Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Belfast rape trial discussion thread II

1…2728303233…108

Comments

  • #872
    SterlingArcher
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,767 ✭✭✭SterlingArcher


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    I think the people who have really let the mask slip are those women at the forefront of Rape Crisis Centres north and south.

    Their remit is to prevent rape and to educate on the issues surrounding it.

    Rather than make this a conversation about personal responsibility for all young people socialising, they have climbed on to a feminist bandwagon and made it about men and male sporting organisations.

    A complete dereliction of their responsibilities imo.

    The desperation to abandon reasoned, rational thought, seems to be highly infectious, when it comes to blindly seeking moral superiority in an empty power game that produces no winners.

    These are the first utterings, before the loud shriekings of "toxic masculinity" dot dot dot....

    Thought so short sighted and utterly void of any complexity.

    That family in the car that drowned .the guy who jumped into the water to save that baby while his girlfriend watched on helplessly ( well he was just full of toxic masculinity). His now ex girlfriend is suing the dead families estate by the way...those pesky men amiright.

    The men who rushed the terrorists onboard that flight( were just full of toxic masculinity ).

    The French policeman that traded his life for the life of a woman inside that shop (That was sexist. Pure toxic masculinity)

    The desire for these type of women to try attack men at every level is unwavering.

    They are not the good people . You can see the miserable viciousness oozing out of every pore. And these want to be the ones to dictate how a man should behave.


  • #873
    ArthurDayne
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,930 ✭✭✭ArthurDayne


    facehugger99 wrote: »
    I've a better idea that will be simpler.

    1. Don't act like an arsehole.

    Again, more sidestepping.

    Would you support the program. Yes or No?


  • #874
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,560 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    facehugger99 wrote: »
    I've a better idea that will be simpler.

    1. Don't act like an arsehole.

    You don't think there will be drunk young girls clambering to get into nightclub VIP areas tonight?

    So deluded. :rolleyes:


  • #875
    Roger Hassenforder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,555 ✭✭✭Roger Hassenforder


    Mrsmum wrote: »
    You suspect incorrectly. And I also have four teenagers.
    See joe40's post to explain what actually happened.

    I strongly doubt you have any regular engagement with anyone between the ages of 14 to 24 such is the shock and outrage youre affecting at behaviour. If you do, theyre masking their norms very well.
    BTW, I dont condone it. But i just dont condemn it whether as a display of moral indignation and outrage, or genuine outrage.


  • #876
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,560 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    BBC reporter saying there that this is not really a sacking, it is a mutual agreement involving a financial settlement.

    A fudge to quieten the mob. And they seem to have bought it.


  • Advertisement
  • #877
    Mrsmum
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,860 ✭✭✭Mrsmum


    Roger Hassenforder wrote: »
    I strongly doubt you have any regular engagement with anyone between the ages of 14 to 24 such is the shock and outrage youre affecting at behaviour. If you do, theyre masking their norms very well.
    BTW, I dont condone it. But i just dont condemn it whether as a display of moral indignation and outrage, or genuine outrage.

    With regard to my knowledge of teenagers and my family You are just wrong but like in a lot of things you think you're right. I am well able for the cut and trust of modern life and teenagers but I also know when it steps over the line and I'm not alone in knowing that. Some day you might grow up and know too.


  • #878
    tigger123
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,593 ✭✭✭tigger123


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    You don't think there will be drunk young girls clambering to get into nightclub VIP areas tonight?

    So deluded. :rolleyes:

    Even if there are, it doesn't mean it's ok to treat them the way Paddy Jackson and his friends did.


  • #879
    Mrsmum
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,860 ✭✭✭Mrsmum


    Roger Hassenforder wrote: »
    I strongly doubt you have any regular engagement with anyone between the ages of 14 to 24 such is the shock and outrage youre affecting at behaviour. If you do, theyre masking their norms very well.
    BTW, I dont condone it. But i just dont condemn it whether as a display of moral indignation and outrage, or genuine outrage.

    Love the way you put the top age AT 24 there just to cover the stupid behaviour of PJ.


  • #880
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,560 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    tigger123 wrote: »
    Even if there are, it doesn't mean it's ok to treat them the way Paddy Jackson and his friends did.

    What, make sure she got home safely after a night of consensual sex?


  • #881
    ArthurDayne
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,930 ✭✭✭ArthurDayne


    Mrsmum wrote: »
    With regard to my knowledge of teenagers and my family You are just wrong but like in a lot of things you think you're right. I am well able for the cut and trust of modern life and teenagers but I also know when it steps over the line and I'm not alone in knowing that. Some day you might grow up and know too.

    MrsMum, seeing as Facehugger doesn't appear too willing to explore the theme further -- perhaps I might ask if you would be willing to answer on the below hypothesis. Would you be supportive of the following National Programme being implemented?

