Sheep_shear wrote: » I thought a few weeks ago, they changed things so that "Believe all women" was actually a battle cry of the far right. Has that changed again? Very tough to keep up.
Eric Cartman wrote: » judging by the politicians this person is likely to be at dinner with considering her cv, id imagine its the people who were retweeting #ibelieveher who would go fierce quiet if she ever did name the person and there was truth to it.
Joeytheparrot wrote: » No The timing is because dozens of Irish people have been discussing their sexual assault experiences on twitter in the last week.
coinop wrote: » Do you believe women or will you demand proof?https://mobile.twitter.com/taisling/status/1274649516491366401
KiKi III wrote: » It can happen, I’ve already acknowledged that. But it’s rare. If you want an Irish source to learn about the prevalence of sexual violence in Ireland against men and women I suggest the SAVI report. Tell me: When men started coming forward in the 90s in the media saying that they had been abused by priests decades before, did you assume they were mostly attention seekers or out for the compo as has been said repeatedly about women on this thread?
ELM327 wrote: » It's "Believe all women once it doesnt affect democratic party candidates or anyone on the left"
double jobbing wrote: » Yes. It always seems to be a certain "type" on Twitter though.
LazySamaritan wrote: » I signed in to respond to a question but the post seems to have been deleted. It was asking is a hand on a leg sexual assault. I don't know the full details but according to the tweet it wasn't just a hand on leg but the accused put his hand up the woman's leg. That could make it a sexual assault. The wording has always confused me. In this country isn't assault the threat of violence and battery the actual physical impact, with even an unwanted touch considered battery. If that is so wouldn't sexual assault be the threat or fear, and then the physical act be sexual battery. I never hear of sexual battery so is it just different in a sex crime? Or am I wrong about assault and battery in this country. It was something that was related to a course in college 30 years ago so maybe things changed I the meantime or it was just explained to wrong. And I fear for the present and the future when people think it is okay to use this nonsense software. What if one of those people misunderstands who they are all but naming and spreads around information that it was some other man?
Randy Archer wrote: » It’s plausible but what is with your attitude ? Yes, proof is required in a civilised society . Mob rule can’t be tolerated
Spon Farmer wrote: » Again referencing the US. This is an Irish case.
Spon Farmer wrote: » What do you mean? That they would stop believing her?
Randy Archer wrote: » Criminal law got rid of the battery distinction See Sections 2 , 3and 4 of Non Fatal Offences against the Person Act 1997 . Assault (section 2) is any unwanted contact or threat of same . Sexual assault is unwanted contact with sexual /indecent as to it - its irrelevant as to whether the culprit didn’t think it was indecent - see section 3 of criminal law rape amendment act 1990
ELM327 wrote: » Similar hypocrisy here though.
Eric Cartman wrote: » yes, or just go quiet to further their aims. The 'metoo' crowd have weaponised the experiences of women in order to shut down political opponents.
Spon Farmer wrote: » Are you saying that suspects are public supporters of women's rights, etc. and so the "movements" allow them to misbehave themselves?
Eric Cartman wrote: » absolutely. I would even go as far as to say that the majority of men labelling themselves as feminists or being active in these 'womens rights' movements are predators who are only involved in order to attain sex with women under false pretences or to divert the spotlight from their own past actions.
double jobbing wrote: » That posionous realm of humanity is going mad about, from what I can see, two musicians, a politician, a comedian and an actor. All because of some random faceless person making accusations. Twitter is utter poison. In saying that the actor named is a left wing thug of the highest order, it would be nice to see him put through the ringer even if he is likely innocent. An odious individual.
LazySamaritan wrote: » I was told earlier that my knowledge was out of date but thank you for the further details. So it the threat or fear of the assault also considered assault or is it just not a thing here?
Those abused girls in Rotherham and elsewhere just need to shut their mouths. For the good of diversity
Spon Farmer wrote: » Anybody here work on a factory floor or a warehouse? When I started working I was in few such places over the years and I was "groped" by female colleagues a few times - not for sexual purposes I think, just horse play - and common greetings would "how's your tits?" and the likes. I know the offices were very different but are factories like this anymore?
paw patrol wrote: » Lets not forget in the UK , raped girls should shut up for the sake of diversity A tweet liked and shared by Labour MP Naz Shah It's weird how laws and standards only apply when its applies "the right way":(
MoonUnit75 wrote: » I worked on a factory floor during my college holidays. Mostly women on the line and it was exactly like your experience. Mostly women in their late 30s and 40s in my area and it was unreal. They seemed obsessed with college students sexual exploits and were really unhappy if I wouldn't share stories on the line, on top of the groping etc.
LuasSimon wrote: » Not allowed say these things anymore even if it’s true .... you could get locked up for even saying this type of thing happened .... more than likely you coerced these women and played on their weaknesses ....
3DataModem wrote: » I can say one thing, that I'm sure you all agree with. I dig shaming lech. In fact, I'm sure we'd all dig shaming this particular lech.
