Dudess wrote: » Nope. The obscured sight of a guy jerking off - what damage could that sight do? I'm serious. Maybe cause a kid to go "Ew..." or to laugh... what else?
montane wrote: » Im quite happy with a law that prohibits guys from masturbating themselves beside me, and dont think I'd be too happy to see it in public places such as cinema, restaurants, public transport, creches, etc. But that's just me.
Dudess wrote: » I don't disagree - certainly don't like the idea at all myself. I'm just wondering though what irreversible damage it does...
minidazzler wrote: » I agree, all in, it's a public ****, public indecency really. Not so terrible. But he put himself in the public eye, and put the public in his pubic eye. Given his position in the community, it is not surprising the ridicule he is receiving. Deserving of having his job lost, not really, but deserving of losing the respect of the republic, yes, which indirectly effects his job. How can he do shows on any subject related to sex when he will be branded a pervert by idiots? I don't think it's that bad, but as my blurb may say, I always thought he was a bit of a wanker. He just got caught, which is a problem given his public persona. Not sure if you are serious about he should lose his job. Public indecency is not a good reason to fire someone. I would never get a job if it was given the amount of people who have seen my balls when drunk. But as to why he didn't go to the toilet, because he was bollixed I guess!
montane wrote: » From reading of Prendeville's arrogance throughout this thread, I wonder did the alcohol and painkillers have any effect. Maybe his ego had become so inflated along with his level of narcissism, especially following a day as a guest of honour at some convention, he felt entitled to masturbate himself in front of the general public - maybe he thought he was doing the air hostesses a favour by inviting them to suck him off, while at the same time ingratiating other passengers with the sight of his glorious penis.
PaintDoctor wrote: » D'ya know what? I was the first person to claim that if he did what he did, it was wrong. I still stand by that - if he did do it - but the grilling the guy is getting is ridiculous. The amount of coverage in the papers over the past few days has been disgusting. There's no need for the witchhunt that's going on in the papers, and people would want to give him a break if he's to have any hope of recovering his standing from this, and I'd like to personally apologise for any jokes or comments I made on here. In my opinion, there should be a moratorium on this for the next few days until everything gets a chance to calm down.
Dudess wrote: » Nope. The obscured sight of a guy jerking off - what damage could that sight do? I'm serious.
M5 wrote: » Would that make him a member of the mile high club :pac:
--Kaiser-- wrote: » To be honest, no one in their right mind is going to take out his lad and do the old hand shandy in public surrounded by people. Since he has no prior history of mental illness (or public indecent exposure) we can safely assume he wasn't in a right state of mind, through drink or nurofen or whatever (it does say not to mix with alcohol on the cover doesn't it?)
NothingMan wrote: » Well... Did he cum or what? I hate these cliff hangers.
The witnesses, who sat on either side of Mr Prendeville as he exposed himself and masturbated under an in-flight magazine on board a flight on October 19, made the statements at Togher Garda Station in Cork yesterday.
It is understood Prendeville exposed himself under a copy of Cara inflight magazine while sitting in a seat at the front of the Aer Lingus aircraft as it was preparing for take-off at Heathrow.
oceanclub wrote: » Just to reemphasise, allegedly he did not just whip it out. The fact he was using a magazine to hide himself while doing it indicates a certain level of calculation.
Misanthrope wrote: » Probably got into some real cocaine in London, having only had the headshop 'Jokaine' in Cork.Sat next to a women after blowing a fat rail and lost his mind completely.Coke and booze I'd say.
--Kaiser-- wrote: » In that case I think I can retract my earlier statement!
Corholio wrote: » The word around Cork is that he may have been more 'familiar' with the women sitting next to him than he may be letting on.
The witnesses, who sat on either side of Mr Prendeville as he exposed himself and masturbated under an in-flight magazine on board a flight on October 19, made the statements at Todger Garda Station in Cork yesterday.
oceanclub wrote: » So you're OK with public masturbation? You have no problem if, in any situation, a guy started masturbating a few inches from you? P.
Dudess wrote: » Aw look, we're adults here aren't we? Why does that 13-year-old arguing tactic of saying something that wasn't said have to be used?