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

Homophobic attack on London bus - mod warning, please see OP

Options
1…2930323435…42

Comments

  • Options
    #932
    RIGOLO
    Site Banned Posts: 1,463 ✭✭✭RIGOLO


    DubInMeath wrote: »
    Simple answer.

    Bus attack: CCTV footage available as reported, no need for a description of the attackers, just a requests for witnesses to come forward so the statements given by both sides can be clarified.

    Your example, unfortunately no CCTV going by the report, standard enough to release a general description so that anyone who might have been in the area and seen a person fitting the description can come forward to provide information.

    Looking forward to you opening a thread on the attack provided, lucky woman going by the report

    To be honest Id prefer we didnt need to open ANY threads on these issues .
    Id prefer there wasnt a need for a thread for gay couples getting attacked on buses , or mothers getting stabbed pushing their toddlers in a buggy.

    Heres an idea lets start by teaching kids about same-sex relationships in school, oh hang on they tried that in Birmingham and 500 muslims turned up outside the gates.

    Rather than threads , society needs solutions.

    Its about time the LGBT community got on board with solutions for everyones problems, and not just their own .


  • Options
    #933
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,917 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    RIGOLO wrote: »
    To be honest Id prefer we didnt need to open ANY threads on these issues .
    Id prefer there wasnt a need for a thread for gay couples getting attacked on buses , or mothers getting stabbed pushing their toddlers in a buggy.

    Heres an idea lets start by teaching kids about same-sex relationships in school, oh hang on they tried that in Birmingham and 500 muslims turned up outside the gates.

    Rather than threads , society needs solutions.

    Its about time the LGBT community got on board with solutions for everyones problems, and not just their own .

    So your in moaning because a thread wasn't opened because the victim was married to a man, and that this thread was opened because the victims are gay.

    Your right in that society needs to recognise and deal with the issue of people who are homophobic and racist among other issues like cuts to police budgets.


  • Options
    #934
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,984 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    RIGOLO wrote: »
    A dedicated thread and 62 pages later .. ..

    Where the thread on after-hours for this poor woman ..Stabbed in Islington yesterday

    Is it because she was married to a man she doesnt deserve a thread and 62 pages ...

    Mother-of-three is stabbed after 'refusing to hand over phone to teenage mugger' as she pushed her son in a buggy in north London street



    perhapse you could tell us where the thread on this poor woman is? did you think about starting one yourself, and if not why not? was it because you aren't actually concerned about what happened to her, but are looking for an excuse for a rant about a different issue in an attempt to try and make out that this particular discussion has no validity? because if that is your aim, it has failed.


    RIGOLO wrote: »
    btw the police DID release a desciption for this crime



    Interesting how they never released any description of the attackers for the 2 girls getting on the bus ... mmm I wonder why

    Is that a nettle I see before me, best not not grasp it , you dont want to be having any uncomfortable conversations taking you out of your comfort zone now do we ...


    because they had cctv in relation to this homophobic attack on the bus. quite possibly they didn't have cctv in relation to the attack on the mother.
    either way your complaint is irrelevant and invalid.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #935
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 20,784 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    RIGOLO wrote: »
    A dedicated thread and 62 pages later .. ..

    Where the thread on after-hours for this poor woman ..Stabbed in Islington yesterday

    Is it because she was married to a man she doesnt deserve a thread and 62 pages ...

    Mother-of-three is stabbed after 'refusing to hand over phone to teenage mugger' as she pushed her son in a buggy in north London street



    btw the police DID release a desciption for this crime



    Interesting how they never released any description of the attackers for the 2 girls getting on the bus ... mmm I wonder why

    Is that a nettle I see before me, best not not grasp it , you dont want to be having any uncomfortable conversations taking you out of your comfort zone now do we ...

    This is exactly what I was talking about.

