Martin Cullen's 'rape' experience

Macha

Choke wrote: »

He was using 'rape' to mean violation.
That term has been used many times in that context, for instance, to describe the destruction of the environment.

It's a recognised use of the word.

I am well aware of the word and it's Latin origins. However, it's most common meaning in English is as a forced sexual act and Mr. Cullen was well aware of it, as he made clear when he added the phrase "and I use those words very carefully". He would not have added that phrase if he just meant it in the less common form of "to despoil", which in the vast majority of cases is used for inanimate objects such as the environment or countryside, as you state yourself.

He could have very easily said violated but he didn't. And I believe he specifically chose the word "rape" because of it's loaded meaning.

donaghs

Choke wrote: »

He was using 'rape' to mean violation.
That term has been used many times in that context, for instance, to describe the destruction of the environment.

It's a recognised use of the word.

I don't think so. It's one thing to say that "the environment was raped", or the Japanese were responsible for the "Rape of Naking", or some other non-human analogy.

But Cullen was making a direct analogy between a few weeks in the media limelight, and being raped (sexually assaulted). He said the experience was like "being raped".

A better indirect analogy for Cullen would be the way he's abused taxpayers money on nonsense like underspec-voting machines, pr consultants, helicopter rides, etc, etc. He may not be much worse than some of our other politicians (no excuse) but we know enough about him to know he's a disgrace to this country.

BennyLava

One wonders why, if it was so painful for him in the first place, he felt the need to bring it all back up again, using terminology that was guaranteed to garner maximum media attention.

there is a term for people like him, and I use my words carefully, media seeking whore

Red_Marauder

BennyLava wrote: »

One wonders why, if it was so painful for him in the first place, he felt the need to bring it all back up again, using terminology that was guaranteed to garner maximum media attention.

There were no recording media present at the meeting - I think it might have been Cian McCormack who recorded it on his i-phone. If you listen to the playback you can hear that it's a very poor recording and totally inaudible in parts.

It certainly wasn't the place to launch a media campaign as you cynically suggest.

Also what do you mean by this

if it was so painful for him in the first place, he felt the need to bring it all back up again

He was addressing an audience on the personal effects of defamation of character, and recounted a traumatic experience for himself.
Are you suggesting it's wrong for people who suffer bad experiences to talk about it in public? Cullen certainly has nothing to answer for there.

taconnol wrote:

it belittles the far more serious trauma that is rape.

I don't agree at all. Everybody knows what rape is, as a society we have been very much brought into tune with the human suffering that sexual abuse draws on an individual.
Do you actually think this waters that down? You really think that when rape is discussed in future people will only associate it with defamation of name? That notion is bizarre and ridiculous in equal measure.

Do you object to the use of the term murder as well, when it is used in a metaphoric sense. or have you ever used that term?

rubensni

Red_Marauder wrote: »

A politician's integrity and credibility are irrelevant? You really think so?

In the eyes of the Irish public? Yes I do. Personally I don't like it, but what can I do? The fact is the bigger the crook, the bigger the vote.

"Stroke" Fahy tops the poll:
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/convicted-councillor-stroke-fahy-tops-the-vote-1765362.html

Lowry creams off the top:
http://www.tipperarystar.ie/news/Lowry-Tipp-Tops-in-Dail.5972456.jp

Bev the queen of Mayo:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/ireland/article5439768.ece

Around the time of the next election I'll be making a bet with Paddy Power that John O'Donoghue will top the poll in South Kerry. It's not a sure thing, but if Jackie Healy Rae's son runs ahead of The Father Rae, The Bull will have it in the bag.

Darsad

Red_Marauder wrote: »

Are you suggesting it's wrong for people who suffer bad experiences to talk about it in public? Cullen certainly has nothing to answer for there.
I don't agree at all. Everybody knows what rape is, as a society we have been very much brought into tune with the human suffering that sexual abuse draws on an individual.
Do you actually think this waters that down? You really think that when rape is discussed in future people will only associate it with defamation of name? That notion is bizarre and ridiculous in equal measure.

