rape is when your choice is removed.

RoisinClare6 · 24-06-2017 5:40pm

I listened to it, didn't appreciate the laughter in it for the topic that it was. They aren't handling the criticisms well either. They were apparently blocking people and deleting people telling their stories which bothered me because at the start of the podcast that it was their opinion and they should be allowed to voice it basically, yet that courtesy wasn't extended to others on their platform. I can see how people took it up and can see it from both sides.

Jthreehats · 24-06-2017 5:40pm

wrote:

<snipped>

No they Really didn't, and they think, like many others that rosemaries article was irresponsible and dangerous, The women that think that type of encounter is rape got majorly pissed off when the idea of personal responsibility in situations such as rosemaries was brought up. they were called rape apologists and everything else. And then a suicide attempt was put down to their conversation on the podcast. Rosemary took to twitter and her followers came out with pitchforks, Absolutely mental.

RoisinClare6 · 24-06-2017 5:42pm

Jthreehats wrote: »

No they Really didn't, and they think, like many others that rosemaries article was irresponsible and dangerous, The women that think that type of encounter is rape got majorly pissed off when the idea of personal responsibility in situations such as rosemaries was brought up. they were called rape apologists and everything else. And then a suicide attempt was put down to their conversation on the podcast. Rosemary took to twitter and her followers came out with pitchforks, Absolutely mental.

it wasn't all rosemary though, I had seen it on a popular snapchat group before rosemary put anything up

Jthreehats · 24-06-2017 5:53pm

RoisinClare6 wrote: »

it wasn't all rosemary though, I had seen it on a popular snapchat group before rosemary put anything up

I don't know the Snapchat group, she called them rape apologists and victim blamers from her platform with 40 odd thousand followers.

RoisinClare6 · 24-06-2017 6:45pm

Jthreehats wrote: »

I don't know the Snapchat group, she called them rape apologists and victim blamers from her platform with 40 odd thousand followers.

One group had 1,500+ and the other 18,000+ in the other group, each group was discussing them on facebook, quite a few in the snapchat group have a large following on their personal snapchat accounts so it was discussed by many people not just after rosemarys tweets. Another group got wind after that with another following of one thousand plus.

At the end of the day, they put their views out for the world to hear which they are entitled to do, the same as people can have an opinion about the content they put out there. Rosemary was voicing her opinion on a public forum just like the other two did.

They said at the start they would talk about things even if it their views did not correlate to popular opinions. On such a big topic heavy critic was to be expected. Considering they used rosemary as an example there was no shadow of a doubt that she would reply. Like in the podcast they explained that rosemary often posted her blogs to their group, saying she was looking for traffic on her blog and to start a conversation which often got heated and lots of people spoke about on the page. So they themselves knew what they were doing by including her and therefore used her platform to start a conversation and get his just as she had done previously.

They were well aware of what they were doing.

Jthreehats · 24-06-2017 8:12pm

RoisinClare6 wrote: »

One group had 1,500+ and the other 18,000+ in the other group, each group was discussing them on facebook, quite a few in the snapchat group have a large following on their personal snapchat accounts so it was discussed by many people not just after rosemarys tweets. Another group got wind after that with another following of one thousand plus.

At the end of the day, they put their views out for the world to hear which they are entitled to do, the same as people can have an opinion about the content they put out there. Rosemary was voicing her opinion on a public forum just like the other two did.

They said at the start they would talk about things even if it their views did not correlate to popular opinions. On such a big topic heavy critic was to be expected. Considering they used rosemary as an example there was no shadow of a doubt that she would reply. Like in the podcast they explained that rosemary often posted her blogs to their group, saying she was looking for traffic on her blog and to start a conversation which often got heated and lots of people spoke about on the page. So they themselves knew what they were doing by including her and therefore used her platform to start a conversation and get his just as she had done previously.

They were well aware of what they were doing.

I don't think they were aware a discussion about popular warped ideas of what constitutes rape. Would be taken as them blaming victims of rape, they talked about responsibility with regard to consent, regret, personal responsibility and the repercussions of watered down 'rape experiences ' and the men involved

RoisinClare6 · 24-06-2017 9:00pm

Jthreehats wrote: »

I don't think they were aware a discussion about popular warped ideas of what constitutes rape. Would be taken as them blaming victims of rape, they talked about responsibility with regard to consent, regret, personal responsibility and the repercussions of watered down 'rape experiences ' and the men involved

I'm sure they are well aware of peoples varying opinions as the topic has be discussed on numerous platforms before including their own when rosemary posted the blog to their facebook group awhile back, like when it was discussed in the past few days there was highly different opinions. Deleting peoples comments sharing their experiences and blocking them hasn't helped them in the slightest, people will take that as being censored or silenced, which is a bit hypocritical considering they were saying theyhave the right to share their opinions. I'm not saying what is said about them is true or that people who are of the the opposite opinion are right but I don't think the uproar lies entirely on rosemarys shoulders as explained above it was discussed at length and thoughts brought to them before she tweeted. That's all I'm saying.