    A healthy dose of whataboutery with some racist dog whistling thrown in at the end. Kudos, you reached a new low.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Options
    #936
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,814 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Deleted User wrote: »
    dubinmeath takes the point i made fairly and i agree with the point made back

    joeytheparrot, unsurprisingly tbh, has a little tantrum

    No. I didnt have a tantrum. I pointed out the holes in your argument. Aparently you cant deal with that.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #937
    Assetbacked
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,969 ✭✭✭Assetbacked


    Strange that there has been no further update beyond the arrests. That means no one has been charged. Combine this with the gap in the girls' story (we were seated, then suddenly we were in a fight) and the lack of additional information then this story had more to it than initially reported.

    Those swallowing the homophobic attack line and thinking that's all there is too it, gays are victims, we still need Pride etc. without actually looking too much into this appear to have jumped the shark.


  • Options
    #938
    MrFresh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,420 ✭✭✭MrFresh


    Assetbacked wrote: »
    Strange that there has been no further update beyond the arrests. That means no one has been charged. Combine this with the gap in the girls' story (we were seated, then suddenly we were in a fight) and the lack of additional information then this story had more to it than initially reported.

    Those swallowing the homophobic attack line and thinking that's all there is too it, gays are victims, we still need Pride etc. without actually looking too much into this appear to have jumped the shark.


    Aren't they juveniles? In any case, such a case would have to go to CPS for a decision on charges due to the discriminatory nature of the crime.


  • Options
    #939
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,917 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Assetbacked wrote: »
    Strange that there has been no further update beyond the arrests. That means no one has been charged. Combine this with the gap in the girls' story (we were seated, then suddenly we were in a fight) and the lack of additional information then this story had more to it than initially reported.

    Those swallowing the homophobic attack line and thinking that's all there is too it, gays are victims, we still need Pride etc. without actually looking too much into this appear to have jumped the shark.

    The suspects are out on bail and due to return in July, try looking stuff up before hand.


  • Options
    #940
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    DubInMeath wrote: »
    The suspects are out on bail and due to return in July, try looking stuff up before hand.
    Have you got a link to that?
    What are they charged with?
    Robbery? Assault/GBH? Homophobic hate crime? Misogynistic hate crime? Damaging coins under the 1971 Coinage Act?


  • Options
    #941
    Grey Wind
    Registered Users Posts: 95 ✭✭Grey Wind


    recedite wrote: »
    Have you got a link to that?
    What are they charged with?
    Robbery? Assault/GBH? Homophobic hate crime? Misogynistic hate crime? Damaging coins under the 1971 Coinage Act?

    https://www.straitstimes.com/world/europe/suspects-out-on-bail-after-attack-on-lesbian-couple-on-london-bus


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #942
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,917 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    recedite wrote: »
    Have you got a link to that?
    What are they charged with?
    Robbery? Assault/GBH? Homophobic hate crime? Misogynistic hate crime? Damaging coins under the 1971 Coinage Act?


    http://www.letmegooglethat.com/?q=London+bus+attack+bail


  • Options
    #943
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    Its a bit strange. The Straits Times of Singapore reports that they are out on bail, which would normally mean they have been charged with something. But no actual charges are mentioned.


  • Options
    #944
    Dante7
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,543 ✭✭✭Dante7


    I think they have been released on police bail, as opposed to being bailed by a judge following a court hearing. There obviously hasn't been a court appearance, otherwise the 18 year old would have been identified.


  • Options
    #945
    Assetbacked
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,969 ✭✭✭Assetbacked


    The Straits Times, a Singaporean newspaper, is the only source I can see. The article is also not clear. Wow, you sure proved my point wrong.


  • Options
    #946
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,917 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Assetbacked wrote: »
    The Straits Times, a Singaporean newspaper, is the only source I can see. The article is also not clear. Wow, you sure proved my point wrong.

    I think you proved that you can't use a search engine if that's the only link you found.


  • Options
    #947
    Hector Savage
    Registered Users Posts: 8,810 ✭✭✭Hector Savage


    But he makes good points, why in 2019 is an attack on 2 lesbians on a bus causing more outrage then the MURDER of a young woman in front of her child ???


