zedhead wrote: » Genuine question. Do you think if she went on trial now for a false rape claim against them and was found not guilty, does that mean they raped her?
jm08 wrote: » It will never get to a situation of it going to CAS. The IRFU can just suspend them until the end of their contract if they want to. All they have to do is keep paying them. PJ's contract is up in June next year. He will be very stupid if he pursues anyone legally about this. All its doing is keeping his name in the spotlight.
super_furry wrote: » Looks like the rehabilitation attempts have begun in earnest, but I don’t think the public at large are going to buy it. Especially when he’s threatening to sue everyone who says they don’t believe him.
FrancieBrady wrote: » What is sexist about describing a woman who is, in somebody's opinion, sexually promiscuous as a slut? It is a slang term for somebody like that recognised by dictionaries as such. You may not like the term, that doesn't make it sexist. Referring to 'all women as sluts' would of course be sexist and warrants sanction.
AudreyHepburn wrote: » I’m not defending sexism at all - I’m saying you can’t accuse PJ etc al of being sexist from a few WhatsApp messages.
AudreyHepburn wrote: » And I’m also noting that they are far from the only people to have messages in their chats that could be taken the wrong way by the wrong person.
AudreyHepburn wrote: » I suppose the apologize was a necessary evil for PR but I don’t think it’s far to take it as him admitting he did what she claimed he did or that he is acknowledging being sexist.
blanch152 wrote: » Let's go back to your argument that people can be called something because of what they did but not what they are. Are women called sluts because they are women or because they engage in promiscuous acts? Using your definitions, wouldn't the following apply: "All women are sluts" - that is sexist. "That woman is a slut" - that is not sexist, if it is based on something she did. "Some women are sluts" - that is also not sexist "Where there any sluts there?" - that is also not sexist, if it follows from the previous belief/statement that only some women are sluts. Now, let's be clear, I am using your definitions here, and the above should not be taken to represent my view.
Yeah_Right wrote: » Its called PR mate. All part of the rehabilitation. There will be classes/courses run by some professor/doctor in sociology or women studies or sexuality. He will probably have to do a few talks to young men/schoolboys about respecting women. I wouldn't be surprised if he started attending church with a couple of his more religious Ulster teammates and then he will be back on the field and this will all be forgotten.
Yeah_Right wrote: » My girlfriend and her friends call each other sluts. Sometimes they even do it on Whatsap and Facebook. Is that sexist? Are they sluts? Is it offensive ? Should they apologise.
blanch152 wrote: » Suspending him without grounds unless they are set out in his contract could amount to restraint of trade causing loss of income and leave the IRFU open to paying significant damages to Jackson and Holding.
joe40 wrote: » You persist in that argument. As far as I.know the term.was used in relation to a photo with women, they did not know. The "slut" word was a generic term for women they meet on nights out. I'm not old fsshioned, or a prude but that is just horrible. And no everyone is not like that and it is not the same as jokey banter, dirty jokes etc there is a world of a difference. I'm from donegal imagine if my daughter got a selfie with Michael Murphy and he then sent a whatsapp message to other team members some " letterkenny sluts" would you seriously try to defend that, cause if so you would go well down in my estimation.
Grayson wrote: » wtf are you trying to say? Are you actually trying to argue against people calling out sexism?
FrancieBrady wrote: » Well, I wouldn't get too upset as I would realise he didn't know my daughter. Seriously, if you want to live in a world where people get upset to the level they have about private messages between a group of lads, go ahead. Most of us aren't. The comment, in private, not directed at womankind in general is not sexist. There are promiscuous women (sluts, as some like to call them) in the world, the lads had no problems taking advantage of that promiscuity so I am not even sure they were being derogatory and where being the male equivalent (horndogs) Most men and women grow out of that phase.
AudreyHepburn wrote: » Grayson wrote: » Even one of the rugby players admits the language is demeaning and wrong.https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/ashamed-paddy-jackson-apologises-for-degrading-messages-1.3452843 Seriously, stop trying to defend sexism. It's disgusting. I’m not defending sexism at all - I’m saying you can’t accuse PJ etc al of being sexist from a few WhatsApp messages. And I’m also noting that they are far from the only people to have messages in their chats that could be taken the wrong way by the wrong person. I suppose the apologize was a necessary evil for PR but I don’t think it’s far to take it as him admitting he did what she claimed he did or that he is acknowledging being sexist.
