Teenager took selfies while she had sex with dog.

hatrickpatrick

Cold War Kid wrote: »

If it were a man who had sex with a dog... we'd have to see what the reaction would be here if it were; at the moment it's a woman having sex with a dog.

I provided examples of cases in the past in which nobody expressed any worry or sympathy for the man involved. I'm not merely pulling the claim out of my backside. I'm on a discussion forum, I saw some posts which pissed me off and I responded to them. That's, y'know, what generally happens on discussion forums.

I don't just apply this to gender either btw - I'm wholeheartedly sick of seeing people saying "poor <perpetrator>" when a crime is committed. Unless evidence for mental illness is provided, it shouldn't be assumed - that's letting people off the hook for their vile behaviour, regardless of whether that's the intention. Just as people are innocent until proven guilty, IMO they should also be regarded as compos mentis unless shown otherwise.

NachoBusiness

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Of course, the one who commits a sick act involving an animal is the real victim of all this.

I never said she was a victim. I just feel sorry for her.

I stand by my statement that if she were a guy, there wouldn't be nearly this level of sympathy.

Well then you're just being vindictive, Patrick. Vilifying and berating this girl just because a man would get that treatment if they had done it. Can't you see that this just makes you as bad as the very people you are condemning?

Listen, I think you're right about men getting chastised and judged for crimes which women often do not, and in fact get sympathy and understanding instead. I'm genuinely with you on that. Check my posts in tGC for evidence of it, but pick your battles ffs man. This is a teenage girl here, not the likes of say Diane Brimble. She's a kid and if there are hypocritical sexists out there (and there are) that feel bad for this girl but wouldn't if it were a young guy, condemn them, but for God sake don't become like them.

osarusan

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Evidence of gender-bias:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057163295

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056682963

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056162585

Lots of jokes, few people referring to the lads as sickos, few "poor animal" remarks, not a single "poor guy, hope he gets help" or any such bullsh!t.
Potential, unproven assumptions of mental illness are almost always trotted out when it's a woman who does something like this. Almost never when it's a guy - the underlying assumption being that men are capable of being horrible human beings, but women probably have a legitimate excuse. It happens again and again - I can't be the only one who's noticed the trend and finds it highly discrimninatory?

In this thread of over 100 posts (up to and including your post):

3 posters said she must have had mental problems.

2 sympathised with her.

1 (excluding you) said she should be prosecuted (who also said she must have mental problems)

1 said she was a sicko.


In one of the other threads you linked, describing them as sick came up only once, and it referred to both the man and woman involved in the Limerick case.


I had a closer look at the middle of the three links, and there was only one post suggesting the man should be prosecuted.

EDIT: In the thread about the man who had sex with a horse, 0 people said he was a sicko or similar. 1 person said he should done for cruelty (although he had already been sentenced).

The trend isn't anywhere near as clear as you are making it out to be, I think.

The threads are all actually very similar in that they are filled with the same "That's ruff/doggystyle wha!" jokes throughout.

hatrickpatrick

NachoBusiness wrote: »

I never said she was a victim. I just feel sorry for her.

Why? There's no evidence that she's mentally ill. None whatsoever.

Well then you're just being vindictive, Patrick. Vilifying and berating this girl just because a man would get that treatment if they had done it. Can't you see that this just makes you as bad as the very people you are condemning?

Not at all, because I agree with men getting berated and vilified for doing this. If bestiality is going to be legalised for either gender, I'd have a serious problem with it.

Listen, I think you're right about men getting chastised and judged for crimes which women often do not, and in fact get sympathy and understanding instead. I'm genuinely with you on that. Check my posts in tGC for evidence of it, but pick your battles ffs man. This is a teenage girl here, not the likes of say Diane Brimble. She's a kid and if there are hypocritical sexists out there (and there are) that feel bad for this girl but wouldn't if it were a young guy, condemn them, but for God sake don't become like them.

I'm really not, all I'm saying here is that assuming mental illness where no evidence has been provided is a cop out. If sex with an animal is wrong then it's wrong. If it's not wrong, I'm not sure I want to live on this planet anymore.

Rough Sleeper

Just two hounds getting off together, no biggie.

One eyed Jack

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

This post makes no sense to me. I'm merely pointing out that what's happening in this thread is an example of a deeply rooted gender bias in society. I wouldn't be pointing it out if it wasn't happening. I'm not suggesting that anyone should have any sort of hive mind, but I'm suggesting that these are societal tropes which are unfair to everyone and should be called out and challenged when they appear.