  • Options
    #948
    Christy42
    Registered Users Posts: 7,867 ✭✭✭Christy42


    Hector Savage wrote: »
    But he makes good points, why in 2019 is an attack on 2 lesbians on a bus causing more outrage then the MURDER of a young woman in front of her child ???

    Is your question why is that murder not getting more outrage or is it why isn't the attack on the lesbian couple getting less outrage?

    Because the first seems like a question for a different thread and the second seems callous.


  • Options
    #949
    Hector Savage
    Registered Users Posts: 8,810 ✭✭✭Hector Savage


    Christy42 wrote: »
    Is your question why is that murder not getting more outrage or is it why isn't the attack on the lesbian couple getting less outrage?

    Because the first seems like a question for a different thread and the second seems callous.

    a bit of both, I personally think the attack on the 2 women was more a crime of misogyny than homophobia.

    Homophobic attacks generally are against gay men - especially when the attackers are men.
    This could have easily been 2 straight friends that were attacked - the reasons were they were not interested in these sexually frustrated and angry men - not because they're gay.

    The gay thing ticks the progressive boxes.

    That will irk some people on here I'm sure that will of course try and misrepresent what I am saying.


  • Options
    #950
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,153 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Hector Savage wrote: »
    a bit of both, I personally think the attack on the 2 women was more a crime of misogyny than homophobia.

    Homophobic attacks generally are against gay men - especially when the attackers are men.
    This could have easily been 2 straight friends that were attacked - the reasons were they were not interested in these sexually frustrated and angry men - not because they're gay.

    The gay thing ticks the progressive boxes.

    That will irk some people on here I'm sure that will of course try and misrepresent what I am saying.

    so we just ignore everything that suggests it was a homophobic attack because they were 2 women? I didnt think this thread could get more stupid but you managed it.


  • Options
    #951
    joe40
    Registered Users Posts: 3,811 ✭✭✭joe40


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    so we just ignore everything that suggests it was a homophobic attack because they were 2 women? I didnt think this thread could get more stupid but you managed it.

    Does it really matter if it is labelled a homophobic attack or a misogynistic attack.
    It was absolutely an attack on two gay women but I think mostly it was an attack on women not willing to behave as this group of men wanted them to, for their own gratification.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #952
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,153 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    joe40 wrote: »
    Does it really matter if it is labelled a homophobic attack or a misogynistic attack.
    It was absolutely an attack on two gay women but I think mostly it was an attack on women not willing to behave as this group of men wanted them to, for their own gratification.

    Does it matter? yes it does.


  • Options
    #953
    Hector Savage
    Registered Users Posts: 8,810 ✭✭✭Hector Savage


    joe40 wrote: »
    Does it really matter if it is labelled a homophobic attack or a misogynistic attack.
    It was absolutely an attack on two gay women but I think mostly it was an attack on women not willing to behave as this group of men wanted them to, for their own gratification.

    Exactly!

    Don't get me wrong, it's a crime and I hope they get the book thrown at them, but the evidence points more to misogyny than homophobia.

    I'd be more worried about what gave these men the attitude to expect that from women - online porn ?
    ****ed up world we live in, this **** is effecting kids minds, kids as young as 7 are being shown porn in school by their mates.


  • Options
    #954
    FunLover18
    Registered Users Posts: 6,793 ✭✭✭FunLover18


    For me, a bunch of men urging two women to kiss for their own gratification says more about their attitudes towards lesbianism than it does about their attitude towards women in general. It was absolutely misogynistic but I feel the attitudes towards sexuality is the (slightly) bigger problem.


  • Options
    #955
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Hector Savage wrote: »
    But he makes good points, why in 2019 is an attack on 2 lesbians on a bus causing more outrage then the MURDER of a young woman in front of her child ???

    Probably because you are not comparing like with like. One was a failed mugging - the other was seemingly an attack on people purely for being who they are.

