Fox news commentator: women in uniform should expect to be raped

RichieC

I think anyone who defends this disgraceful propaganda network should be hung by their bollocks.

How can they justify allowing oul crows like this on the TV?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFGcF1id1PM

BunShopVoyeur

RichieC wrote: »

I think anyone who defends this disgraceful propaganda network should be hung by their bollocks.

How can they justify allowing oul crows like this on the TV?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFGcF1id1PM

Edited to fcuk.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

this is pretty ridiculous, even for you richieC

Eric Cartman

even if it did say anything, the way it was cut means any context is removed so the clip is just a pointless mess of soundbytes

RichieC

salient parts are kept. no one wants to sit through that old cnut.

krudler

"Her sweet can, swee-swee-swee-sweet can."

"no Mr Simpson nooooo!"

"dramatization! may not have happened..."

AngryBollix

Fox News now renamed fux news

My name is URL

That crazy old bint also called for the assassination of Obama before he was elected.

LaFlammeRouge

RichieC wrote: »

salient parts are kept. no one wants to sit through that old cnut.

Did you? Or do you get your propaganda from indymedia.

stupidusername

sorry, but what's she meant to be saying exactly?

Eric Cartman

LaFlammeRouge wrote: »

Did you? Or do you get your propaganda from indymedia.

+1 indymedia makes fox news look like a media pillar of truth

MickySticks

Richie I am disappoint.

RichieC

stupidusername wrote: »

sorry, but what's she meant to be saying exactly?

the gist is is that women in close quarters with men in the military should pretty much expect to be raped. her agenda is women shouldnt be in the military.. here's why... ect ect ect.

It's funny folks are banging on about the editing like the wipes were trying to be hid or something.. :rolleyes:

I'll post the full clip once I find it.

previous poster is correct, she's the same bitch who joked about assassinating their president.

blatantrereg

stupidusername wrote: »

sorry, but what's she meant to be saying exactly?

"sorry" and "I resign"

LaFlammeRouge

RichieC wrote: »

the gist is is that women in close quarters with men in the military should pretty much expect to be raped. her agenda is women shouldnt be in the military.. here's why... ect ect ect.

It's funny folks are banging on about the editing like the wipes were trying to be hid or something.. :rolleyes:

I'll post the full clip once I find it.

previous poster is correct, she's the same bitch who joked about assassinating their president.

Rape in the US military: America's dirty little secret

A female soldier in Iraq is more likely to be attacked by a fellow soldier than killed by enemy fire

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/dec/09/rape-us-military

hmmm maybe she is right:pac:

MickySticks

If I had a wheelbarrow full of mickys I wouldn't give her one.

stupidusername

RichieC wrote: »

the gist is is that women in close quarters with men in the military should pretty much expect to be raped. her agenda is women shouldnt be in the military.. here's why... ect ect ect.

I didn't get that at all from what I heard

downwithpeace

Correct me if I'm wrong, isn't this the type of thing Fox News is known for?

44leto

Originally Posted by RichieC
the gist is is that women in close quarters with men in the military should pretty much expect to be raped. her agenda is women shouldnt be in the military.. here's why... ect ect ect.

I didn't get the whole jist of the vid either its rubbish and i bet she is taken out of context alot.

I think I heard rape is up in the military by 40% if that is true, that is a lot, but then again its so edited you really can't take it seriously, there shouldn't even be a thread on it.

RichieC

quote:

"I think they have actually discovered there is a difference between men and women. And the sexual abuse report says that there has been, since 2006, a 64% increase in violent sexual assaults. Now, what did they expect? These people are in close contact, the whole airing of this issue has never been done by Congress, it's strictly been a question of pressure from the feminists."

ejmaztec

With the male-rapes taking place in some of the warzones, it's probably a good idea for no-one to be fighting, whether they be male or female.

Rabies

One of my ex's is an ex marine. Was in Iraq for a year.
Women are not allowed on the front line. They do a lot of the driving and patrols. Also moving supplies between compounds.
That doesn't mean its an easy life either. She was shot at, shot people, on roads where it was unknown if there was landmines.
There is a massive amount of physical violence towards women from their own people on the base.
Many rapes get pushed under the carpet by the commanding officers and the group mentality of the guys. Machoism and fvck load of drugs screw their heads. That goes for both male and female.
Reports of many of the girls have sex with many different men on base each night, and men assaulting women is common too.