Do you object to the use of the term murder as well, when it is used in a metaphoric sense. or have you ever used that term?

How could you possible try to defend this mans use of the word rape to do this is more fitting of your words bizarre and ridiculous in equal measure. Perhaps he suffered some inconvenience but he no doubt will be well rewarded when he takes his libel case after the electorate dump him. He is well versed at showing the croc tears, personally I find his prancing around China Air's first class in his pj's en route to the olympics while the athletes were stuffed into economy on the same flight more offensive than a little bit of media intrusion.

Red_Marauder

rubensni wrote: »

In the eyes of the Irish public?

No I was merely responding to you statement that confidence and integrity are irrelvant. If you wish to qualify that by saying that's the opinion of the Irish voting public, I'm not going to argue with you there.

Darsad wrote:

Perhaps he suffered some inconvenience but he will be well rewarded when he takes his libel case after the electorate dump him.

I don't think the electorate will dump their minister - or certainly not over this; frankly I'm convinced they have bigger issues to concern themselves with. And it doesn't include his pyjamas.

Also, he's extremely unlikely to take any defamation case now, not least for the reason that as far as I understand it the Statute of Limitations legislation has, or has just about, "expired" the defamatory articles in question.

Furthermore. I think the term "some inconvenience" is a complete understatement. There is no question but that elements of the newspaper media constinued a campaign against Leech and Cullen which sought to sell newspapers by defaming individual parties and printing lies about them, as found by the jury in the Leech libel case.
When you take the personal nature of these lies, the impact it had on a young family, and the personal intrusion into the lives of, and embarrassment for, children, spouses and grandparents, it amounts to something more than "inconvenience"

Darsad

Red_Marauder wrote: »

Also, he's extremely unlikely to take any defamation case now, not least for the reason that as far as I understand it the Statute of Limitations legislation has, or has just about, "expired" the defamatory articles in question.

"

Under the libel laws He has six years within which he can initiate a case that does not mean it has to be heard and Im sure his Legal team would be well able to delay any hearing until it suited Mr Cullen. I also think you are very wrong about his electorate not dumping him waterford has been hit pretty badly in the last year or two and from what im hearing he is no where near as popular as before bit like FF across the country I suppose .
If Cullens chin is made of China then perhaps he is in the wrong job.

Red_Marauder

Darsad wrote: »

Under the libel laws He has six years within which he can initiate a case

That's why I said his libel case as has been set out is unlikely to proceed.

You don't seem to be aware that the Minister lodged notification of intended proceedings with the High Court in 2004 and that is due to expire this year.

Darsad

Well you know the government could also expire within this year which just might suit , but I have no doubt extensions can be sought if they happen to cling on some how !

Red_Marauder

No they can't, it's there in black and white.
You might not want to think so, but the law is the law.

Maebh

Laminations wrote: »

He was making a figurative and not a literal comparison. The same way you just said 'screw the media'.

It was possibly a poor choice of words and a bit of a blunder but if people didn't look for the slightest thing to get offended by it would have gone unnoticed

That's why, you'll notice, I said "analogy".

a·nal·o·gies
1.
a. Similarity in some respects between things that are otherwise dissimilar.
b. A comparison based on such similarity.

I said he may have felt violated, he may have felt sad, he may have felt shame etc, but these things do not equal rape.

And I don't agree that the public know what the effects of rape really are. This country has a tendency to downplay sexual assault.

So, metaphor, as in "my dad's gonna murder me", is one thing. But a direct analogy is what we're talking about. Not a metaphor. He meant it seriously (but not, I'll grant him, literally), and that's why I say there are certain words you shouldn't just fling around...

But hey, who cares, right? I'm just over-reactionary I guess...

moonpurple

to op, very wrong move by the chap, I mean ok most voters are ladies but is feminism the last refuge of the scoundrel?

