Belfast rape trial discussion thread II

FrancieBrady · 20-07-2018 06:02PM

jm08 wrote: »

Yea, its a horrible pejoritave word.

it's a descriptive word. Perjoritive if the person called it isn't behaving in a slutty way.
Same as hussy, slattern, prossie...etc etc.

And would you be telling your son that if he is giving out invitations to strange young women while drunk outside a nightclub that he should not be inviting this unknown woman & his friends into his bedroom.

Yes I would. I would tell him not to do anything that he didn't have permission to do.

The jury did not say there was no rape, just that there was a reasonable doubt that there was no a rape.

I know because we got a blow by blow account of the court case.

I've forgotten what question you asked.

They were accused of rape, there was no evidence of that, and they were found NOT GUILTY.

Sly inferences are just that - sly and at this stage, rather sad and desperate.

My question again:

So let me get this straight: You would object to your daughter being called a 'slut' but not if she was accused of 'behaving like a slut'?

Slut on it's own is the problem? That somehow is descriptive of more serious behaviour?

jm08 · 20-07-2018 06:17PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

it's a descriptive word. Perjoritive if the person called it isn't behaving in a slutty way.
Same as hussy, slattern, prossie...etc etc.

No, its not the same as hussy etc.

Yes I would. I would tell him not to do anything that he didn't have permission to do.

Good to hear.

They were accused of rape, there was no evidence of that, and they were found NOT GUILTY.

Sly inferences are just that - sly and at this stage, rather sad and desperate.

Why do you keep talking about the court case. I'm talking about the caveman WhatsApps 'banter'.

So let me get this straight: You would object to your daughter being called a 'slut' but not if she was accused of 'behaving like a slut'?

Slut on it's own is the problem? That somehow is descriptive of more serious behaviour?

The definition of 'slut' is:

1 disparaging + offensive : a promiscuous woman : a woman who has many sexual partners

The woman's definition of slutty behaviour was described as ''the girls sitting on the lads laps and taking selfies'.

Now, from what I recall from the lads understanding of their social media 'banter' 'sluts' were the raw material for spit roasting.

I would never refer to anyone as behaving like a slut or or describe them as being a slut (ie., promiscuous or having many sexual partners as I wouldn't have a clue anyway).

FrancieBrady · 20-07-2018 06:30PM

jm08 wrote: »

No, its not the same as hussy etc.

Even if it is describing the exact same behaviour?

That is 'cakism' at it's finest.

Why do you keep talking about the court case. I'm talking about the caveman WhatsApps 'banter'.

Because you keep bringing up aspects of the evidence to warp to suit your narrative.

Ah, so just because she went into PJ's bedroom, it is automatically assumed she wanted to have sex with PJ and the rest of his friends. She was 19 years old. What did she do to indicate that while going into PJ's bedroom, that she was up for having sex with the rest of them?

The girl showed poor judgement having anything to do with them as they were obviusly very drunk and wouldn't have known what they were doing. Mitigating circumstances though - she was 19 years old. Mitigating circumstances for the lads - they were drunk - but that is not an excuse as its something in their control.

The definition of 'slut' is:

1 disparaging + offensive : a promiscuous woman : a woman who has many sexual partners

The woman's definition of slutty behaviour was described as ''the girls sitting on the lads laps and taking selfies'.

Now, from what I recall from the lads understanding of their social media 'banter' 'sluts' were the raw material for spit roasting.

I would never refer to anyone as behaving like a slut or or describe them as being a slut (ie., promiscuous or having many sexual partners as I wouldn't have a clue anyway).

It could have been totally innocent behaviour. What right had she to describe it as 'slutty behaviour' if the lads had not the same right?

I reckon if you are into spit roasts (each to their own) then a girl of loose morals or who is promiscuous is exactly what you are looking for. But let's not call them that handy descriptive word in private messages... eh? :rolleyes:

Roger Hassenforder · 20-07-2018 06:32PM

jm08 wrote: »

The definition of 'slut' is:

1 disparaging + offensive : a promiscuous woman : a woman who has many sexual partners

The woman's definition of slutty behaviour was described as ''the girls sitting on the lads laps and taking selfies'.

Now, from what I recall from the lads understanding of their social media 'banter' 'sluts' were the raw material for spit roasting.

I would never refer to anyone as behaving like a slut or or describe them as being a slut (ie., promiscuous or having many sexual partners as I wouldn't have a clue anyway).

Am I missing something?

