Guys... Health notice Showing in Gym

Galvasean

the_syco wrote: »

Could you please PM the name of said pool/gym so I can avoid it? It sounds like someone ingrained with some good ole fashioned "irish catholic guilt" is in charge of it, and would be somewhere that I'd prefer to avoid. And if that's the only decent pool/gym in the area, I'll avoid that area completely.

That reminds me, the whole awkwardness in relation to nudity seems to be a fairly Irish thing. i remember when I was playing for my college hockey team we had a couple of foreign lads (Italy & France/Greece IIRC). They seemed to have no problem stripping down for showers after matches/training. The Irish lads on the other hand were very 'clingy' in terms of the towel. Personally I think in this country we're too hung up on 'private parts'. It's kind of like how so many men try to hide away problems associated with such parts (prostate, testicles etc.). It's like people are ashamed to have 'private parts'.

JayRoc

This is all a bit weird....the article I read in either the Times or The Examiner last week on this case (before the verdict was reached) put a completely different light on what happened, and suspiciously I now can't find any mention of this article on google.

Suffice to say there was certainly more reason to pursue a criminal case than has been made clear in the linked piece from the Indo. At least one witness was said to have alerted the management of the pool to alleged behaviour in the changing rooms, independently of the young man in question.

If, as it seems, he was innocent of any wrongdoing, the man should be looking at suing this witness in my opinion, as opposed to the parents.
Anyone hearing the allegations I read in that article would have been severely biased against the accused.


On another note, I can't get over how many "men" are put off by male nudity in male changing rooms. I'd hazard a guess most of them are under 25 or 30 and probably didn't play team sports?? Very very strange.

qrrgprgua

JayRoc wrote: »

On another note, I can't get over how many "men" are put off by male nudity in male changing rooms. I'd hazard a guess most of them are under 25 or 30 and probably didn't play team sports?? Very very strange.

It wasn't a man, it was a young teenager. Who had not much experience in ther area...it seems

qrrgprgua

the_syco wrote: »

Could you please PM the name of said pool/gym so I can avoid it? It sounds like someone ingrained with some good ole fashioned "irish catholic guilt" is in charge of it, and would be somewhere that I'd prefer to avoid. And if that's the only decent pool/gym in the area, I'll avoid that area completely.

Waterpoint enniscrone... And its not old fashioned or a result of catholic guilt, its just aimed towards families and there are no his and hers chaning rooms. They have a gym attached but only communal changing rooms

JayRoc

qrrgprgua wrote: »

It wasn't a man, it was a young teenager. Who had not much experience in ther area...it seems

No, I meant the number of folks here who seem petrified of a glimpse of an aul' tallywhacker.

qrrgprgua

JayRoc wrote: »

No, I meant the number of folks here who seem petrified of a glimpse of an aul' tallywhacker.

Who cares.. Personally I don't spend my time looking at other guys parts..

Galvasean

JayRoc wrote: »

This is all a bit weird....the article I read in either the Times or The Examiner last week on this case (before the verdict was reached) put a completely different light on what happened, and suspiciously I now can't find any mention of this article on google.

Suffice to say there was certainly more reason to pursue a criminal case than has been made clear in the linked piece from the Indo. At least one witness was said to have alerted the management of the pool to alleged behaviour in the changing rooms, independently of the young man in question.

If, as it seems, he was innocent of any wrongdoing, the man should be looking at suing this witness in my opinion, as opposed to the parents.
Anyone hearing the allegations I read in that article would have been severely biased against the accused.

Sounds to me like the paper were using an unreliable source and are now hiding the article to save face.

drkpower

Am I missing something, or did noone bother to do a bit of cursory googling on this before passing judgment on the DPP, the kid, the family, and anyone else they felt was deserving of a little abuse?

There appears to have been clear independent witness evidence supporting the kid's account. Now, this independent witness may or may not have been discredited at trial, but those who have been deriding, in such definitive tones, the DPP (& others) for prosecuting this action are spectacularly off the mark.