Laminations

Maebh wrote: »

That's why, you'll notice, I said "analogy".

a·nal·o·gies
1.
a. Similarity in some respects between things that are otherwise dissimilar.
b. A comparison based on such similarity.

I said he may have felt violated, he may have felt sad, he may have felt shame etc, but these things do not equal rape.

And I don't agree that the public know what the effects of rape really are. This country has a tendency to downplay sexual assault.

So, metaphor, as in "my dad's gonna murder me", is one thing. But a direct analogy is what we're talking about. Not a metaphor. He meant it seriously (but not, I'll grant him, literally), and that's why I say there are certain words you shouldn't just fling around...

But hey, who cares, right? I'm just over-reactionary I guess...

By that definition his use of rape as an analogy is justified. You say yourself that he may have felt violated, sad and shamefull. The comparison is based on these similarities but the violations themselves remain dissimilar. He was expressing how he felt, not trying to diminish the public condemnation of rape. Like i said feel free to jump on the man for his governments dismal performance but dont knock him for trying to express how he feels by using an analogy. It is an over reaction

Darsad

Laminations wrote: »

. Like i said feel free to jump on the man for his governments dismal performance but dont knock him for trying to express how he feels by using an analogy. It is an over reaction

As with many of his actions down the years, his use of the word rape the venue and context behind its use just show the mans incompetence.The motive behind its use I still believe to be some feeble attempt to gain some public sympathy for his possible upcoming legal proceedings.

marco_polo

Darsad wrote: »

As with many of his actions down the years, his use of the word rape the venue and context behind its use just show the mans incompetence.The motive behind its use I still believe to be some feeble attempt to gain some public sympathy for his possible upcoming legal proceedings.

Is public sympathy a large factor in the verdict of libel cases these days?

Darsad

marco_polo wrote: »

Is public sympathy a large factor in the verdict of libel cases these days?

Obviously not in the verdict but one would imagine that a highly paid minister /public servant would be cognizant of the publics perception of his actions and would it not be in his interest to try and garrner as much public sympathy as possible prior to under taking possibly lucrative
proceedings.

Red_Marauder

What is your preoccupation with a legal dispute?

If anything, it has been indicated in the Leech libel case that Cullen would have a strong basis for having his character defamed... what on earth is your problem with that? You have a problem with defamation law? You think the media didn't do anything wrong?

As has already been explained, the six year order is about to expire in a few months, so he won't be able to undertake that course of legal action which he may once have considered. Get over it...

PeakOutput

having read the article it was a completely fair comment

Darsad

Red_Marauder wrote: »

What is your preoccupation with a legal dispute?...

None My preoccupation is with the individual concerned and the damage he has inflicted on this nation through his incompetence and not the rights and wrongs of any legal case. Why dont you come out and tell us where your coming from and what is your vested interest in defending the indefensible.

Red_Marauder

Darsad wrote: »

None

Then why do you keep referring to such an extremely unlikely legal case?

The fact is, he was wronged and is fully entitled to have that corrected as a citizen. The indications are that he has chosen not to. You keep bringing it up in this thread - why????

Why dont you come out and tell us where your coming from and what is your vested interest in defending the indefensible.

Vested interest, what? I'm a Fine Gael party member and I vote Fine Gael. I'm just pretty fed up with this bashing for the sake of it. Some people just need to cop on a bit to be honest, there is a good reason why people in the street are not talking about this, or why politicians in Leinster House are not - because it's a non issue.

anymore

Phoenix magazine has an interesting article on this issue ( Jan 29, page 3)
Amongst other things it speculates on any effects various recent comments might have on any damages that might be awarded in any potential future court hearings.

.

Condatis

The Oxford English Dictionary has more than one definition of Rape, they include: "forcible interference", "violation" and "pillage".

I too have been raped – by lawyers who EXTORTED exhorbitant fees and by debtors.

The experience, while different from sexual rape is no less traumatic, invasive or damaging.

Cullen's use of the word is understandable and acceptable.