mayolady14 wrote: » No. I chose to bring it up in an anonymous forum to show how reluctant we are to believe rape victims. I have literally no reason to lie. His name is not mentioned and the post was edited so you don’t even know his team or sport. You don’t know when it happened. I didn’t mentioned the Garda station. I have literally nothing to gain or prove and yet still....we can’t believe women when they disclose they were assaulted
sashafierce wrote: » This post has been deleted.
irishrebe wrote: » It's not about assuming someone is guilty of rape. It's about NOT assuming someone is guilty of lying about being raped.
Mokuba wrote: Why would you automatically believe a stranger that you don't know? And why would it make any difference to the stranger whether some randomers on a forum believe her? What a strange post.
mayolady14 wrote: » If you told me someone robbed you, I’d believe you. I might not believe who you say it was, but I’d believe you.
Appledreams15 wrote: » Mayolady, today all women of Ireland stand together. I feel your pain, and I have suffered what you have suffered. It is so important to get as many people to these rallies today as possible. It is vitally important to raise international awareness of human rights abuses of women in Ireland
irishrebe wrote: » Nobody is saying they should be automatically believed. But as it stands, they tend NOT to be believed. That is the default reaction. Someone is posting here, saying they have been raped, and look how many people are undermining her, victim blaming and insisting she must be a liar. How can you honestly not think there's a serious problem in this country? I've sent the link to this thread to various friends around the world and they're absolutely appalled.
mayolady14 wrote: » How? If someone tells you a crime happened to them do you not believe them?
retro:electro wrote: » Do you not think this is absolutely ridiculous and frankly dangerous? Why should we always “believe women” on the basis that they are women? Are we too weak to be challenged? Are so feeble minded that we are incapable of lying, or will we faint at the feet of anyone who dare question us? Why?
seamus wrote: » That's not correct. There are circumstances where you may stab someone to death and you haven't committed a crime. This is why you don't seem to get my point. Rape does not occupy some special category where a crime can have occurred but the person who committed it is not a criminal. If you cannot prove that a crime was committed by the person, then what they did was not a crime. The legal system has to work that way, it makes no sense otherwise. You can always tag the "...but the court may have made a mistake" rider onto any verdict. That's taken as a given, it doesn't even need to be said.
Sidebaro wrote: » I'm not claiming to be clever. I merely claimed you needed to educate yourself on the reasons as to why so few rape victims come forward. Disbelieving them, as you did (almost proudly?), is part of that.
Omackeral wrote: » There's a part on the form when you get selected for jury duty that says ''If you feel you cannot fulfill these duties, please respond within X amount of days outlining your reasons for same''. I would suggest you consider filling out that subsection should such a form ever come through your letterbox.
Wibbs wrote: » irishrebe wrote: » Nobody is saying they should be automatically believed. But as it stands, they tend NOT to be believed. That is the default reaction. Someone is posting here, saying they have been raped, and look how many people are undermining her, victim blaming and insisting she must be a liar. How can you honestly not think there's a serious problem in this country? I've sent the link to this thread to various friends around the world and they're absolutely appalled. Who is "victim blaming" that poster? Point it out please. More let's go to def con one on the jargon. mayolady14 wrote: » How? If someone tells you a crime happened to them do you not believe them? I give them the benefit of the doubt and ask for more details. retro:electro wrote: » Do you not think this is absolutely ridiculous and frankly dangerous? Why should we always “believe women” on the basis that they are women? Are we too weak to be challenged? Are so feeble minded that we are incapable of lying, or will we faint at the feet of anyone who dare question us? Why? That's one of the biggest ironies with current so called "feminism", it promotes the notion that women are not strong, that they're agentless victims prey to emotional overreactions who need safe spaces and near constant protection(ironically from and by men). The poor dears. A notion that wouldn't be out of place in archaic Victorian attitudes to women.
mayolady14 wrote: » No one is saying women can’t lie or we should lock men up on the basis for one testimony? If you told me someone robbed you, I’d believe you. I might not believe who you say it was, but I’d believe you.
irishrebe wrote: » I would very much argue that not being able to access abortion, even in the case of rape, and maybe being prosecuted for undergoing an illegal abortion, is very much a human rights abuse and characteristic of a patriarchal totalitarian state. Being forced to carry, give birth to and possibly raise a rapist's child seems quite the human rights abuse to me. What do you consider human rights abuse then, Wibbs?