You've no issue with someone describing someone else as "slutty", but you've an issue with someone being referred to as a "slut"?

One is an adjective to describe behaviour
One is a noun for someone behaving that way.

Galwayguy35 · 20-07-2018 07:26PM

_Whimsical_ wrote: »

The Donegal rape case that's been in the media reminded me of this case. I assumed it's why it was back again.

There another male was found innocent of rape despite leaving a girl he'd just had sex with bleeding, injured, crying and what witnesses described as hysterical in public.

On this occasion, the girl left with severe head injuries and vaginal injuries that medical exams found were not consistent with any consensual act. During the rape a car arrived in the area and while the male asked the driver to leave the victim rang and texted a friends begging for help but he returned. Those texts were entered as evidence.

The lack of conviction hinged on the fact that afterwards she walked back up the road with the boy in question and allowed him give her a brief kiss...while crying hysterically and bleeding from the head and vagina.

There's something very wrong with some young men and the justice system.

The idea that there are men walking around there who can have sex and leave a woman bleeding and hysterically crying and assume a good night has been had by all is really frightening.

_Whimsical_ wrote: »

Defamatory how?

A paralel drawn between 2 cases where no one was convicted but in both cases men left a women they purported to believe had consented to sex bleeding and hysterically crying in public.
Nothing defamatory there. They are the established facts of both cases.

"During the rape", those 3 words could get you in a bit of hot water but it's up to you if you want to edit the post or not.

AllForIt · 20-07-2018 07:49PM

There is a whole spectrum of ppl who could be called sluts and the term can be used in a pejorative or simply a factual way - as in say 'up for it' or 'easy' etc. I'm male and would go into town on my own to gay bars and when I'd arrive home the next day my flatmates would say things like 'what were you up to last night ya slut'. I never took it offensively cause I was unashamedly out on the pull back in the day when that was how I used to spend my free time. Oh those were the days. Anyway...

Also I do find it a bit curious the way these seemingly hetro male friends find it so easy to participate in sexual intercourse in front of their friends. I couldn't possibly do that with my male friends even gay male friends. I'm not saying the 2 lads are bisexual but maybe there is another level of sexuality going on here and that would explain for me the nature of the text messages.

jm08 · 20-07-2018 08:42PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Even if it is describing the exact same behaviour?

That is 'cakism' at it's finest.

Even if it is describing the exact same behaviour?

That is 'cakism' at it's finest.

Because you keep bringing up aspects of the evidence to warp to suit your narrative.

It could have been totally innocent behaviour. What right had she to describe it as 'slutty behaviour' if the lads had not the same right?

I reckon if you are into spit roasts (each to their own) then a girl of loose morals or who is promiscuous is exactly what you are looking for. But let's not call them that handy descriptive word in private messages... eh?

Because you keep bringing up aspects of the evidence to warp to suit your narrative.

It could have been totally innocent behaviour. What right had she to describe it as 'slutty behaviour' if the lads had not the same right?

I reckon if you are into spit roasts (each to their own) then a girl of loose morals or who is promiscuous is exactly what you are looking for. But let's not call them that handy descriptive word in private messages... eh? :rolleyes:

I'll say it again then - I wouldn't describe anyone as being a slut because it is demeaning and jumping to a lot of assumptions if you go on the dictionary meaning. Why did they have to describe the women in that way? Why didn't they describe themselves as sluts - their morals seem to be fairly loose so sluts would be more appropriate than 'legends'.

If you can't see a difference between calling someone a 'slut' and some slutty behaviour which is described as sitting on the lads lap and taking selfies (which is fairly harmless) to spit roasting sluts I give up.

FrancieBrady · 20-07-2018 09:07PM

jm08 wrote: »

I'll say it again then - I wouldn't describe anyone as being a slut because it is demeaning and jumping to a lot of assumptions if you go on the dictionary meaning. Why did they have to describe the women in that way? Why didn't they describe themselves as sluts - their morals seem to be fairly loose so sluts would be more appropriate than 'legends'.

If you can't see a difference between calling someone a 'slut' and some slutty behaviour which is described as sitting on the lads lap and taking selfies (which is fairly harmless) to spit roasting sluts I give up.

Don't be getting carried away with your righeousness there. It was defined long after she sent the message.

'Slutty behaviour' can include anything in a wide ambit of behaviour.
But you would see a distinction if someone applied it to your daughter. I think it is you who needs to take a wee look at themselves.

jm08 · 20-07-2018 09:29PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Don't be getting carried away with your righeousness there. It was defined long after she sent the message.