Jthreehats · 24-06-2017 9:23pm

RoisinClare6 wrote: »

I'm sure they are well aware of peoples varying opinions as the topic has be discussed on numerous platforms before including their own when rosemary posted the blog to their facebook group awhile back, like when it was discussed in the past few days there was highly different opinions. Deleting peoples comments sharing their experiences and blocking them hasn't helped them in the slightest, people will take that as being censored or silenced, which is a bit hypocritical considering they were saying theyhave the right to share their opinions. I'm not saying what is said about them is true or that people who are of the the opposite opinion are right but I don't think the uproar lies entirely on rosemarys shoulders as explained above it was discussed at length and thoughts brought to them before she tweeted. That's all I'm saying.

Yeah, no I would agree with you, I don't think it rosemaries fault that a conversation about consent was taken up as victim blaming and rape apologising, but I do think she tried to sway her followers to think that, and used her platform to do so.

Dolbert · 24-06-2017 9:24pm

Sorry but where did Rosemary revoke consent? She said no repeatedly, the guy didn't take no for an answer. Don't state things that are blatantly untrue just because you don't like a blogger. Some of the comments in that podcast were utterly disgusting ("You have to ask yourself if you could have got out of it") and had women blaming themselves for what happened to them all over again. Not to mention how appalling it is to openly dissect someone else's experience for content. I'm just shocked that one of them is apparently in marketing because that's one of the worst PR moves I've seen in a long time.

Jthreehats · 24-06-2017 9:33pm

Dolbert wrote: »

Sorry but where did Rosemary revoke consent? She said no repeatedly, the guy didn't take no for an answer. Don't state things that are blatantly untrue just because you don't like a blogger. Some of the comments in that podcast were utterly disgusting ("You have to ask yourself if you could have got out of it") and had women blaming themselves for what happened to them all over again. Not to mention how appalling it is to openly dissect someone else's experience for content. I'm just shocked that one of them is apparently in marketing because that's one of the worst PR moves I've seen in a long time.

Well if you are of the oppinion the experience rosemaries article outlines constitutes rape, then yeah I guess you would be annoyed by that being looked at. I don't think it was rape as she stated she chose to have sex rather than an awkward conversation, I think it's dangerous to say that type of encounter is rape. It's nothing to do with the blogger, it's to do with having a platform and asking people to look at experiences such as these and call them rape.

Dolbert · 24-06-2017 9:38pm

Rape by coercion is still rape. Non-violent rape is still rape. I can't believe we still have to have this conversation in this day and age. Rosemary didn't say yes, she stopped saying no because the guy wasn't listening anyway.

The podcast had so many people upset because some of it was absolute beyond the pale stuff. Feminists my foot

Here's a link to some quotes from it:
https://twitter.com/niamhmccormax/status/877924218230366209

Dolbert · 24-06-2017 9:49pm

You must have took up a different meaning from the blog post to me so, that's not how I read it. The podcast mirrors the majority opinion of the AH thread going at the time so it wouldn't be that out there in terms of how people think.

Jthreehats · 24-06-2017 10:16pm

these 'receipts are taken completely out of context, and they never mentioned rape survivors, they spoke about consent and responsibility. if you can get out of a situation ie say 'hey I dont fancy you' but you consent instead and then call it rape. is that rape? that ws the question they asked. nothing about victim blaming.

Dolbert · 24-06-2017 10:22pm

"if you can get out of a situation ie say 'hey I dont fancy you' but you consent instead and then call it rape."

But she didn't consent?

Dolbert · 24-06-2017 10:34pm

So she said yes? Like I said, must've been reading a different blogpost

Dolbert · 24-06-2017 10:37pm

Righty-o.

Jthreehats · 24-06-2017 11:14pm

Dolbert wrote: »

"if you can get out of a situation ie say 'hey I dont fancy you' but you consent instead and then call it rape."

But she didn't consent?

In my opinion she did, she chose to have sex. If your opinion is otherwise that's fine.

ibarelycare · 26-06-2017 8:42am

Whilst I agree with what the girls were saying in the Podcast about RMC's specific situation, and I respect their right to haven an opinion, choosing to discuss it was completely ill-advised and downright stupid especially considering they admin a FB page of ~18k women with a very strong feminist tone. Outside of discussing RMC's case, they continuously victim-blamed women who are raped when they're too drunk. Also the way they went about it was very bad, and their actions in the aftermath were very damaging and upsetting to a lot of people.