Grayson wrote: » Even one of the rugby players admits the language is demeaning and wrong.https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/ashamed-paddy-jackson-apologises-for-degrading-messages-1.3452843 Seriously, stop trying to defend sexism. It's disgusting.
Appledreams15 wrote: » Jackson's apology sounded heartfelt today. I'm glad he did it. I'm glad he understood the public anger at him. And I'm glad he has learned from it.
FrancieBrady wrote: » joe40 wrote: » You persist in that argument. As far as I.know the term.was used in relation to a photo with women, they did not know. The "slut" word was a generic term for women they meet on nights out. I'm not old fsshioned, or a prude but that is just horrible. And no everyone is not like that and it is not the same as jokey banter, dirty jokes etc there is a world of a difference. I'm from donegal imagine if my daughter got a selfie with Michael Murphy and he then sent a whatsapp message to other team members some " letterkenny sluts" would you seriously try to defend that, cause if so you would go well down in my estimation. Well, I wouldn't get too upset as I would realise he didn't know my daughter. Seriously, if you want to live in a world where people get upset to the level they have about private messages between a group of lads, go ahead. Most of us aren't. The comment, in private, not directed at womankind in general is not sexist. There are promiscuous women (sluts, as some like to call them) in the world, the lads had no problems taking advantage of that promiscuity so I am not even sure they were being derogatory and where being the male equivalent (horndogs) Most men and women grow out of that phase.
FrancieBrady wrote: » so I am not even sure they were being derogatory
cloudatlas wrote: » "Love Belfast sluts" how many women is that in your opinion?
cloudatlas wrote: » Yes you can accuse them of sexism because the mesages were sexist and full of misogyny. The defence is sure this is normal bants. If it is then it is also sexist and in my opinion not normal.
mfceiling wrote: » He's not threatening to sue everyone who doesn't believe him. It's more to do with people posting on social media that he is a rapist even though a jury acquitted him of the same charge. As Ricky Gervais said "people now believe that their "opinion" is as valid as "facts".
Augeo wrote: » Appledreams15 wrote: » Jackson's apology sounded heartfelt today. I'm glad he did it. I'm glad he understood the public anger at him. And I'm glad he has learned from it. Damage limitation.......... he's thinking of his pocket.
Strazdas wrote: » It's definitely not normal. Referring to women as 'brasses' and 'sluts' sounds like a bunch of guys who don't particularly like women rather than regular lads banter. Not every younger man is part of this "sports jock" mentality.
wexie wrote: » cloudatlas wrote: » "Love Belfast sluts" how many women is that in your opinion? See.....the discussion on this can go on forever and nobody would ever come out on top. You could argue : all women in Belfast or : Just the women in Belfast with questionable morals. And neither side could prove the other wrong.
wexie wrote: » See.....the discussion on this can go on forever and nobody would ever come out on top. You could argue : all women in Belfast or : Just the women in Belfast with questionable morals. And neither side could prove the other wrong.
Chief Supt. Lorraine Wheatley wrote: » As a Chief Superintendent in AGS, this case has been driving me absolutely round the bend. My colleagues in the PSNI agree that it is a bit of a circus by all accounts. I have obviously had years of experience in the law and I have never seen something as ridiculous as this. Paddy Jackson was found not guilty in a court of law. NOT guilty. It is absolute nonsense that people went out on the streets and protested against a verdict which stands legally. If the woman wants to appeal the verdict then she can do so. The men should be left alone. I am a woman and a Chief Super in the Gardaí and find this outrageous. I do feel sorry for the men involved. That is just my opinion. Lorraine.
GreeBo wrote: » I'm not *trying* to say anything. What I am stating is that your argument is sexist. If its wrong for a man to call a woman a slut, but fine for a woman to call another woman a slut (as the complainant did in this case) then that is treating people differently because of nothing other than their sex. They have a word for that now...I bet you can guess what it is.
jm08 wrote: » She didn't call another woman a slut - what she said was the girls were 'being slutty.' (which could, according to the dictionary mean that they were either being 'untidy or lazy' or being 'promiscuous with many casual sexual partners'.'
