Girl allegedly raped on Brazilian Big Brother

Millicent · 18-01-2012 02:42AM

Bullseye1 wrote: »

Absolutely. So why give them that opportunity. There will always be those type of people you need to protect yourself against them.

Did you know that most rapes are carried out by someone known to the victim, often a partner or spouse? Saying a victim should protect themselves creates the fallacious assumption that one can preempt a criminal's actions. They can't.

It also means that a potential victim must curtail their own freedom in deference to someone else's potential for criminal behaviour. Where's the fairness in that?

18-01-2012 02:50AM

The begining of this thread wow just wow what the feck has they way she looks got to do with anything ? Or him for that matter .
Poor girl if its true

Liam Byrne · 18-01-2012 02:50AM

Johro wrote: »

People are always going to find themselves in situations where they might drink way too much, whether they do it regularly or once in a blue moon,

Not necessarily

but that hardly makes them, even partly, responsible for their own rape. I thought everyone would get that.

Agree 100%.

And note that it is possible to put both separate issues in the same sentence and not have one related to the other.

Johro · 18-01-2012 02:52AM

Millicent wrote: »

It also means that a potential victim must curtail their own freedom in deference to someone else's potential for criminal behaviour. Where's the fairness in that?

In a nutshell. Very well put.

Kimia · 18-01-2012 02:53AM

Bullseye1 wrote: »

There is no excuse for rape full stop.

However there is no excuse for getting blind drunk and not knowing what had happened the night before. People have been ostracized for getting behind the steering wheel of a car when drunk and rightly so. It's time people started taking responsibility for their own actions and stop drinking to excess.

When you have victims of rape who where drunk the night of the crime and their inability to give a cohesive account of what happened leads to a case not being persued by the prosecution who is to blame? If the victim was not blind drunk then they give their case a much stronger chance of success.

When did it become anyone else's business what I do with my body? If I want to get absolutely S*IT faced I will, and it's noone's business but my own.

That does not give anyone the right to rape me. How can you not see that?

Chuck Stone · 18-01-2012 02:54AM

Johro wrote: »

People are always going to find themselves in situations where they might drink way too much, whether they do it regularly or once in a blue moon, but that hardly makes them, even partly, responsible for their own rape. I thought everyone would get that.

Exactly. Getting pissed is, at worst, irresponsible. Also, people tend to drink more when they are going through difficult life transitions or stressful periods of their lives which may point to an underlying emotional struggle.

Raping someone is a heinous crime.

Liam Byrne · 18-01-2012 02:57AM

Kimia wrote: »

Bullseye1 wrote: »

There is no excuse for rape full stop.

However there is no excuse for getting blind drunk and not knowing what had happened the night before. People have been ostracized for getting behind the steering wheel of a car when drunk and rightly so. It's time people started taking responsibility for their own actions and stop drinking to excess.

When you have victims of rape who where drunk the night of the crime and their inability to give a cohesive account of what happened leads to a case not being persued by the prosecution who is to blame? If the victim was not blind drunk then they give their case a much stronger chance of success.

When did it become anyone else's business what I do with my body? If I want to get absolutely S*IT faced I will, and it's noone's business but my own.

That does not give anyone the right to rape me. How can you not see that?

Read Bullseye's first line again.

There is no excuse for rape full stop.

Where is the ambiguity in that statement that lets you claim that he's "giving anyone the right to rape" you ?

Because I can't see it.

Kimia · 18-01-2012 03:02AM

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Read Bullseye's first line again.

Where is the ambiguity in that statement that lets you claim that he's "giving anyone the right to rape" you ?

Because I can't see it.

It was the 'however' that followed it.

So if I was a man, and I was at a house party with mates, and I got blind drunk, as you do from time to time, and fell asleep on the couch - it's my fault if I wake up to find another guy having sex with me?