    While both are equally horrific things to happen - one at least parses more rationally in the mind than the other. When someone gets injured or killed in a mugging we do not tend to have people trying to understand how or why it happens. Most of us know - or feel we know - that already. We can be horrified by it - but we can at least _understand_ it.

    It is not that one requires more outrage than the other therefore - I am sure we are all equally outraged that such attacks occur - it is that one affords more issues to discuss and debate or simply think over than the other. And this being specifically a _discussion forum_ it is going to self select for topics that are likely to produce more _discussion_.

    So I am not convinced you are using the correct tools to gauge relative outrage. Either on this issue or your usual hobby horse of pretending anyone who does not hate Islam as much as you do is somehow protective of it and biased in favour of it. Basically - there is a selection bias built into the medium you are using to measure. On quite a lot of topics.
    Hector Savage wrote: »
    the evidence points more to misogyny than homophobia.

    I think it is elements of both myself because -
    Hector Savage wrote: »
    I'd be more worried about what gave these men the attitude to expect that from women - online porn ?

    - with or without porn I think there is an element of neither homophobia or misogyny but homo-ignorance. I do not think porn is to be blamed at all. Rather there is just an idea some people have that if you are somehow sexually alternative then you are sexually "open" and can be treated with standards of propriety much lower than people of a "normal" sexuality can be.

    I see this often in my own relationship. When a certain type of person cops my girlfriends are "together" then the things they say and do around them often simply change. The social etiquette and propriety standards they apply to every other girl in the room is different automatically to the one they now apply to my girlfriends in that moment. Their being simply sexually different means - in the mind of this ignorant minority - that they are sexually promiscuous/open/up for it and usual standards do not apply.

    A guy who it seems from first exposure would never dream of going up to a girl - to give a relatively recent example we experienced - to ask her in a pub "how many fingers can your boyfriend get up you?" will without reservation hesitation or embarrassment ask one of my GFs that very question loudly in the pub to the guffaws of his mates.

    There is also this nonsense notion some have that if you are in any way sexually alternative on one attribute - then you are on them all. A frequent user of this forum for example accused me of lying when I said I did not have a "dog in the race" on trans-gender issues. Because I _do_ have a dog in the race of homosexuality issues however - he declared me a liar as I simply must have a dog in the other races too.

    His reasoning? Simply put when asked he declared that because I was alternative _at all_ I must be alternative across the board and be invested uniform in all alternative sex issues.

    That is the ignorance we have to deal with in some people. Not porn or early exposure to it I suspect - though I admit that likely does not _help_ either.


  • Options
    #956
    Hector Savage
    Registered Users Posts: 8,810 ✭✭✭Hector Savage


    FunLover18 wrote: »
    For me, a bunch of men urging two women to kiss for their own gratification says more about their attitudes towards lesbianism than it does about their attitude towards women in general. It was absolutely misogynistic but I feel the attitudes towards sexuality is the (slightly) bigger problem.

    I mainly agree with this, but you think they would let 2 girls off if they thought they were straight ??


  • Options
    #957
    Hector Savage
    Registered Users Posts: 8,810 ✭✭✭Hector Savage


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Probably because you are not comparing like with like. One was a failed mugging - the other was seemingly an attack on people purely for being who they are.

    While both are equally horrific things to happen - one at least parses more rationally in the mind than the other. When someone gets injured or killed in a mugging we do not tend to have people trying to understand how or why it happens. Most of us know - or feel we know - that already. We can be horrified by it - but we can at least _understand_ it.

    It is not that one requires more outrage than the other therefore - I am sure we are all equally outraged that such attacks occur - it is that one affords more issues to discuss and debate or simply think over than the other. And this being specifically a _discussion forum_ it is going to self select for topics that are likely to produce more _discussion_.

    So I am not convinced you are using the correct tools to gauge relative outrage. Either on this issue or your usual hobby horse of pretending anyone who does not hate Islam as much as you do is somehow protective of it and biased in favour of it. Basically - there is a selection bias built into the medium you are using to measure. On quite a lot of topics.