    1. All citizens of the State shall submit their phones and other electronic devices to the nearest Garda station;

    2. All devices will be screened along a rubric created by a panel of experts on public morality and decency. All social media companies will be legally ordered to store messages which are deleted so that they can be retrieved.;

    3. Screening will include ALL private correspondence, including with family, spouses and friends.

    4. All those who are found to have used terms or language in private conversation that can be deemed offensive to the public or a section of the public shall be automatically liable for expulsion from their jobs.

    In one fell swoop -- all those who have used degrading and offensive language will be cast out of their jobs. Only the morally righteous shall remain and the workplaces of Ireland shall be purified. The battle to embed political correctness and moral perfection in private conversations will have been won.

    Would you support this program?


  • Advertisement
  • #882
    facehugger99
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,824 ✭✭✭facehugger99


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    BBC reporter saying there that this is not really a sacking, it is a mutual agreement involving a financial settlement.

    A fudge to quieten the mob. And they seem to have bought it.

    The bitter is strong in this one.:D


  • #883
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,560 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    facehugger99 wrote: »
    The bitter is strong in this one.:D

    Nothing bitter about it. I'm delighted they got paid to leave and let the sponsors/IRFU engage in the con that they sacked them.

    Joke is on you and yours facehugger.


  • #884
    pjohnson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,019 ✭✭✭✭pjohnson


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Nothing bitter about it. I'm delighted they got paid to leave and let the sponsors/IRFU engage in the con that they sacked them.

    Joke is on you and yours facehugger.

    I wonder will facehugger and co. go back to wanting Rory Best removed from Ireland duty.


  • #885
    meeeeh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,624 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    You don't think there will be drunk young girls clambering to get into nightclub VIP areas tonight?

    So deluded. :rolleyes:

    And what is wrong with that. Are you saying they are asking for it. And btw what is your obsession with VIP areas, should only men be allowed into them?


  • #886
    DavidLyons_
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,297 ✭✭✭DavidLyons_


    facehugger99 wrote: »
    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    BBC reporter saying there that this is not really a sacking, it is a mutual agreement involving a financial settlement.

    A fudge to quieten the mob. And they seem to have bought it.

    The bitter is strong in this one.:D
    Oh the fcuking irony.


  • #887
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,560 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    meeeeh wrote: »
    And what is wrong with that. Are you saying they are asking for it. And btw what is your obsession with VIP areas, should only men be allowed into them?

    Ah the indignant feminist rant. Never imply that your own personal responsibility is part of the reason you may end up in potentially dangerous situations because that is anti women something something. :rolleyes:

    I referred to VIP areas with men in them because this is where the night in question began. Calm down on that one.


  • #888
    facehugger99
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,824 ✭✭✭facehugger99


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Nothing bitter about it. I'm delighted they got paid to leave and let the sponsors/IRFU engage in the con that they sacked them.

    Joke is on you and yours facehugger.

    What joke is that Francie lad?

    I'd be surprised if their contracts hadn't been paid up - would be quite normal under the circumstances.

    The main thing as far as I'm concerned is that they never represent Ireland again. Good luck to them in France or wherever they wash up - none of my business, as long as they never wear the green again I'm quite happy.


  • #889
    joe40
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,813 ✭✭✭joe40


    ArthurDayne wrote: »
    Mrsmum wrote: »
    With regard to my knowledge of teenagers and my family You are just wrong but like in a lot of things you think you're right. I am well able for the cut and trust of modern life and teenagers but I also know when it steps over the line and I'm not alone in knowing that. Some day you might grow up and know too.

    MrsMum, seeing as Facehugger doesn't appear too willing to explore the theme further -- perhaps I might ask if you would be willing to answer on the below hypothesis. Would you be supportive of the following National Programme being implemented?

    1. All citizens of the State shall submit their phones and other electronic devices to the nearest Garda station;

    2. All devices will be screened along a rubric created by a panel of experts on public morality and decency. All social media companies will be legally ordered to store messages which are deleted so that they can be retrieved.;

    3. Screening will include ALL private correspondence, including with family, spouses and friends.

    4. All those who are found to have used terms or language in private conversation that can be deemed offensive to the public or a section of the public shall be automatically liable for expulsion from their jobs.

    In one fell swoop -- all those who have used degrading and offensive language will be cast out of their jobs. Only the morally righteous shall remain and the workplaces of Ireland shall be purified. The battle to embed political correctness and moral perfection in private conversations will have been won.

    Would you support this program?
    This is really not complicated. Your privacy is important and should be protected as indeed it is.
    If your private conversations become public, for whatever reason, you have to own those comments. They are a reflection on you.
    If they are offensive, damaging, illegal you have to own the consequences.
    The fact they started out as private is no defence.
    Just to be clear i'm talking about this in general, not this case specifically.


  • #890
    meeeeh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,624 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    ArthurDayne wrote: »
    Would you support this program?

    Stop with false equations. You are not getting a response because your manifesto is so wide of the mark it's not worth responding.


