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
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.

Warwick student rejects consent lessons.

1234579

Comments

  • #182
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 26,920 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    DivingDuck wrote: »
    Firstly, they are profoundly different things. In Europe, "Being a slut" is not a crime. Rape, however, is.

    Secondly, there are many places where young people do indeed receive instruction on how not to be a slut. Consider Catholic schools where the contraception discussion is limited to "just abstain from sex", or the Purity Ball concept which continues to exist in the USA.

    I can't understand how anyone would be offended by the existence of these classes. Considering the frankly terrifying statistics coming in from the US (which suggest that, at one college at least, nearly 20% of female freshmen have experienced rape or attempted rape during their freshman year), it's unsurprising that UK universities are trying to prevent the same from happening there.

    There are numerous examples in the media where the guy in question, who was later found guilty of rape by the court, appeared to genuinely believe that he was not guilty of sexual assault and that the girl had been a willing participant. I think many of those guys could be helped by this seminar. I think girls who would be inclined to give a maybe when they really meant yes (or no) could be helped by it, too.

    If someone feels it doesn't apply to them, then don't go. People within their rights to refrain from attending. But it's foolish for someone to assume that just because they don't need something explained to them means that absolutely everyone can grasp the same concept without assistance.

    By the sound of things, the class seems to focus on opening a dialogue before there's any action, which can only be a good thing in my book. It doesn't sound like man-bashing. It discusses the unfair and lopsided stereotype that girls can't sexually assault guys, encourages both sides to be direct: not to give mixed messages, and not to interpret a no as a maybe.

    How can anybody be offended by that?

    Yea, the 1 in 5 statistic has been proven to be false numerous times over and I really wish people would stop talking about it. It is just aggravating the issue and further scaremongering against men.

    There are numerous examples in the media of guys who have been accused of rape, when such a thing didn't occur, turning into a witch hunt against them, without any means for them to protect themselves.

    Are there any statistics for how many guys this has happened to? You can be almost certain it's more than what we're hearing in the media, because usually how it goes when a man is accused of rape it's, "he's a rapist. burn him. rapist! blargh!" by both genders.

    You know what, like I said, we really do need to teach students to drink within their limits. To not go overboard.

    Just to add -

    If you want to teach classes on consent, then you should also teach classes on accusations.


  • #183
    RDM_83 again
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,116 ✭✭✭RDM_83 again


    I don't think anybody has a problem with No meaning No, or no response meaning No.
    People have an issue with enthusiastic vocal response being considered invalid due to alcohol (and a very grey area)
    I've done stuff I've regretted when sober but at least a bit of me wanted to do those things, I really don't believe its easy to get a drunk person to do something they really don't want to do in fact its probably harder (just to point out never had sex with somebody who has had less to drink than me, but all that means is both partners are assaulting each other!).


  • #184
    RDM_83 again
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,116 ✭✭✭RDM_83 again


    I don't think anybody has a problem with No meaning No, or no response meaning No.
    People have an issue with enthusiastic vocal response being considered invalid due to alcohol (and a very grey area of how much alcohol)
    I've done stuff I've regretted when sober but at least a bit of me wanted to do those things, I really don't believe its easy to get a drunk person to do something they really don't want to do in fact its probably harder (just to point out never had sex with somebody who has had less to drink than me, but all that means is both partners are assaulting each other!).


  • #185
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,127 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    smash wrote: »
    It's an utterly pointless exercise!

    What is society coming to when you're labelled guilty until taught how to be innocent?


    You could say any endeavour is a pointless exercise if you see no value in it, be it math, Irish, English, religion, SPHE, etc, etc, any number of other things could be considered an utterly pointless exercise that the person can easily say "I don't need to do this". I wouldn't see myself as needing to do it either. Can it hurt me to do it? Of course not, it's always better to be armed with the facts beforehand than try and argue them afterwards if the scenario ever arose.

    Society won't be grinding to a halt on the back of anything ever spread on social media, nor is anyone being labelled guilty for anything, but they are being invited to attend classes where they can be informed about consent. Where's the problem? It was an invite, not an instruction, and the guy is getting angry about it?