Omackeral wrote: »
Mr.H wrote: » You have a disgusting attitude and really need to grow up. Stop dragging everyone into a victim status. You didnt serve on the jury for this case so didnt see the evidence. The people that did found the men innocent and that is it. Dont make up your own story for this case because the story is, she willingly had group sex. That was her choice. She for some reason cried rape afterwards. We dont know why and probably never will. But in this case there was no rape. Let it go
OldNotWIse wrote: » irishrebe wrote: » It's not about assuming someone is guilty of rape. It's about NOT assuming someone is guilty of lying about being raped. That's some impressive mental gymnastics. I don't believe that was the question put to the jury though
Mr.H wrote: » Listen the lads are not guilty. The woman either lied or she thought she was telling the truth. A lot of people are talking balls about consent and evidence but the fact is they are not guilty of this or any crime. Just because some feminazi idiots want to drag this out because "all men are potential rapists", doesnt mean they have any clue what they are talking about. Anyone who keeps droning on about this case is not just dragging it out for the lads, but also the woman they think is a victim. Let it go. Let all parties move on with their lives.
Mr.H wrote: » A jury member is suppose to look at the facts and the facts alone. The facts didnt add up to rape. So why would you believe there was rape? You said women can lie. So why cant this woman have lied? (I dont think she did myself but I also dont think it wad rape)
Mr.H wrote: » irishrebe wrote: » I would very much argue that not being able to access abortion, even in the case of rape, and maybe being prosecuted for undergoing an illegal abortion, is very much a human rights abuse and characteristic of a patriarchal totalitarian state. Being forced to carry, give birth to and possibly raise a rapist's child seems quite the human rights abuse to me. What do you consider human rights abuse then, Wibbs? This case has nothing to do with the 8th She is not pregnant and was not raped
irishrebe wrote: » In case you didn't notice, I was replying to Wibbs asking what human rights abuses are being committed in Ireland.
Uncharted wrote: You're pathetic if you believe an Internet forum is the place to bare your soul and not be challenged on every detail of it. IT'S AN ONLINE FORUM,not a drop in centre for victims. Get a grip. Every female I know would be ashamed of your 'womans' opinions.
mayolady14 wrote: » yourdeadwright wrote: » Again if you felt unfairly treated you should have followed up with a complaint and perused the matter, Without sounded cold hearted The Ombudsman is in place to help complaints like this, its the sole reason it is in place .You decided not to peruse the one route that is there and then complain things need to change , It’s pretty telling that you and others on this tread would prefer to chastise me for not taking things further than be horrified that 1. This happened and 2. A guard did nothing.
yourdeadwright wrote: » Again if you felt unfairly treated you should have followed up with a complaint and perused the matter, Without sounded cold hearted The Ombudsman is in place to help complaints like this, its the sole reason it is in place .You decided not to peruse the one route that is there and then complain things need to change ,
mayolady14 wrote: » They don’t add up to rape beyond reasonable doubt. Sure she could’ve, but if she had decided to lie she literally must have decided straight away as she was crying bleeding etc, and texted her friend the next day. Pretty quick turnaround to decide on a massive plot to take down a couple of rugby players with a sore head.
OldNotWIse wrote: » Mr.H wrote: » You have a disgusting attitude and really need to grow up. Stop dragging everyone into a victim status. You didnt serve on the jury for this case so didnt see the evidence. The people that did found the men innocent and that is it. Dont make up your own story for this case because the story is, she willingly had group sex. That was her choice. She for some reason cried rape afterwards. We dont know why and probably never will. But in this case there was no rape. Let it go Amen. I was a victim, and posts like this disgust me. Bullsh*t sisterhood claptrap. #dontspeakforme
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w4.vanillicon.com/v2/4c2f272c464d99a9eee64a80fbe71a0c.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w8.vanillicon.com/v2/8d35864a3237216e70f346edd3eb761f.svg)