Lindsay said in the podcast that there was an incident that happened to her and she was told by the RCC that it was rape. She said it wasn't rape. When they were facing a load of backlash she turned it around and said that she was raped and that she was a victim.

They blocked people from the FB page for disagreeing with them and for telling their own rape stories.

RMC blocked them on Twitter and they accused her of "shutting down" conversation, even though they themselves had done the exact same thing.

One of them has left the FB page, the other one spent half the weekend crying on Snapchat over the backlash, and the rest of it twerking and showing off her Bulmers grab bag at Body and Soul :pac:

Lindy97 · 28-06-2017 9:03am

Jthreehats wrote: »

Lead wrote: »

Has anyone heard the latest It Galz podcast about consent and what do you think?

I'm fuming! I'm so angry at those two uneducated idiots saying you weren't raped if it wasn't violent.

They never said that, what they spoke about was consent, if there is no threat to you physically or otherwise and you have a choice to stop the encounter but choose to consent, and then regret it later. Some people are calling that rape. And that's wrong. If you have a choice. Like in rosemaries article, she chose to have sex rather than tell the guy she wasn't interested. rape is when your choice is removed.

Not strictly true, one said that if you can get out of the situation then she doesnt class it as rape, completely discounting the reaction that a lot of women have felt where they freeze and just let it happen, almost like they shut down and leave their body to deal with what's happening. According to one of them, the implication being that if you're not being physically restrained or beaten then yeah you can get out of it so it's not rape.
The whole thing started as a dig at Rosemary, which fair enough they dont like her but the rant about her at the start was completely unnecessary given the serious subject matter "she used our site for hits, blah blah blah, but here's our take on her rape without actually naming her"
They also said that if you had too much to drink, you weren't being responsible and therefore were leaving yourself more open to rape...she then went off to Body and Soul sponsored by Bulmers, so yeah.....
The whole thing was on very shaky ground, and very victim blamey in it's language, even saying what about the poor guys whose lives could be ruined??. They said they welcomed any discussion on it yet when were heavily criticised for it, one went on a blocking spree on said facebook site and blocked a lot of victims of rape who called her out on her bull.

ibarelycare · 28-06-2017 9:24am

Lindsay has closed her FB account now and the Mas who Drink group has been archived.

pc7 · 28-06-2017 9:26am

A new group has been set up now by someone else!

Lindy97 · 28-06-2017 9:48am

Can a group be taken out of the archive and reopened? Or is that it?

ibarelycare · 28-06-2017 9:51am

Lindy97 wrote: »

Can a group be taken out of the archive and reopened? Or is that it?

I think it can. But I reckon they might be just closing it down. Apparently you can't close a group when there are still members in it so they might be archiving it so they can delete everyone and then just delete the group altogether. There are no admins left on the group either.

mel123 · 28-06-2017 11:55am

Im not on FB or insta, its snapchat only for me (and boards).
I couldnt believe it yesterday when Lindsey put up a snap saying she archived the page. Things didnt go her way, so she god rid of it, how childish.
I have read about the backlash, seen a few screenshots and the like, but then i saw her pissed all weekend having a grand aul time at body and soul - she didnt look too distraught about all the drama to me. Im not saying she should be at home crying in to her pillow, but as a blogger you have to take the good with the bad, address it, and move on. Deleting the pages and podcasts to me was a mistake.

SB_Part2 · 28-06-2017 1:20pm

mel123 wrote: »

Im not on FB or insta, its snapchat only for me (and boards).
I couldnt believe it yesterday when Lindsey put up a snap saying she archived the page. Things didnt go her way, so she god rid of it, how childish.
I have read about the backlash, seen a few screenshots and the like, but then i saw her pissed all weekend having a grand aul time at body and soul - she didnt look too distraught about all the drama to me. Im not saying she should be at home crying in to her pillow, but as a blogger you have to take the good with the bad, address it, and move on. Deleting the pages and podcasts to me was a mistake.

Someone mailed her giving her abuse and said that she wasn't raped she was just easy.

She was also being accused of being the sole reason someone tried to commit suicide.

TBH I don't blame her for archiving the group.

Dolbert · 28-06-2017 1:35pm

SB_Part2 wrote: »

Someone mailed her giving her abuse and said that she wasn't raped she was just easy.

She was also being accused of being the sole reason someone tried to commit suicide.

TBH I don't blame her for archiving the group.