  • #891
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,560 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    sugarman wrote: »
    Isn't that pretty much the case in all professional sporting contracts? They'd legally be entitled to see out their contracts or come to a settlement . They can only ever terminate a players contract if it's in breach of club rules.

    Yes, but the IRFU are clearly trying to give the impression that they sacked them. ('Revoked their contracts')
    Seems they didn't, they negotiated an early end to their contracts. Entirely different thing.


  • Advertisement
  • #892
    facehugger99
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,824 ✭✭✭facehugger99


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Yes, but the IRFU are clearly trying to give the impression that they sacked them. ('Revoked their contracts')
    Seems they didn't, they negotiated an early end to their contracts. Entirely different thing.

    Sure Francie - you 'won'.

    *Slow hand clap


  • #893
    meeeeh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,624 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Ah the indignant feminist rant. Never imply that your own personal responsibility is part of the reason you may end up in potentially dangerous situations because that is anti women something something. :rolleyes:.
    I still don't get you, women should not go into VIP areas or should not drink because they would potentially get raped?


  • #894
    Roger Hassenforder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,555 ✭✭✭Roger Hassenforder


    Mrsmum wrote: »
    Love the way you put the top age AT 24 there just to cover the stupid behaviour of PJ.
    Mrsmum wrote: »
    Love the way you put the top age AT 24 there just to cover the stupid behaviour of PJ.

    Actually i used it as a nice 10yr span to cover the years where young adults are most susceptible to gob****ery and behaviour, their later years would acknowlege included some moments which were possibly not their finest hours.

    As the teens/complainant would say
    "Lolz"
    Did you just think of that riposte too late after premature posting precluded its insertion ?

    At least we can agree it was stupid though.
    Not criminal, not deserving of having his life ruined.


  • #895
    givyjoe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,287 ✭✭✭givyjoe


    facehugger99 wrote: »
    Jesus man - why don't you knock the mansplaining ****e off? - it's boring to to keep spamming the thread with your repetitious waffle.

    Whereas are your 'insightful', biased and bitter contributions are lighting it up.


  • #896
    meeeeh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,624 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Yes, but the IRFU are clearly trying to give the impression that they sacked them. ('Revoked their contracts')
    Seems they didn't, they negotiated an early end to their contracts. Entirely different thing.

    It's called paying off someone because you would rather pay for them not to play for you than have them in your team.


  • #897
    Mrsmum
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,860 ✭✭✭Mrsmum


    ArthurDayne wrote: »
    MrsMum, seeing as Facehugger doesn't appear too willing to explore the theme further -- perhaps I might ask if you would be willing to answer on the below hypothesis. Would you be supportive of the following National Programme being implemented?

    1. All citizens of the State shall submit their phones and other electronic devices to the nearest Garda station;

    2. All devices will be screened along a rubric created by a panel of experts on public morality and decency. All social media companies will be legally ordered to store messages which are deleted so that they can be retrieved.;

    3. Screening will include ALL private correspondence, including with family, spouses and friends.

    4. All those who are found to have used terms or language in private conversation that can be deemed offensive to the public or a section of the public shall be automatically liable for expulsion from their jobs.

    In one fell swoop -- all those who have used degrading and offensive language will be cast out of their jobs. Only the morally righteous shall remain and the workplaces of Ireland shall b.ction in private conversations will have been won.

    Would you support this program?

    I have no interest whatsoever in delving into what anyone does in their private life but when it becomes known to me then I will have an opinion just as everyone else will. Their behaviour invaded my home for weeks on end. I didn't go looking for it in this case and I won't ever go looking for it. So bad was it that reporters warned us that we should protect little ears from hearing.There was literally no getting away from it and you would want to be braindead not to have a viewpoint. My viewpoint wasn't favourable to them. Their employers and sponsors also thought they lacked respect and integrity. It's over now. Next case stands on it's own merits.


  • #898
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,560 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    facehugger99 wrote: »
    What joke is that Francie lad?

    The joke is that you are delighted they were sacked.
    wexie wrote:
    Oh look at that....they've been sacked

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-43766959

    facehugger wrote:
    Hardly surprising.

    Great news all the same.

    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=106723513&postcount=820
    The fact is they weren't. They negotiated a financial reward to end their contracts early.


  • #899
    ProfessorPlum
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,816 ✭✭✭ProfessorPlum


    Mrsmum wrote: »
    You suspect incorrectly. And I also have four teenagers.
    See joe40's post to explain what actually happened.

    You need Joe to mansplain it for you? :rolleyes::D


  • #900
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,560 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    meeeeh wrote: »
    I still don't get you, women should not go into VIP areas or should not drink because they would potentially get raped?

    Some women need to have personal responsibility and not end up drunk and alone in strangers bedrooms.


  • Advertisement
  • #901
    facehugger99
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,824 ✭✭✭facehugger99


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    The joke is that you are delighted they were sacked.



    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=106723513&postcount=820
    The fact is they weren't. They negotiated a financial reward to end their contracts early.

    Really grasping at straws now - quite sad to witness.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement