Warwick student rejects consent lessons.

Kev W · 15-10-2015 03:39PM

conorhal wrote: »

I'd say the same of the organizers, who will no doubt smugly suggest that this incident demonstrates why these classes need to be mandatory.

I love the phrase "no doubt".

It allows one to cluck their tongue and roll their eyes at the completely imagined actions of others.

Good stuff.

steddyeddy · 15-10-2015 03:39PM

Candie wrote: »

Then he's playing right into their hands.

When I come across something obviously ridiculous and unrelated to my life, I do the sensible thing and I ignore it.

He should have done the same, but now he's all notorious and bad-ass and sticking it to those crazy rad-fems. So he's no different, really.

Yes he is. He's demonstrating and publicly speaking out against idiocy like this.

conorhal · 15-10-2015 03:40PM

Kev W wrote: »

I love the phrase "no doubt".

It allows one to cluck their tongue and roll their eyes at the completely imagined actions of others.

Good stuff.

A bit like the student union in this case, no?

steddyeddy · 15-10-2015 03:41PM

conorhal wrote: »

These loons have pretty much taken over university politics as a result of that kind of shrugging apathy, a halt needs to be called to their antics at some point, but it would of course be a braver (or more foolish) person then I to do so.
In truth the 'reaction' is just another example of the 'no-platform' shouting down of dissent that has become all to common, even here, where national issues of immigration or travellers or no doubt this nonsense will be quietly moved and closed on 'Irelands biggest forum'.

Correct me if I'm wrong but these examples of social Darwinism don't seem as prevalent in Ireland thankfully.

Duggy747 · 15-10-2015 03:41PM

I love it, the reactions are that he should've taken the course or shut his mouth.

Kev W · 15-10-2015 03:41PM

conorhal wrote: »

A bit like the student union in this case, no?

The imaginary one that you said called for the lecture to be mandatory? Yes, I suppose.

15-10-2015 03:43PM

Why was he invited to attend the classes? Who else was invited?

This kind of sh1t really bothers me and I would absolutely not go either.

Maguined · 15-10-2015 03:49PM

Duggy747 wrote: »

I love it, the reactions are that he should've taken the course or shut his mouth.

We don't care about your consent now shut up and learn about consent!

Grab All Association · 15-10-2015 03:49PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Why was he invited to attend the classes? Who else was invited?

This kind of sh1t really bothers me and I would absolutely not go either.

RAPIST!

The PC brigade is coming woo woo woo woo woo

Time for some re-femication

discus · 15-10-2015 03:52PM

TOXIC MASCULINITY

strelok · 15-10-2015 03:53PM

discus wrote: »

TOXIC MASCULINITY

bit redundant, surely

Zillah · 15-10-2015 03:53PM

On one hand I can completely understand someone being outraged at the implication that they are a potential rapist.

On the other hand, I think a huge amount of rape revolves around the perception that certain things aren't "really" rape in the mind of a lot of people, especially young men, especially when it comes to alcohol. Contrary to popular perception rapists aren't slavering monsters stalking in the shadows. A lot of them are otherwise normal guys who see someone vulnerable and convince themselves that it's not that bad. They probably have a little voice telling them no at the same time, and I think that voice would be a lot louder and stronger if they had had someone look them in the eye previously and tell them with no ambiguity that if she is too drunk to talk to you properly then it is rape.

Problems specific to this situation: if he personally was invited, as opposed to blanket invites, that's outrageous and deserves to be called out.

It's an invite only course, as opposed to something mandatory done, say, at the end of second school as a part of sex ed: so the only people that will attend are the people you're probably not worried about.

It's hijacked by a bunch of strident misandrists that want to demonise men: calling him a rapey creepbag for insisting that he understands consent and would never violate it, with or without such a class, is an abhorrent, idiotic, and self-defeating thing to do.

EazyD · 15-10-2015 03:55PM

It's just the feminists shouting again folks, back to work.

conorhal · 15-10-2015 03:55PM

Kev W wrote: »

The imaginary one that you said called for the lecture to be mandatory? Yes, I suppose.

No doubt you intended that sentence to make sense.

15-10-2015 04:18PM

Is it just men that are "invited" to attend?

Surely this is no more than gender profiling.

wakka12 · 15-10-2015 04:21PM

Such bs. Gay guys sit it too do they? Just because theyre male

Tarzana2 · 15-10-2015 04:24PM

Medusa22 wrote: »

I disagree with his posting a photo of himself holding a sign that reads ''This is not what a rapist looks like'', unfortunately there is no way to identify what a rapist looks like, they don't wear signs and there is no certain ''look'', otherwise we'd be able to identify them for ourselves.

+1

Or indeed herself, as women can be rapists too.