    Bit of perspective wouldn't go amiss there tbh.


  • #186
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,808 ✭✭✭✭smash


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    You could say any endeavour is a pointless exercise if you see no value in it, be it math, Irish, English, religion, SPHE, etc, etc, any number of other things could be considered an utterly pointless exercise that the person can easily say "I don't need to do this". I wouldn't see myself as needing to do it either. Can it hurt me to do it? Of course not, it's always better to be armed with the facts beforehand than try and argue them afterwards if the scenario ever arose.
    It's absolutely nothing to do with whether it can hurt you or not, it's to do with the implication that you need it. Would you be happy to get an invite to attend a class entitled "Why you shouldn't break a pint glass across someone's face on a random night out", just because of say, where you're from? It's utterly obnoxious!
    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    Society won't be grinding to a halt on the back of anything ever spread on social media
    Well that's not true. It's where the vast majority of news comes from these days.
    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    nor is anyone being labelled guilty for anything, but they are being invited to attend classes where they can be informed about consent. Where's the problem? It was an invite, not an instruction, and the guy is getting angry about it?
    And he has a right to be. It's a step towards acceptance of this kind of non sense.
    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    Bit of perspective wouldn't go amiss there tbh.
    I agree. You should try some.


  • Advertisement
  • #187
    osarusan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,931 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    smash wrote: »
    It's an utterly pointless exercise!
    What is?


  • #188
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,127 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    smash wrote: »
    It's absolutely nothing to do with whether it can hurt you or not, it's to do with the implication that you need it. Would you be happy to get an invite to attend a class entitled "Why you shouldn't break a pint glass across someone's face on a random night out", just because of say, where you're from? It's utterly obnoxious!


    Why can't you ask would I be happy being invited to a talk being given about consent? It really wouldn't bother me either way except for the rather cringeworthy title "I heart consent", which would put me off, probably enough to admit I wouldn't go to it on that basis if the title was to be any indicator of the course content.

    smash wrote: »
    Well that's not true. It's where the vast majority of news comes from these days.


    For college students perhaps, but for the vast majority of adults that still buy newspapers and watch their news on tv? You'll be hard pressed to find an adult who gives a fiddlers about some teenager in the US being invited to a talk about consent, let alone get upset about it on his behalf. They're more likely to tell him to grow the fcuk up.

    smash wrote: »
    And he has a right to be. It's a step towards acceptance of this kind of non sense.


    An invitation to a talk about consent is nonsense when every fcuking time I open After Hours lately there's another thread involving something or someone and something to do with consent and arguments about it, and you're suggesting that an information evening about it to try and inform students about it is nonsense? Well, I suppose you do have that right, as does he. More people simply wouldn't care less about his bitching.

    smash wrote: »
    I agree. You should try some.


    By getting more of my daily news from social media?

    I'm fine, thanks all the same.


  • #189
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,808 ✭✭✭✭smash


    osarusan wrote: »
    What is?
    I would have thought that was obvious given what the thread is about...


  • #190
    osarusan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,931 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    smash wrote: »
    I would have thought that was obvious given what the thread is about...
    The consent sessions are pointless?

    Why what happens in them? It's great that you actually know, because nobody else here does. Please fill us in - it's been all speculation and assumption so far.


  • #191
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,808 ✭✭✭✭smash


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    Why can't you ask would I be happy being invited to a talk being given about consent?
    Because you suggested that anything is pointless if you're not interested. I gave you a scenario that might invoke a bit of emotion.
    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    For college students perhaps, but for the vast majority of adults that still buy newspapers and watch their news on tv? You'll be hard pressed to find an adult who gives a fiddlers about some teenager in the US being invited to a talk about consent, let alone get upset about it on his behalf. They're more likely to tell him to grow the fcuk up.
    Well this still isn't true and you're changing your argument now. News will hit social media before it hits a newspaper or TV, and that's where it spreads.
    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    An invitation to a talk about consent is nonsense when every fcuking time I open After Hours lately there's another thread involving something or someone and something to do with consent and arguments about it, and you're suggesting that an information evening about it to try and inform students about it is nonsense?
    It's as much use, and arguably as insensitive, as the likes of getting an invite for a talk which is titled "How to not abuse your children".
    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    Well, I suppose you do have that right, as does he. More people simply wouldn't care less about his bitching.
    His bitching, as you put it, is highlighting the stupidity of the situation. By not bitching, he'd be accepting that it's something that should be normalised.
    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    By getting more of my daily news from social media?