It was defined afterwards because she was asked what was meant. Slight difference in the circumstances as well bearing in mind there was not a photo attached identifying these 'Belfast Sluts' or the conversation about legends spit roasting sluts.

'Slutty behaviour' can include anything in a wide ambit of behaviour.
But you would see a distinction if someone applied it to your daughter. I think it is you who needs to take a wee look at themselves.

It can include different behaviour but we get the context and meaning in both these instances.

edit: In the WhatApp Group, they also referred to the 3 girls as ''Brassers''.

The dictionary says that Brassers = prostitutes.

FrancieBrady · 20-07-2018 09:38PM

jm08 wrote: »

It was defined afterwards because she was asked what was meant. Slight difference in the circumstances as well bearing in mind there was not a photo attached identifying these 'Belfast Sluts' or the conversation about legends spit roasting sluts.

It can include different behaviour but we get the context and meaning in both these instances.

Long after the event.

What would your reaction have been at the time?

Or, if I called somebody a slut and then defined it to mean some kissing and lap sitting. That is fine?

mfceiling · 20-07-2018 09:39PM

jm08 wrote: »

NI is hardly to the fore when it comes to human rights, respect for women etc. Women know their place up there.

That's a lot of generalising right there.

jm08 · 20-07-2018 10:05PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Long after the event.

What would your reaction have been at the time?

Or, if I called somebody a slut and then defined it to mean some kissing and lap sitting. That is fine?

I'm not sure what difference it makes since the people the complainant was texting had no idea who the three girls who were being slutty were, where as the lads were circulating photos of the three 'Belfast Sluts' or as someone else asked in their WhatApp group whether they were ''Brassers" (i.e., prostitutes).

jm08 · 20-07-2018 10:07PM

mfceiling wrote: »

That's a lot of generalising right there.

In what way?

FrancieBrady · 20-07-2018 10:14PM

jm08 wrote: »

I'm not sure what difference it makes since the people the complainant was texting had no idea who the three girls who were being slutty were, where as the lads were circulating photos of the three 'Belfast Sluts' or as someone else asked in their WhatApp group whether they were ''Brassers" (i.e., prostitutes).

What?

Could you answer the question for once?

if I called somebody a slut and then defined it to mean some kissing and lap sitting. That is fine?

mfceiling · 20-07-2018 10:20PM

jm08 wrote: »

In what way?

Women know their place up there?
Do they?
All of them?

jm08 · 20-07-2018 10:36PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What?

Could you answer the question for once?

No. Its not fine.

Will I Am Not · 20-07-2018 10:38PM

jm08 wrote: »

In what way?

I read that in Joe Duffy’s voice

jm08 · 20-07-2018 10:47PM

mfceiling wrote: »

Women know their place up there?
Do they?
All of them?

A lot of them (particularly the elected representatives) have some fairly backward attitudes to women who breastfeed in public (exhibitionists), conversion therapy for LGBT people, abortion, same sex marriage, etc. etc. Oh and the best one of all, lads will be lads (Willie John McBride who still thinks he is on a rugby tour smashing up hotels in the 70s), but particularly the lack of empathy the women who signed the petitions to Save PJ & SO had for the complainant. They gave me the impression they thought she asked for it and got poor wee PJ & SO into trouble.

sightband · 20-07-2018 11:22PM

jm08 wrote: »

Yea, its a horrible pejoritave word.

And would you be telling your son that if he is giving out invitations to strange young women while drunk outside a nightclub that he should not be inviting this unknown woman & his friends into his bedroom.

The jury did not say there was no rape, just that there was a reasonable doubt that there was no a rape.

I know because we got a blow by blow account of the court case.

I've forgotten what question you asked.

So have I, but I’ve a new question, or maybe it’s just more curiosity and I’d like to know your thoughts on it... do you reckon now the lads have been cleared they can feel guilt free if they chose to knock one out with all that grade a memory **** material they must have from that night? Or maybe they were smashed and yer one was wrecked and they think how da fuq did I end up getting up on that minger of a yoke?

FrancieBrady · 20-07-2018 11:26PM

jm08 wrote: »

A lot of them (particularly the elected representatives) have some fairly backward attitudes to women who breastfeed in public (exhibitionists), conversion therapy for LGBT people, abortion, same sex marriage, etc. etc. Oh and the best one of all, lads will be lads (Willie John McBride who still thinks he is on a rugby tour smashing up hotels in the 70s), but particularly the lack of empathy the women who signed the petitions to Save PJ & SO had for the complainant. They gave me the impression they thought she asked for it and got poor wee PJ & SO into trouble.