Zillah · 15-10-2015 04:36PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Is it just men that are "invited" to attend?

Surely this is no more than gender profiling.

The vast majority of rapists are men though, in fairness; are we really going to throw a hissy fit over anti-rape campaigns being focused on men?

EazyD · 15-10-2015 04:37PM

Tarzana2 wrote: »

+1

Or indeed herself, as women can be rapists too.

Not in Ireland anyway, one must possess a penis to be able to do so.

Gongoozler · 15-10-2015 04:38PM

I would never in a million years have thought Ched Evans could be found guilty of rape based on the fact that the girl was too drunk to be able to knowingly consent. So, considering that's a law now and you can go to prison for it, I think it's quite important that people learn all the ways you can get to being called a rapist. The 'knock you over the head and rape you' type of rapist most likely wouldn't be influenced at all by classes such as these.

steddyeddy · 15-10-2015 04:39PM

Zillah wrote: »

The vast majority of rapists are men though, in fairness; are we really going to throw a hissy fit over anti-rape campaigns being focused on men?

Actually yes we do. Should we have science recruitment fairs aimed only at men because scientists have historically been men?

15-10-2015 04:43PM

Zillah wrote: »

The vast majority of rapists are men though, in fairness; are we really going to throw a hissy fit over anti-rape campaigns being focused on men?

If somewhere had a "how not to steal" course aimed at Black people, you'd know there'd be uproar about it.

And it's not a "hissy fit", it's justified annoyance and anger over being labelled a potential rapist because I have a penis.

strelok · 15-10-2015 04:45PM

Deleted User wrote: »

If somewhere had a "how not to steal" course aimed at Black people, you'd know there'd be uproar about it.

And it's not a "hissy fit", it's justified annoyance and anger over being labelled a potential rapist because I have a penis.

they took all the arab students out of my first year orientation and made sure they all understood strapping explosives to your chest and blowing yourself up in a lecture hall was just not accepted behaviour here in the west

Maguined · 15-10-2015 04:46PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Is it just men that are "invited" to attend?

Surely this is no more than gender profiling.

Probably not, it seems that as it is run through the students union they have made it mandatory for two members of each society to attend the courses so of the 300 invited many of them were women. It seems from the website you were meant to voluntarily sign yourself up to the course if you so desired but obviously George did not sign himself up.

It also seems I was wrong as they are not just targetting freshers as George is not a Freshman in the college as he is in his second year so either he is a society executive in which case the other execs named him as one of their two mandatory attendess or else someone invited him to be one of the 300 on the event page out of the 12k undergraduates (as I was wrong and the page says it is not just for Freshers). I guess someone felt he did look like a rapist and would benefit from the course.

15-10-2015 04:47PM

strelok wrote: »

they took all the arab students out of my first year orientation and made sure they all understood strapping explosives to your chest and blowing yourself up in a lecture hall was just not accepted behaviour here in the west

And then had "invited" them on a course on how not to do mass killings.

blue note · 15-10-2015 04:50PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

Actually yes we do. Should we have science recruitment fairs aimed only at men because scientists have historically been men?

Do you think we should have anti suicide campaigns aimed solely at men because the majority of victims are men? Maybe domestic violence campaigns should only target men too because more of the victims are female?

sonny.knowles · 15-10-2015 04:52PM

strelok wrote: »

they took all the arab students out of my first year orientation and made sure they all understood strapping explosives to your chest and blowing yourself up in a lecture hall was just not accepted behaviour here in the west

Did it work? How many are still alive?

steddyeddy · 15-10-2015 04:52PM

blue note wrote: »

Do you think we should have anti suicide campaigns aimed solely at men because the majority of victims are men? Maybe domestic violence campaigns should only target men too because more of the victims are female?

Em no I don't that's my point. I don't believe in gender profiling negative stereotypes.

15-10-2015 04:55PM

blue note wrote: »

Do you think we should have anti suicide campaigns aimed solely at men because the majority of victims are men? Maybe domestic violence campaigns should only target men too because more of the victims are female?

I think you're misunderstanding the point they were trying to make ..

steddyeddy · 15-10-2015 05:05PM

Zillah wrote: »

The vast majority of rapists are men though, in fairness; are we really going to throw a hissy fit over anti-rape campaigns being focused on men?

I think I explained my point arseways there. I'll try again. ANother example would be sexual abuse. Most perpetrators are family members. Would it be acceptable to give classes to family members on something self evident like how not to commit abuse?

Sure there are more male rapists but what proportion of men are rapists? Is it fair or effective to aim a campaign at all men because a small proportion of the gender makes up a large proportion of rape statistics?

Warwick student rejects consent lessons.

Comments