    I'm fine, thanks all the same.
    You realise boards is a social media platform right?
    osarusan wrote: »
    The consent sessions are pointless?
    Yes they are in my opinion. And I'm not alone.


  • Advertisement
  • #192
    zeffabelli
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,515 ✭✭✭zeffabelli


    smash wrote: »
    Because you suggested that anything is pointless if you're not interested. I gave you a scenario that might invoke a bit of emotion.


    Well this still isn't true and you're changing your argument now. News will hit social media before it hits a newspaper or TV, and that's where it spreads.


    It's as much use, and arguably as insensitive, as the likes of getting an invite for a talk which is titled "How to not abuse your children".


    His bitching, as you put it, is highlighting the stupidity of the situation. By not bitching, he'd be accepting that it's something that should be normalised.


    You realise boards is a social media platform right?


    Yes they are in my opinion. And I'm not alone.

    Because the definitions are changing.

    Maybe a parent slags and doesn't know it's abusive.

    The definitions are always changing.


  • #193
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,808 ✭✭✭✭smash


    zeffabelli wrote: »
    Because the definitions are changing.

    Maybe a parent slags and doesn't know it's abusive.

    The definitions are always changing.

    Yet the vast vast majority have enough cop on to know it's wrong. The others can't be changed!


  • #194
    OneOfThem
    Closed Accounts Posts: 667 ✭✭✭OneOfThem


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    Well no, the only answer to it really is not to put yourself in a position where you could be accused of sexual assault or rape, and somehow there are billions of people the world over who manage to do just that.

    Are there? Billions? How do they manage that? I'm aware that hassidic Jews, dont allow women to be alone with men other than there husbands. But are there billions of them? And doesn't that still leave them in the position that they could be accused of marital rape or sexual assault? Or that men left alone together could be accused of male and male sexual assault? Or couldn't there be the possibility of woman on woman sexual assault accusations?

    Probably not those Jewish lads so. Who are the billions of people that manage to not put themselves in a position where they could be accused of a sexual assault? How do they manage that and what kinds of funny hats do they wear?

    I agree with you that this lad's a bit of a whiney bitch though. So this paragraph is us agreeing with each other about something in a thread about sexual consent and alcohol. So that's nice, and a little weird.


  • #195
    NachoBusiness
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,389 ✭✭✭NachoBusiness


    zeffabelli wrote: »
    The only answer to this is to stay away from drunk people.

    Goodbye fun. It was nice knowing you.
    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    Well no, the only answer to it really is not to put yourself in a position where you could be accused of sexual assault or rape...

    Eh, putting yourself in a position where you could be accused of rape includes having sex with someone who has consumed alcohol, that's the user's point.
    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    It really wouldn't bother me either way except for the rather cringeworthy title "I heart consent", which would put me off, probably enough to admit I wouldn't go to it on that basis if the title was to be any indicator of the course content.
    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    I wouldn't see myself as needing to do it either. Can it hurt me to do it? Of course not, it's always better to be armed with the facts beforehand than try and argue them afterwards if the scenario ever arose.

    Ha. Yet again you contradict yourself on what you have said in other threads:
    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    If someone is in college and they don't understand that at that age what rape is, then there's no amount of "education" is going to have any effect upon their attitude.


  • #196
    meeeeh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,612 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    NachoBusiness wrote: »
    Eh, putting yourself in a position where you could be accused of rape includes having sex with someone who has consumed alcohol, that's the user's point.

    Yes because so many cases of she said he said land in the court. Usually there is some other evidence also present. Very few rapes end up in conviction. This hysteria about innocent men being ruined because of false accusations is a bit ridiculous. I'm not saying it doesn't happen but it doesn't happen that often. I think everyone can remember how half of the town shook hands with someone who was clearly proven to be rapist. It also doesn't seem like drunken sex is any less popular because of these pitfalls.

    And frankly advice against very drunken sex is sound because a lot of other mishaps can happen like messaging up the contraception and so on.


  • #197
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,127 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    smash wrote: »
    Because you suggested that anything is pointless if you're not interested. I gave you a scenario that might invoke a bit of emotion.


    Well tbh I would think a conversation about consent and the issues surrounding consent with regard to avoiding possible accusations of rape would be emotive enough as it is without needing to bring in other stuff. I think such a conversation would be in anyone's interest who was sexually active and in college in the US where we hear through social media that an increasing number of men are being subjected to cuckoo courts which lead to them being expelled from the college. If junior doesn't think it's in his best interests to inform himself, he may want to think twice about that before he accuses the event organisers of being up on their high horse. The event wasn't specifically targeting this chap if it was sent out as an invitation on social media. Nobody actually accused nor insinuated that he was a rapist.


    Well this still isn't true and you're changing your argument now. News will hit social media before it hits a newspaper or TV, and that's where it spreads.


    This is what you call news? Some random student in far-off USA that you never heard of before, gets his knickers in a twist about being sent an invite to an event on facebook, an this is considered news?

    My point stands - more people get their news from newspapers and television, even radio, than they do social media.

    They get news about the latest international butt-hurt snowflake, from social media.

    It's as much use, and arguably as insensitive, as the likes of getting an invite for a talk which is titled "How to not abuse your children".


    Again, I'll point out that I've been getting emails about penis enlargement pills in my inbox for years, I have yet to make an issue of it rather than simply delete them. If I got an email entitled "how not to abuse your children", I'd simply delete that too. I wouldn't be so paranoid as to think it could actually ever be applied to me. I don't know tbh, I might go, if it wasn't titled something cringeworthy like "I heart kids"...

    His bitching, as you put it, is highlighting the stupidity of the situation. By not bitching, he'd be accepting that it's something that should be normalised.


    And you can't see that the organisers were trying to make the point that attitudes in the college regarding consent were what they considered normalised? That is, that not much consideration at all is given to the issue of consent when two drunken students hook up. That's the behaviour that's normalised, and this event was an attempt to counteract that effect. This chap took it personally because of his own paranoia, or maybe because he was expecting an invitation to a party and all he got was another spam invite, so he chose to make an issue of that instead and gain some social media notoriety for himself. He'll be forgottten by the weekend as drunken students everywhere carry on as is normal for them, and Monday morning they could be facing into an accusation of rape, and be expelled by the following weekend.

    I understand that's at least how these things normally go? Being normalised and all. If only someone tried to do something about that, like trying to inform students maybe? At least then they would think twice before putting their futures at risk.

    You realise boards is a social media platform right?


    Yes I do, and that's why I said more of my news from social media, because I get most of my news from newspapers, radio and television. Boards only contributes a small amount to perspective upon the world around me. There are events of far greater global importance currently in the media than some angry teenager having a hissy-fit because he got a spam invite on facebook instead of what he was hoping would be a house party invite! :rolleyes:


  • #198
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,127 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    NachoBusiness wrote: »
    Eh, putting yourself in a position where you could be accused of rape includes having sex with someone who has consumed alcohol, that's the user's point.


    And there I was thinking their point was that people had to be drunk to have fun, or at least they couldn't be sober when having sex, because that would be no fun at all!

    Nacho what would I do without you?

    NachoBusiness wrote: »
    Ha. Yet again you contradict yourself on what you have said in other threads:


    There's no contradiction there? Please, don't be shy at all, point out the source of your confusion and I'll at least try to break it down for you.


  • #199
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,798 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    adocholiday wrote: »
    Funnily enough the vast majority of us managed to get to the various stages of life that we are at without having raped someone.

    By the standards of today's feminists, most of us are probably serial rapists, especially in Ireland. Ever kissed a woman in a nightclub after she'd had a couple of drinks? Sexual assault. Your girlfriend ever done you a sexual favour out of kindness even when she wasn't particularly in the mood? Sexual assault. Woman ever woken up still spooning you after falling asleep that way? Sexual assault - you can't assume that consent lasts the whole night and should have repeatedly woken her to make sure she was ok with you continuing to hold her in her sleep.

    None of this is hyperbole. The brand of SJW which is pushing this kind of crap genuinely believes that consent is this fickle.

    As someone posted on Boards before, can't remember who it was, "Nobody has a problem with 'no means no' or 'lack of no doesn't mean yes', it's all of these new scenarios in which 'yes still means no' that people have a problem with".


  • #200
    meeeeh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,612 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    By the standards of today's feminists? Couple of lulas on internet don't exactly set the laws and would be completely ignored if they wouldn't be highlighted by someone who finds it beneficial for their own interests to represent them as mainstream.


  • #201
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 26,920 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    meeeeh wrote: »
    By the standards of today's feminists? Couple of lulas on internet don't exactly set the laws and would be completely ignored if they wouldn't be highlighted by someone who finds it beneficial for their own interests to represent them as mainstream.

    Therein lies the problem. They are the most vocal and the ones that get heard more. So, as a result, they become what people associated with what feminism is, when, in reality, this isn't the case.

    Usually the ones that start off with, "well, firstly I'm a feminist" are the ones we're talking about.


  • Advertisement
  • #202
    NachoBusiness
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,389 ✭✭✭NachoBusiness


    meeeeh wrote: »
    I think everyone can remember how half of the town shook hands with someone who was clearly proven to be rapist.

    How could we forget.

    Kinda ironic that you would chastise me on the basis that few convictions are based on he said she said and then go on to cite something which has only ever occurred once.


  • #203
    zeffabelli
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,515 ✭✭✭zeffabelli


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    By the standards of today's feminists, most of us are probably serial rapists, especially in Ireland. Ever kissed a woman in a nightclub after she'd had a couple of drinks? Sexual assault. Your girlfriend ever done you a sexual favour out of kindness even when she wasn't particularly in the mood? Sexual assault. Woman ever woken up still spooning you after falling asleep that way? Sexual assault - you can't assume that consent lasts the whole night and should have repeatedly woken her to make sure she was ok with you continuing to hold her in her sleep.

    None of this is hyperbole. The brand of SJW which is pushing this kind of crap genuinely believes that consent is this fickle.

    As someone posted on Boards before, can't remember who it was, "Nobody has a problem with 'no means no' or 'lack of no doesn't mean yes', it's all of these new scenarios in which 'yes still means no' that people have a problem with".

    They apply black and white binary thinking to something which is anything but.


  • #204
    meeeeh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,612 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Therein lies the problem. They are the most vocal and the ones that get heard more. So, as a result, they become what people associated with what feminism is, when, in reality, this isn't the case.

    Usually the ones that start off with, "well, firstly I'm a feminist" are the ones we're talking about.

    Are they really the most vocal or are they highlighted the most because it helps to discredit feminism or portray women as unreasonable?


  • #205
    NachoBusiness
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,389 ✭✭✭NachoBusiness


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    There's no contradiction there? Please, don't be shy at all, point out the source of your confusion and I'll at least try to break it down for you.

    No bother:

    On one thread you said that "no amount of education is going to have any effect upon [a college student's] attitude" regarding the issues of consent / rape.. and in this one you suggest that it could.
    Nacho what would I do without you?

    Get away with talking out your hat more often?


  • #206
    tritium
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,793 ✭✭✭tritium


    meeeeh wrote: »
    Yes because so many cases of she said he said land in the court. Usually there is some other evidence also present. Very few rapes end up in conviction. This hysteria about innocent men being ruined because of false accusations is a bit ridiculous. I'm not saying it doesn't happen but it doesn't happen that often. I think everyone can remember how half of the town shook hands with someone who was clearly proven to be rapist. It also doesn't seem like drunken sex is any less popular because of these pitfalls.


    I presume you mean very few accusations of rape end in conviction. And of those, some we're actually rape but couldn't be proved, some were rape in one persons mind but not in the others, and some regardless of how they were thought of, were not.

    Which is why its so easy to arrive at 1 in 4 in dodgy research, and also why this whole thing is nowhere near a simple or straightforward as a gang of uni under graduates want to make out.


  • #207
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 26,920 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    meeeeh wrote: »
    Deleted User wrote: »
    Therein lies the problem. They are the most vocal and the ones that get heard more. So, as a result, they become what people associated with what feminism is, when, in reality, this isn't the case.

    Usually the ones that start off with, "well, firstly I'm a feminist" are the ones we're talking about.

    Are they really the most vocal or are they highlighted the most because it helps to discredit feminism or portray women as unreasonable?
    I don't think that it has anything to do with trying to discredit them, but they are definitely the most vocal and they most certainly do get the most attention.


  • #208
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 26,219 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    By the standards of today's feminists, most of us are probably serial rapists, especially in Ireland. Ever kissed a woman in a nightclub after she'd had a couple of drinks? Sexual assault. Your girlfriend ever done you a sexual favour out of kindness even when she wasn't particularly in the mood? Sexual assault. Woman ever woken up still spooning you after falling asleep that way? Sexual assault - you can't assume that consent lasts the whole night and should have repeatedly woken her to make sure she was ok with you continuing to hold her in her sleep.

    None of this is hyperbole. The brand of SJW which is pushing this kind of crap genuinely believes that consent is this fickle.

    As someone posted on Boards before, can't remember who it was, "Nobody has a problem with 'no means no' or 'lack of no doesn't mean yes', it's all of these new scenarios in which 'yes still means no' that people have a problem with".

    Jesus Christ.
    No, nothing hyperbolic about any of that. Not even a hint of shrieking hysteria.

    I sometimes wonder how people function. I live without any of this in the actual real world. Where men and women get along, there isn't a feminist or Redpiller under every bed and behind every door, and my boss calls me Pet and I call him Squishy and nobody has even thought of a tribunal, and when we see something stupid on the internet we roll our eyes, ignore it, and it goes away.

    I recommend it.


  • #209
    meeeeh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,612 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    NachoBusiness wrote: »
    How could we forget.

    Kinda ironic that you would chastise me on the basis that few convictions are based on he said she said and then go on to cite something which has only ever occurred once.

    No that one was reported more because it involved whole bloody town. There are examples of women standing by their husbands after child abuse was proven. There is dark past of accusations against people of authority (mainly church) being ignored because the accused had high standing in society. It's part of the same problem. Rape is very hard to prove and the trial very taxing for victims. I am not saying false accusations don't happen and some have horrific consequences (that land disagreement that ended with innocent man in prison for rape) but often they are used as straw man argument to discredit valid concerns.


  • #210
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,127 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    NachoBusiness wrote: »
    No bother:

    On one thread you said that "no amount of education is going to have any effect upon [a college student's] attitude" regarding the issues of consent / rape.. and in this one you suggest that it could.


    I suppose it would depend upon the context involved and the circumstances of each case. I don't believe that there is any real benefit to be gained from hosting these classes or talks or whatever they are in college, because by then it's too late as many students are already set in their particular mindset at that point.

    I would hope though, that maybe, just maybe, there might be one or two students who wouldn't get their knickers in a twist because their paranoia caused them to interpret the invite as an insinuation that they were a rapist, might gain some useful insight out of the event and pass it around among their friends on social media.

    NachoBusiness wrote: »
    Get away with talking out your hat more often?


    Where's the fun in that? :(


  • Advertisement
  • #211
    NachoBusiness
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,389 ✭✭✭NachoBusiness


    meeeeh wrote: »
    No that one was reported more because it involved whole bloody town. There are examples of women standing by their husbands after child abuse was proven. There is dark past of accusations against people of authority (mainly church) being ignored because the accused had high standing in society. It's part of the same problem Rape is very hard to prove and the trial very taxing for victims.

    Yeah, we know, but so what? People always come out with this sort of crap, and it is crap, whenever it is pointed out that the potential for wrongful convictions might be being raised for one reason or another. What you cite shouldn't happen, nobody thinks it should, but is no argument against having laws in place which make sense and reflect how people interact with one another, especially when drunk. This 'But a whole town shook hands with a rapist..' nonsense is absurd and totally irrelevant.


Advertisement