    I think it is elements of both myself because -



    - with or without porn I think there is an element of neither homophobia or misogyny but homo-ignorance. I do not think porn is to be blamed at all. Rather there is just an idea some people have that if you are somehow sexually alternative then you are sexually "open" and can be treated with standards of propriety much lower than people of a "normal" sexuality can be.

    I see this often in my own relationship. When a certain type of person cops my girlfriends are "together" then the things they say and do around them often simply change. The social etiquette and propriety standards they apply to every other girl in the room is different automatically to the one they now apply to my girlfriends in that moment. Their being simply sexually different means - in the mind of this ignorant minority - that they are sexually promiscuous/open/up for it and usual standards do not apply.

    A guy who it seems from first exposure would never dream of going up to a girl - to give a relatively recent example we experienced - to ask her in a pub "how many fingers can your boyfriend get up you?" will without reservation hesitation or embarrassment ask one of my GFs that very question loudly in the pub to the guffaws of his mates.

    There is also this nonsense notion some have that if you are in any way sexually alternative on one attribute - then you are on them all. A frequent user of this forum for example accused me of lying when I said I did not have a "dog in the race" on trans-gender issues. Because I _do_ have a dog in the race of homosexuality issues however - he declared me a liar as I simply must have a dog in the other races too.

    His reasoning? Simply put when asked he declared that because I was alternative _at all_ I must be alternative across the board and be invested uniform in all alternative sex issues.

    That is the ignorance we have to deal with in some people. Not porn or early exposure to it I suspect - though I admit that likely does not _help_ either.

    Very good post - mainly, was gonna thank it until I read ...
    Either on this issue or your usual hobby horse of pretending anyone who does not hate Islam as much as you do is somehow protective of it and biased in favour of it



    wtf has Islam to do with this ?


  • Options
    #958
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    ^ Nothing. Nor did I say it does. I was making a point that the tools you use to measure relative outrage are inherently biased. Which is seemingly a general problem and not one limited to this thread.


  • Options
    #959
    Hector Savage
    Registered Users Posts: 8,810 ✭✭✭Hector Savage


    Deleted User wrote: »
    ^ Nothing. Nor did I say it does. I was making a point that the tools you use to measure relative outrage are inherently biased. Which is seemingly a general problem and not one limited to this thread.

    fair enough, seriously gonna just never mention Islam on boards again :mad:


  • Options
    #960
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    ^If you wish. Though I am sceptical that is true rather than just a flounce. But it certainly was never my intention. My intention was to highlight an issue in measurement and I felt to correctly highlight he issue I could not mistakenly give the impression it was limited to one particular topic. Otherwise the issue I was highlighting could be misconstrued.

    But it is not an issue personally with you either. There are selection bias problems in measuring relative outrage across many people and media. The environment of clickbait for example means certain topics _seem_ to cause more outrage than others solely because the media reporting on them work to manufacture outrage on some topics more than others.

    It is easy to make the mistake that topic X caused more outrage than topic Y solely because one caused more discussion than the other. But discussion and outrage are different things. So it is simply an error to gauge one by measuring the other. And I think this is the mistake you and some others make _generally_ not just here. That this attack got 60 pages of response when the murder of a mother did not - is not a measure of the relative outrage or horror people feel for each incident.

    But I will drop it there if you wish as we risk a back and forth discussion that tends to attract ire.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #961
    FunLover18
    Registered Users Posts: 6,793 ✭✭✭FunLover18


    Hector Savage wrote: »
    I mainly agree with this, but you think they would let 2 girls off if they thought they were straight ??

    I think they possibly would have approached two straight girls in the same manner, and I emphasise "possibly", however that raises the question of are homophobic attitudes or slurs any less homophobic when aimed at heterosexual people?

    I also think it's important to take into account the victims' accounts and from the stories I've read it's quite clear that two women feel they were attacked because of their sexuality and not because they were women.


Advertisement