Seachmall

stupidusername wrote: »

I didn't get that at all from what I heard

Here's a transcription.


"We have women once more, the feminists, wanting to be warriors and victims at the same time...

There's been, since 2006, a 64% increase in violent sexual assaults. Now, what did they expect? These people are in close contact...


The feminists have also directed them, really, to spend a lot of money. They have sexual councilors all over the place, victim's advocates...

...to support women in the military who are now being raped too much."


[Ellipsis indicates edited section.]


To me lines like "wanting to be warriors and victims at the same time", "What did they expect?" and "Being raped too much" sound like she's blaming the women for being raped.

Obviously it's heavily edited so the context isn't absolutely clear. Take from it what you will.

Sugar Free

She said they were being raped too much :eek:

Is a little ok? Wtf.

stupidusername

Seachmall wrote: »

To me lines like "wanting to be warriors and victims at the same time", "What did they expect?" and "Being raped too much" sound like she's blaming the women for being raped.

Obviously it's heavily edited so the context isn't absolutely clear. Take from it what you will.

ok thanks for that. "Being raped too much" sounds so odd, but I can't put my finger on why. however I don't take from it that she's saying she's blaming the victims.

and I do think the heaviness of the editing is taking way too much from this for it to be a topic to discuss.

Dimithy

Seachmall wrote: »

"to support women in the military who are now being raped too much."

First time i've ever come across the idea of being raped too much. As if one time is ok, but if they get raped twice its too much.

blatantrereg

LaFlammeRouge wrote: »

hmmm maybe she is right:pac:

She raises good questions, even if her presentation of them is obnoxious.

Civilians must get raped the whole time I guess.

I spent one summer in the USA near a place on the east coast where they train marines. I was aware of three rape stories in that time alone, including one incident I prevented directly and physically myself, involving a guy who trained people in that very facility. Only one incident was reported, and that report was rubbished and the teenage girl demonised for saying it. I was left with a very bad impression of how rape is tolerated in some parts of American culture tbh.

Perhaps the presence of female combat soldiers would reduce the amount of rape overall. Maybe not - they dont seem to have any such effect in military intelligence on abuse there (based only on what I saw in Standard Operating Procedure)

Sykk

Rabies wrote: »

One of my ex's is an ex marine. Was in Iraq for a year.
Women are not allowed on the front line. They do a lot of the driving and patrols. Also moving supplies between compounds.
That doesn't mean its an easy life either. She was shot at, shot people, on roads where it was unknown if there was landlines.
There is a massive amount of physical violence towards women from their own people on the base.
Many rapes get pushed under the carpet by the commanding officers and the group mentality of the guys. Machoism and fvck load of drugs screw their heads. That goes for both male and female.
Reports of many of the girls have sex with many different men on base each night, and men assaulting women is common too.

Just like Drogheda so... Eircom doesn't operate down that far.

Seachmall

stupidusername wrote: »

"Being raped too much" sounds so odd, but I can't put my finger on why.

Saying "too much" sounds like she believes there's an acceptable amount of rapes that can occur, but presently there's "too much" rape.

however I don't take from it that she's saying she's blaming the victims.

The "What did they expect?" bit sounds like they should expect to be raped when joining the army, as if it's something they "take on" as part of being soldiers. Also, them "wanting to be warriors and victims at the same time" real demeans them. As if they're whinging about being raped; "Hey, you're warriors, deal with it!".

I will mention in the "What did they expect?" part it's not clear who she's referring to when she says "they" nor the exact context. She could be referring to women/congress/military officials/etc. being surprised that there have been an increase in rape after there has been an increase in female soldiers. I think that makes sense, having more women in the army means rape is more likely to occur in the army. Although it seems poorly worded.

We're led to believe she's talking about the victims naively being surprised that they've been raped, but that may not be the case.

