Roger Hassenforder 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 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?
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
FrancieBrady wrote: » And the message to all our children is, if you make a mistake, you will pay for it with your career and good name because sponsors will squawk about morals something something.
Deleted User wrote: » The message to our children is, actions have consequences. Be prepared to accept them.
Silentcorner wrote: » They're ability to negotiate a good deal is significantly weaker than it would normally be. I hope Stuart Olding in particular gets to fulfill his potential, in this whole sorry affair, he is the only one who showed genuine regret at what happened, the statement his solicitor read out was handwritten by him, he showed a bit of humility which should be recognised, humility in this case is a very good first step toward ultimate redemption (by maybe returning to the Irish team at some point).
joe40 wrote: » That sounds like good advice to me if that is the affect drink has on him.
Roger Hassenforder wrote: » joe40 wrote: » That sounds like good advice to me if that is the affect drink has on him. "A boy" Joe, "a boy." Nice try. You're all right though Joe, ill spare you having to admit, advising someone not to do that which may have adverse consequences is in fact sterling advice, not "dangerous" as you claimed.
Mrsmum wrote: » Hilarious how people who think they can say what they like themselves have such a big problem when someone else uses a word they don't like. Channel your inner female and put up with it like we have to do all the time.
Mrsmum wrote: » Mansplaining means " to comment on or explain something to a woman in a condescending, overconfident, and often inaccurate or oversimplified manner". If the cap fits wear it.
Mrsmum wrote: » I know you guys have to latch on to something today seeing as your other cause is lost. Might as well be mansplaining. Btw when you teach your class as I teach my class, that would be called teaching. Surprised you don't know that.
Mrsmum wrote: » You suspect incorrectly. And I also have four teenagers. See joe40's post to explain what actually happened.
joe40 wrote: » Are you seriously telling a mother that you know more about her son and his behaviour than she does. Just out of interest what is your expertise with young people and their behaviour. Young people overall that is.
goz83 wrote: » Your use of the word is completely sexist. Paint it any way you like, but a sexist word remains a sexist word. Your denial of this is just more head in sand arrogance. Let me mansplain it properly. Mansplaining is a preferred femisists word used to describe a man explaining something to a woman which she, or another woman takes offense to. More generalised sexism with a sprinkle of patronisation. You needed a man to explain what you were talking about? Even though that man got it wrong I pray you never see the contents of your teenagers phones. I have a teenager and while I consider him to be a well balanced person for his age...(already talking about college and he’s not even sat his jnr cert) I am not naive enough to think he hasn’t been crude with his friends and said things that would be in bad taste. I just skim read the last 20 odd pages, so I might have missed a bit, but I think he is telling her that she doesn’t know them as well as she thinks. Sure, how could she? She’s been on here all day and for all she knows, FrancieBrady could be one of her kids posting in here :pac:
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: » 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.
Mrsmum wrote: » More ranting and raging against the world.
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?
Patww79 wrote: » This post has been deleted.
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.
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.
Paddy Pantsdown and his simian mate
pjohnson wrote: » So the jury was wrong? You still think they are guilty.
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?
facehugger99 wrote: » I'm capable of forming my own sentences thanks - I don't need your assistance.
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!!!
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.
pjohnson wrote: » Commercial decisions arent based around hashtags. Or people saying bad things in private messages.
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
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
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wf.vanillicon.com/v2/f054c80ff399c4eba8d719c617220a57.svg)
