FrancieBrady wrote: » One for the rugby experts: Is there anything to stop Jackson doing a Bundi Aki and declaring for another international side by playing in one of their club teams? I am thinking Italy maybe.
skearnsot wrote: » I can’t figure any of it out really so I wouldn’t say who is or isn’t guilty - however I will say that not al men are bastards and hell hath no fury like a woman scorned! Just because a woman cries rape - sadly in this day and age it’s not always true
Silentcorner wrote: » Ha Ha Haaa...keep em coming!!! You're hilarious!!! Just so I know what I'm dealing with here....have you ever bought any magic beans?
Rubberchikken wrote: » I dont see their loss of careers with the IRFU as vengeance but rather to be expected based on behaviour they admitted to which must contrast totally with the terms of their contracts.
facehugger99 wrote: » That wasn't what was "proven" and if you think that's the 'message' from this case you're sadly mistaken. The message is actions have consequences. The message is don't think because you play international rugby you have a license to do what you want. The message is don't treat people like dirt. Paddy Pantsdown and his simian mate are learning their lesson the hard way - you still sound like you've a way to go.
Silentcorner wrote: » They had swapped numbers at the end of the night club, before they all went back to a house party. The young lady claimed that she ran out of the house, after going back for her phone, at this point she began to break down, I can only assume she sat down somewhere (the back side of her jeans were covered in dirt)...she said when Rory Harrisson came out of the house after her she initially thought he was going to attack her, but he tried to calm her down, he called a taxi, at this point there were phone calls and messages firing between himself and McIlroy. She was sobbing for the next half an hour, when she got home, he helped her to her front door. The lads of course have a different account, but they are all different from one another so its hard to piece their part of the proceedings together. Oh, and she gave them all oral sex, according to them, and hand jobs...so they all did manage to perform...
Roger Hassenforder wrote: » Dont forget me Joe, im anxious to stop doing something if its leading to Roger jnr going out raping at night Ill repeat as you might have missed it: A boy might take too much alcohol /drugs, and is therefore unable to (reasonably per law!) determine the sex may be nonconsensual. My advice therefore to him would be dont drink , take too much drugs whereby your judgement may be impaired How is that dangerous advice?
skearnsot wrote: » I would DEARLY love to know why a very upset girl who had been just allegedly raped not only sat into the back of a taxi with the best friend of the alleged offenders BUT ALSO gave him her number - he text her didn’t he? That has me stumped - and I’m female! If they had as much drink on board as was pointed out - they shouldn’t be able to raise a smile let alone anything else!!! Just MHO
joe40 wrote: » I was readiing over your post and I apologise I think I misunderstood you. I genuinelythought you were refering to a girls behaviour which would lead a boy to rape. Sorry about that. Absolutely I would give advice to both genders to keep themselves safe
pjohnson wrote: » Commercial decisions arent based around hashtags. Or people saying bad things in private messages.
Roger Hassenforder wrote: » joe40 wrote: » In your case the drink was going to make hom do something. Where did I say you shouldn't advised somebody not to mitigate risks. Was that not one of the numbered points in your post that I agreed with. Joe, Now I'm confused. Are you contradicting yourself or what? joe40 wrote: » Points 1,2 and 3 I agree with. It is this sentence that you use which for me sums up the danger of your position "behaviour s that might lead boys to rape" No girl (or boy for that matter) can engage in behaviour that would lead someone else to rape. That is classic "victim blaming" (I usually detest buzz words but that fits) I'm all for teaching personal responsibility but you are never responsible for the behaviour of someone else. That is not absolutism. which led to the question you're now flip flopping on, and I've just noticed misquoted me. Roger Hassenforder wrote: » Do you disagree with this position so: A boy might take too much alcohol /drugs, and is therefore unable to (reasonably per law!) determine the sex may be nonconsensual. My advice therefore to him would be dont drink , take too much drugs whereby your judgement may be impaired How is that dangerous?
joe40 wrote: » In your case the drink was going to make hom do something. Where did I say you shouldn't advised somebody not to mitigate risks. Was that not one of the numbered points in your post that I agreed with.
joe40 wrote: » Points 1,2 and 3 I agree with. It is this sentence that you use which for me sums up the danger of your position "behaviour s that might lead boys to rape" No girl (or boy for that matter) can engage in behaviour that would lead someone else to rape. That is classic "victim blaming" (I usually detest buzz words but that fits) I'm all for teaching personal responsibility but you are never responsible for the behaviour of someone else. That is not absolutism.
Roger Hassenforder wrote: » Do you disagree with this position so: A boy might take too much alcohol /drugs, and is therefore unable to (reasonably per law!) determine the sex may be nonconsensual. My advice therefore to him would be dont drink , take too much drugs whereby your judgement may be impaired How is that dangerous?
joe40 wrote: » I just checked back I did not misquote you. You laid out 3 numbered point and I agreed with all of them. You then talked about "behaviours that might lead boys to rape" That was the dangerous message I was referring to. To both yourself and francie I have consistently said I would give advice especially to my own kids. I just do not like linking advice to specific incidents such as this one. Francie was saying that the lady from the rape crisis centre should have been giving safety advice women at this time.
Silentcorner wrote: » Ha ha haaaa!!! Good one. You do know clubs are ruthless bast##ds when they are negotiating contracts. If there is a bidding war then the lads have a sporting chance of securing the money they are already on, less their international money, which they will no longer get. If there are only one or two clubs involved then, the lads are not in a strong position...they all have sponsors too. If you think there will be clubs throwing money at them....you should never be left anywhere near the commercial decision making process!!!
facehugger99 wrote: » I'm capable of forming my own sentences thanks - I don't need your assistance.
pjohnson wrote: » So the jury was wrong? You still think they are guilty.
Paddy Pantsdown and his simian mate
pjohnson wrote: » Haha other countries wont give a crap they were found not guilty and happily take them on board. Jackson would be the one less affected of the two.
Patww79 wrote: » This post has been deleted.
Mrsmum wrote: » More ranting and raging against the world.
joe40 wrote: » Ok maybe it is to the guys bedroom she shouldn't go unless she wants full sex. You said the "real tragedy" is that no one is warrning of the dangers of young ladies in bedroom of strange men. I can get the exact post if you wish.
FrancieBrady wrote: » joe40 wrote: » I am seriously asking you how women and men should behave on nights out in relation to "getting off" with each other as they used to say in my day. I'm not trying to be awkward but are you saying a girl shouldn't go back to a guys house unless she wants full sex. I'm not trying to catch anyone out or deflect, i'm being serious. When I was younger plenty of nights would have been like that I am not saying any such thing. Go back and read what I said.
joe40 wrote: » I am seriously asking you how women and men should behave on nights out in relation to "getting off" with each other as they used to say in my day. I'm not trying to be awkward but are you saying a girl shouldn't go back to a guys house unless she wants full sex. I'm not trying to catch anyone out or deflect, i'm being serious. When I was younger plenty of nights would have been like that