Headshot · 18-01-2012 03:02AM

<SNIP>

bronte · 18-01-2012 03:03AM

I'm not entirely sure if this has been posted already but I'm gonna have a 13 year old girl exlpain a few things

Johro · 18-01-2012 03:03AM

'I'm not a rapist, but...'
She was off her face-
She was wearing hardly anything-
She was acting/dancing provocatively-
She accepted my offers of drinks all night-
etc. etc. etc.

KeithM89_old · 18-01-2012 03:06AM

Mod Note: Anyone posting that video again will be banned a long long time, probably permanent.

Johro · 18-01-2012 03:06AM

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Because I can't see it.

No you can't. He's doing your trick of linking one to the other as if they're cause and effect, then saying they're not related. In your case (your post) , it was about what came after the 'but...', in his case, what came after 'however'. Other than that, a pretty similar attitude. 'I don't excuse rape, but she was kinda looking for it being that drunk'. That's what it looks like to the rest of us.

cursai · 18-01-2012 03:07AM

Larry Murphy would be ashamed of big brother.

Coriolanus · 18-01-2012 03:16AM

Sounds like there were a litany of errors by whoever manages the show too. Surely if youlock people in a house you have a duty of care to them. I can see more than just him going down.

Liam Byrne · 18-01-2012 03:20AM

Kimia wrote: »

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Read Bullseye's first line again.

Where is the ambiguity in that statement that lets you claim that he's "giving anyone the right to rape" you ?

Because I can't see it.

It was the 'however' that followed it.

So if I was a man, and I was at a house party with mates, and I got blind drunk, as you do from time to time, and fell asleep on the couch - it's my fault if I wake up to find another guy having sex with me?

No. It's not. And no-one said it was.

dark crystal · 18-01-2012 03:22AM

Nevore wrote: »

Sounds like there were a litany of errors by whoever manages the show too. Surely if youlock people in a house you have a duty of care to them. I can see more than just him going down.

I wonder is the show still broadcasting after such a crime has allegedly been committed?

For all the slagging it gets, if the same thing happened on the U.K version, I doubt there's any way they'd continue on with the show.

Liam Byrne · 18-01-2012 03:22AM

Johro wrote: »

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Because I can't see it.

No you can't. He's doing your trick of linking one to the other as if they're cause and effect, then saying they're not related. In your case (your post) , it was about what came after the 'but...', in his case, what came after 'however'. Other than that, a pretty similar attitude. 'I don't excuse rape, but she was kinda looking for it being that drunk'. That's what it looks like to the rest of us.

You were already corrected.

Multiple times.

LAY OFF

Coriolanus · 18-01-2012 03:26AM

dark crystal wrote: »

Nevore wrote: »

Sounds like there were a litany of errors by whoever manages the show too. Surely if youlock people in a house you have a duty of care to them. I can see more than just him going down.

I wonder is the show still broadcasting after such a crime has allegedly been committed?

For all the slagging it gets, if the same thing happened on the U.K version, I doubt there's any way they'd continue on with the show.

It sounds like its still running, at least it kept rolling until the next afternoon at the very earliest.

Chuck Stone · 18-01-2012 03:41AM

Johro wrote: »

'I'm not a rapist, but...'

Watch for "But-Heads" to Catch a Lie

If someone tells you that "It doesn't make a big difference to me, but ..." there's a fairly strong chance something does make a big difference to them. Statements like this are dubbed "but-heads," and you should read deeper into them.

http://lifehacker.com/5698170/watch-for-but+heads-to-catch-a-lie

.

Yakult · 18-01-2012 04:06AM

Negative - Girl scarred from this mentally.

Positive - One less sick bastard on the street.

Paddy Cow · 18-01-2012 10:57AM

dark crystal wrote: »

I wonder is the show still broadcasting after such a crime has allegedly been committed?

For all the slagging it gets, if the same thing happened on the U.K version, I doubt there's any way they'd continue on with the show.

There is no way the UK show would let it go that far. They nearly went into meltdown after Emily used the N word and Shilpagate. A rape scandal, alleged or otherwise would be the end of the show.