During the two day trial the jury heard from witness Gerard Treacy who said he saw an elderly man pleasuring himself through his towel as looked a 12 year old boy up and down in the changing area of St Enda's swimming pool.

http://www.live95fm.ie/news/news-item/limerick-man-found-not-guilty-of-lewd-act-in-public-swimming-pool/6c7ae523-4fd7-4bc1-83a3-ceb089408394

James Jones

drkpower wrote: »

this independent witness may or may not have been discredited at trial, but those who have been deriding, in such definitive tones, the DPP (& others) for prosecuting this action are spectacularly off the mark. http://www.live95fm.ie/news/news-item/limerick-man-found-not-guilty-of-lewd-act-in-public-swimming-pool/6c7ae523-4fd7-4bc1-83a3-ceb089408394

The link you provided actually states that:

The jury spent just over 2 hours deliberating before returning with a majority verdict of Not Guilty.

That means that some of the jurors (at least one) believed he was guilty and the fact that it took the jury two hours of deliberation means that they must have had some doubt after attending the full trial.

drkpower

James Jones wrote: »

The link you provided actually states that:
That means that some of the jurors (at least one) believed he was guilty and the fact that it took the jury two hours of deliberation means that they must have had some doubt after attending the full trial.

I take the point, but a period of 2 hours deliberation is hardly evidence of 'some doubt'. It could easily take 2 hours for 12 people to introdcue themselves, have a brief chat about their views, raise one or two queries, have them answered etc....

James W

py2006 wrote: »

You have no idea how deeply disturbing seeing an overweight middle aged man walking around naked. It isn't illegal so he has every right. He may not be looking at me but I don't want to be accused at looking either so eyes the floor.

Oh, for goodness sake! I have no idea how one man can be uncomfortable with the nudity of another who has basically the same bits and pieces. It does depend on the gym - I note these days that they all have cublicles for showering but I recall school and gaa changing rooms which did not and people just got on with it. I have never seen a notice in any changing rooms forbidding nudity - but I have in relation to mobile phones.

If a man is messing with himself then he should be kicked out of the gym or facility - that's not acceptable. Otherwise, in a men's changing room, there is always likely to be a certain degree of nudity.

Common sense needs to prevail.

McCrack

A file would not go to the DPP and charges preferred for being naked in a changing area.

Something more would have been alleged to have happened/been done.

People need to use their brains and not think that some aul lad was put on trial for just changing his clothes.

I look forward to the day that I am old enough to walk around the changing rooms completely bollick naked and not have a care in the world.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ng6_lPNwU54

terrible song, but 0:09 on that video. That will be me one day.

later12

drkpower wrote: »

I take the point, but a period of 2 hours deliberation is hardly evidence of 'some doubt'. It could easily take 2 hours for 12 people to introdcue themselves, have a brief chat about their views, raise one or two queries, have them answered etc....

No,but I think the point the user is making is that it was a majority verdict in favour of the defendant, not a unanimous verdict.

I don't so much blame the boy for this as the man who alerted the boy to what he believed was going on. An adult should really be extremely careful about making this sort of allegation.

I have to say I'm reasonably paranoid about children in the changing rooms. I don't mind walking around bollock naked around adults, yet I can't stand having to change around kids or teenagers because of the paranoia that stories of paedophilia give rise to. I practically avoid my gym on Saturday mornings for this reason, it's always full of kids in for swimming.

I think it is a pity that as men we often feel this paranoia about being seen as perverts; but at the same time I wonder if the gentleman in question should not have been a little more careful in relation to his behaviour around this kid? I don't know. That's genuinely a question.

BraziliaNZ

I'm 31 and for as long as I can remember had no problem walking around naked. Anyone who has a problem with it needs to get a grip. It's a human body for god's sake. If people bringing in kids are going to start worrying about me being a perve they can f**k off and take their kids elsewhere.