Also, the use of the word "feminists" is a bit strange in my opinion, looking at the thread on sexism "feminist" does seem to have negative radical connotations with many people. As if only those crazy feminists would be outraged by rape in the military.

and I do think the heaviness of the editing is taking way too much from this for it to be a topic to discuss.

Definitely, we'd need to see the full unedited version.

Rabies

ha ha..
opps

The insurgents planted it there

Frank Black

Dimithy wrote: »

First time i've ever come across the idea of being raped too much. As if one time is ok, but if they get raped twice its too much.

I think it's more to do with time than number, anything less than a 2 minute raping isn't too bad.

stupidusername

Seachmall wrote: »

Saying "too much" sounds like she believes there's an acceptable amount of rapes that can occur, but presently there's "too much" rape.The "What did they expect?" bit sounds like they should expect to be raped when joining the army, as if it's something they "take on" as part of being soldiers. Also, them "wanting to be warriors and victims at the same time" real demeans them. As if they're whinging about being raped; "Hey, you're warriors, deal with it!".

I will mention in the "What did they expect?" part it's not clear who she's referring to when she says "they" nor the exact context. She could be referring to women/congress/military officials/etc. being surprised that there have been an increase in rape after there has been an increase in female soldiers. I think that makes sense, having more women in the army means rape is more likely to occur in the army. Although it seems poorly worded.

We're led to believe she's talking about the victims naively being surprised that they've been raped, but that may not be the case.

Also, the use of the word "feminists" is a bit strange in my opinion, looking at the thread on sexism "feminist" does seem to have negative radical connotations with many people. As if only those crazy feminists would be outraged by rape in the military.

Definitely, we'd need to see the full unedited version.

yeah the "too much" I took to mean more like it's occurring more frequently than in normal society. but either way it sounds odd.

"What did they expect?" - I took to mean (along with "They're too close") that living in the conditions they're in, that is isolated and taken away from normal society means that things can get stressful and humans don't react well under these circumstances. which would also imply that the "they" was the rapists/assailants. but then yeah you do have a point in asking is it the victims she's referring to. it's just the way I heard it, I didn't assume that.

and yeah bringing "feminists" in to it suggests that rape/sexual assault is only unacceptable to that group of people.

Howard the Duck

Fox new haven't fired Bill O'Reilly yet so i'm sure they won't start with this woman.

Son Of A Vidic

RichieC wrote: »

I'll post the full clip once I find it.

That would be good. Because there was no point in posting the edited version, since we have not got the entire unedited commentary.

rossie1977

My name is URL wrote: »

That crazy old bint also called for the assassination of Obama before he was elected.

yes she did

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjYpkvcmog0

CrazyRabbit

Fox news is a great tool.

It helps to more easily identify the members of society that are insane, stupid or ignorant beyond hope.

44leto

Fox News isn't news, it is the product of Newscorp's genius. The American TV and especially the news network TV are saturated, they even have a weather channel. So they found a niche in that market and went for it.

Its audience are the conservative Americans who believe in old values and the good ould days when everything was certain, pure, clean cut and simple. There were no Gays never mind gay marriage, America was right, always, as it is god's country and religion was to be believed and not questioned.

Of course those days never existed they don't have to, everyone reminisces with rosey coloured glasses and these conservatives have money and advertisers love them.

Fox news is entertainment, it is telling its audience they are right and always were. Its a conservative radio show on tele. I browse it every now and again and it does amuse me, I like it because it gives me a sense of superiority.

Liam Byrne

I am of the opinion that this takes the "in the wrong place / shouldn't have been there" to a new level, especially if it's related to a country they invaded.

But yeah - wholesale editing and misdirection means that this version isn't worth a toss (not that any of Fox News' output is, mind)....if you're good and have enough clips you can make anyone appear to say anything.

* I also hereby refute the new rumour that I ever said "I am related to Fox News" and that I viewed it as "....good"

monkeypants

Fox News is a satirical news channel.

44leto

Howard the Duck wrote: »

Fox new haven't fired Bill O'Reilly yet so i'm sure they won't start with this woman.

Why would they the OReily Factor is a howl, He is the conservative version of Jon Stewert but without the sense of humour, but the show is funny.