18-01-2012 11:05AM

Obviously there's no excuse for rape. She should be able to get blind drunk and lie naked in the street if she wants without being touched.

I don't know why people get blind paralytic drunk though. Silly thing to do in general

The OP is appalling
can't believe he did it
as for nobody stepping in,
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sulphuric-Acid-Am%C3%A9lie-Nothomb/dp/0571234925

starbelgrade · 18-01-2012 11:17AM

bluewolf wrote: »

The OP is appalling
can't believe he did it

I find it appalling that people jump to the conclusion that if a guy is indicated as an alleged rapist, that he is automatically guilty. This is a story that the guy has been accused of rape. He has not been charged, tried or convicted of anything.

If he is innocent until proven guilty, then as far as we know, he hasn't actually done anything wrong.

According to a report from the Sydney Morning Herald, a police statement has said that "Both of them did confirm they had consumed alcoholic drinks and that they were aware of their surroundings, and they confirmed touching each other under a comforter".

Duggy747 · 18-01-2012 11:20AM

Not excusing any behaviour of rape but I'm not going to jump the gun here, either.

It's still "allegedly" and multiple media outlets seem to say that the 2 confirmed there was some kissing and fondling going on. He may have been foward in his approach but to find him guilty immediately of rape is a bit quick before any investigation has concluded.

18-01-2012 11:22AM

starbelgrade wrote: »

I find it appalling that people jump to the conclusion that if a guy is indicated as an alleged rapist, that he is automatically guilty. This is a story that the guy has been accused of rape. He has not been charged, tried or convicted of anything.

whatever else he did or didnt do, climbing under the covers of a girl who is passed out drunk in front of a bunch of cameras is pretty stupid

as for the rest of your report,i was going with the one in the OP.
if it was mutual, ok i suppose

starbelgrade · 18-01-2012 11:26AM

Duggy747 wrote: »

Not excusing any behaviour of rape but I'm not going to jump the gun here, either.

It's still "allegedly" and multiple media outlets seem to say that the 2 confirmed there was some kissing and fondling going on. He may have been foward in his approach but to find him guilty immediately of rape is a bit quick before any investigation has concluded.

If you watch the video, it certainly doesn't look like a rape of any kind. It is of course, inconclusive as you can't really see what is going on, but I would say that at the very worst, it was a sexual assault.. though I'm dubious about that too.

My gut feeling is that this story has been blown out of all proportion by the media & the story has been given legs by the production team in order to boost ratings.

I really can't see how a TV show - regardless of how shite it is - would not only allow a sexual assault to take place, but to film & broadcast it on live TV. It really doesn't add up at all.

Dyr · 18-01-2012 11:28AM

starbelgrade wrote: »

I find it appalling that people jump to the conclusion that if a guy is indicated as an alleged rapist, that he is automatically guilty. This is a story that the guy has been accused of rape. He has not been charged, tried or convicted of anything.

If he is innocent until proven guilty, then as far as we know, he hasn't actually done anything wrong.

According to a report from the Sydney Morning Herald, a police statement has said that "Both of them did confirm they had consumed alcoholic drinks and that they were aware of their surroundings, and they confirmed touching each other under a comforter".

In all fairness, you have people here arguing about theoretical court cases where the the term "rapist" and "victim" are being used, so we can safely say the whole presumption of innocence thing goes out the window on this topic :pac:

Duggy747 · 18-01-2012 11:35AM

One thing that leaves me so cynical about stories like these intially is how loose the word "rape" is thrown around, rather than sexual assualt. Almost trivialises such a disgusting and serious topic.

As the situation currently stands, I think this would class better under groping (If he was fondling her without her consent) rather than out-and-out rape.

But, me thinks the media outlets are having a field day with their headlines. Guilty until proven innocent and all that.....

18-01-2012 11:36AM

Haha, there's a time and a place for all that, not on Big Bro

Girl allegedly raped on Brazilian Big Brother

Comments