In some ways social media facilitates the few psychos who always have to take it too far. You don't like someone on the internet? Great, just ignore them and get on with your life like a normal person! But instead you get the virtual stalkers simultaneously taking the moral high ground while engaging in abuse and harassment. You'd have to wonder what someone's life has come to to think that's a normal sane thing to do.

Lindy97 · 28-06-2017 1:37pm

Obviously anyone sending her abuse is not on and totally negates their argument against what was said in the podcast and on twitter

mel123 · 28-06-2017 2:39pm

SB_Part2 wrote: »

Someone mailed her giving her abuse and said that she wasn't raped she was just easy.

She was also being accused of being the sole reason someone tried to commit suicide.

TBH I don't blame her for archiving the group.

Leaving my personal opinions aside (dont agree with the trolls, the opinions etc etc), from a marketing point of view and after building up a page/brand i dont think she should have deleted it. The number one rule is to leave all content as is, and move on. The saying yesterdays news is tomorrows chip paper as they say.

But to even start a topic like this anyway, i think it wasnt thought out at all. Rape is a massive touchy subject, and rightly so, dont throw anything out on social media if you cant sand over what your saying and defend/debate it.

SB_Part2 · 28-06-2017 7:50pm

Jthreehats wrote: »

Again.... they spoke about consenting to sex because you don't want to have an awkward conversation, like rosemaries article. Not freezing due to paralysing fear. They have been totally jumped on. as if anyone would say that?? And yeah, if you get totally ****ed up you are more likely to be assaulted. Not ok, they talked about ways to keep yourself safer, And personal responsibility. Rosemary article was dangerous and needed to be publicly addressed it's nothing to do with not liking her. See the massive thread that started as a result of her article

http://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057710031/1/#post102722160

Just because there's an After Hours thread disagreeing with her doesn't mean she's wrong.

Lindy97 · 28-06-2017 8:19pm

Just like there was a large disagreement with the content and views of the podcast from people who listened to it.

silvervixen84 · 28-06-2017 8:24pm

Mod Jthreehats, please read the charter. You must have more than 50 posts to post in this forum.

Everyone else, stick to the topic. This is about the podcast, not RMC's old blog post, which was discussed in detail in the AH thread.

Wexy86 · 28-06-2017 8:56pm

I listened to it today(had downloaded it before it was removed) and for the first bit I was seeing their point but then they started going on about Jenny's brother could possibly be jailed for having drunken sex and then to say that if you get shítfaced and subsequently raped you have an apportionment of blame, seriously. I then listened to it a second time(on a long walk with vcranky baby) and if I was a rape or sexual abuse victim you can hear so much victim blaming.

Yes it has fallen back in the girls faces and yes they have fúcked up, I don't feel Lyndsey's apology was sincere and I haven't seen one form a Jenny but what's done is done, lesson learned I hope.

There's a new post on the It Galz Instagram so the must intend to keep doing podcasts and I see one of the sponsors dresses.ie commenting so they're still on board. Also see from social blade they are gaining new followers daily.

As they say any media is good media

Ray37 · 29-06-2017 6:49pm

I listened to the podcast when it came out... Well, whatever they were trying to say, really didn't come across well. I got the feeling that the podcast was MEANT to go in the direction of revoking consent (ie, had sex, regretted it, and calling it rape). However, if that's what they were trying to talk about, it really didn't work. The laughing and lack of research was insane. I really didn't feel that the podcast was set out with the intention of blaming victims, but their language around the whole thing left a lot to be desired. The conduct of the two girls after the whole thing, well Jesus that was an absolute disaster. They should have taken time to reflect on it, and not gone on the attack. Blocking and deleting comments from rape victims is disgusting. Thank God I have never been in a situation like some of the poor ladies trying to comment, but I can only imagine their fury when they were essentially being silenced. Rape is obviously such a sensitive subject, a huge amount of care needs to be used when discussing it on a public platform. People will interpret what you say in a completely different light if you arent careful. I do think though that the witch hunt of the girls who made the podcast needs to stop, I can kinda see why the page was archived. Post after post was being put up, and the whole conversation was just escalating. Throwing into the mix the accusation of a suicide attempt that was allegedly due to being triggered by the podcast, I can see why the page was archived. The whole thing was an absolute ****show, and no good has come of this. I dont't think the intention was to hurt anyone, but the podcast was terrible, poorly planned, and extremely upsetting for those who have been victims of rape/assault.

Hangdogroad · 22-12-2020 3:37pm

Never previously heard of them till this video. I see they also did a podcast mocking mens mental health. They sound like delightful people.

https://twitter.com/James_MacX/status/1339989512328540171?s=09

The podcast/ Facebook group

Comments