As it turns out, Willie John's attitude was the same one that gave these guys a job despite the baying puritans baying for blood.

You know the type: the ones who want to censor words now because they don't like them.

blackwhite · 20-07-2018 11:57PM

jm08 wrote: »

As I've already explained, lie down with dogs, you pick up fleas. They were complicit in the slander of the good character of those girls.

So I guess you’d be totally fine for people to judge you based on some isolated examples of poor behaviour from some acquaintances of yours?

jm08 · 21-07-2018 12:00AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

As it turns out, Willie John's attitude was the same one that gave these guys a job despite the baying puritans baying for blood.

You know the type: the ones who want to censor words now because they don't like them.

I've no idea what you are getting at here.

jm08 · 21-07-2018 12:02AM

blackwhite wrote: »

So I guess you’d be totally fine for people to judge you based on some isolated examples of poor behaviour from some acquaintances of yours?

Those lads were out on a spit roasting spree of so called brassers or sluts, so it was hardly an isolated incident.

And yes, I would expect to be judged by the company I keep. Fortunately, most people are fairly decent.

Edit: bearing in mind the 3 girls were referred to as 'Belfast Sluts', the lads were fairly quick to jump to that conclusion. I wonder how they came to that conclusion?

upandcumming · 21-07-2018 01:02AM

jm08 wrote: »

Some women. Its wrong to assume all women do though. You could end up in court.

Why don't you apply that logic to the guys in the WhatsApp group? You repeatedly say that they have a horrible attitude to women, but they refer to the women they encountered on the night. Did they meet all the women or something?

mfceiling · 21-07-2018 06:34AM

jm08 wrote: »

A lot of them (particularly the elected representatives) have some fairly backward attitudes to women who breastfeed in public (exhibitionists), conversion therapy for LGBT people, abortion, same sex marriage, etc. etc. Oh and the best one of all, lads will be lads (Willie John McBride who still thinks he is on a rugby tour smashing up hotels in the 70s), but particularly the lack of empathy the women who signed the petitions to Save PJ & SO had for the complainant. They gave me the impression they thought she asked for it and got poor wee PJ & SO into trouble.

So some women know their place.
But not all women cause that would be a sweeping generalisation.

jm08 · 21-07-2018 09:14AM

upandcumming wrote: »

Why don't you apply that logic to the guys in the WhatsApp group? You repeatedly say that they have a horrible attitude to women, but they refer to the women they encountered on the night. Did they meet all the women or something?

I'm not applying it to all the guys in the WhatsApp group because not all of them were anyway involved in the discussion about picking up 'sluts/brassers', or attempting to spit roast them. Craig Gilroy made a comment (asking if they picked up any sluts as far as I can recall) and was suspended for it by Ulster Rugby/IRFU, which displays a very poor attitude to all women in general.

jm08 · 21-07-2018 09:21AM

mfceiling wrote: »

So some women know their place.
But not all women cause that would be a sweeping generalisation.

Up to recently, Ireland would have been regarded as a fairly conservative/backward country when it comes to women's / LGBT rights which would be a generalisation, though bearing in mind the number of women who were travelling to the UK for abortions would point to some women having a different outlook. Since recent referendum people don't refer to Ireland as being so backward now with its social attitudes.

Have a look at an Orange Order parade. How many women do you see leading them. Is there even such a person as an Orange Women?

robbiezero · 21-07-2018 09:26AM

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't really get how Paddy Jackson's language was in anyway bad in those WhatsApp groups. All he said was "there were more flutes than the 12th of July". That is a top quality joke.

Jackson didn't say that.

Heres Johnny · 21-07-2018 10:13AM

Have a look at an Orange Order parade. How many women do you see leading them. Is there even such a person as an Orange Women?[/quote]

Go out to any nightclub in Ireland or even a wedding you'll see plenty of orange women

mfceiling · 21-07-2018 10:39AM

jm08 wrote: »

Have a look at an Orange Order parade. How many women do you see leading them. Is there even such a person as an Orange Women?

There is indeed a woman's orange order. Behind the scenes of the men's order is an army of women keeping it active....organising fundraising, making tea and sandwiches for the parades, book keeping, cleaning and maintaining the orange halls, charity collections, working with the churches, administration etc.
Women are actually not as downtrodden in the north as you might actually believe.

Belfast rape trial discussion thread II

Comments