None of that precludes anyone from having their own opinion.

Unfair to everyone, or simply as you see it unfair to men?

Find me a similar scenario in which the perpetrator was a teenage male and I think you'll see that people would express the same sentiments. The issue isn't just the gender of the perpetrator, most people will view the circumstances of each case individually.

If the same people were commenting on similar cases with similar circumstances, the only difference being gender, then you might have a point about those particular people's "deep rooted gender bias", but as it stands, you don't.

I notice you didn't challenge anyone who made derogatory comments about the girls appearance? Bit of a blind spot in your own gender bias there, no?

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I provided examples of cases in the past in which nobody expressed any worry or sympathy for the man involved. I'm not merely pulling the claim out of my backside. I'm on a discussion forum, I saw some posts which pissed me off and I responded to them. That's, y'know, what generally happens on discussion forums.

A teenage boy in Ireland took his own life last week after he was tricked into uploading pictures of himself on social media. The story made the front pages of all the newspapers. There wasn't so much as a peep on Boards about it. That's, y'know, what generally happens on discussion forums - people start a thread if they're interested in getting people's opinions on a topic, and sometimes the thread gets legs as people want offer their perspective on the issue, and most people have the cop-on to stay on point, but there's always at least one with a chip on their shoulder that will ride in on their hobby horse and try and wedge in their own hobby horse, completely derailing the thread.

I don't just apply this to gender either btw - I'm wholeheartedly sick of seeing people saying "poor &lt;perpetrator&gt;" when a crime is committed. Unless evidence for mental illness is provided, it shouldn't be assumed - that's letting people off the hook for their vile behaviour, regardless of whether that's the intention. Just as people are innocent until proven guilty, IMO they should also be regarded as compos mentis unless shown otherwise.

Does committing sexual acts with animals seem like normal behavior to you?

It shouldn't come as a surprise that most people would assume the person isn't playing with a full deck. Some people will have other perspectives, but as Nacho says - pick your battles.

Introducing your "deeply rooted gender bias in society" nonsense off the back of a discussion on the internet is misguided at best, and suggests you're spending too much time on the internet at worst.

osarusan

Just had a look through the first thread you linked to again hattrickpatrick, and despite the fact that he had been spared jail, no poster described him as sick, evil, scumbag, or similar.

ThinkProgress

Nice dog!

That woman really is a lucky b*tch!

Realist2

this one is rover my head, if they had a baby would it be a clit bull, i wouldn't want to be her next boyfriend, it would be a dirty cocker after her spitz, i hope he doesn't go near the poodle, i thought a dog eating my homework was the worst he could do,

eternal

The dog is kingpin down the local kennels giving it large about the human be picked up. They all growl and sniff wanting to have their own kebab.

Cold War Kid

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I provided examples of cases in the past in which nobody expressed any worry or sympathy for the man involved. I'm not merely pulling the claim out of my backside.

I never said or implied you did. I simply asked why you have to bring this agenda into so much discussions and never offer a way of addressing it.

I don't just apply this to gender either btw - I'm wholeheartedly sick of seeing people saying "poor <perpetrator>" when a crime is committed. Unless evidence for mental illness is provided, it shouldn't be assumed

Thought you were mad into free speech? It shouldn't be assumed, but people can consider it if they wish - it is highly likely to be the case anyway.

I don't know why it offends some so much when psychiatric illness is mentioned as a possibility - it's hardly such an unlikely outcome, and it doesn't in the slightest excuse anything.

raah!

Why is this a news story? The poor girl obviously has enough troubles as it is.

ahnowbrowncow

If only she had a few drinks the dog would have been arrested for rape.

Wanderer78

trusty mirror

Dolbert

Even when it was the zoophiles I knew it was the feminists.

Medusa22

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Surprised this card didn't get played earlier in the thread.
I will resist the urge to engage in the obvious debate here :rolleyes:

Medusa22 wrote: »

What obvious debate? I'm simply saying that a person who has sexual intercourse with a dog cannot be without issues of some kind.

I think you'll note that I said person and not woman when I talked about having issues. I also said that regardless of her mental issues (or lack of) that she should be prosecuted for what she did because I do consider a person having sexual contact with an animal to be animal abuse. By the way, in certain instances I also believe that women are given more sympathy and understanding when they commit a crime, but I don't think that this has been the case in this thread, and I would feel the same way about this case even if she were a teenage boy.

raah!

raah! wrote: »

Why is this a news story? The poor girl obviously has enough troubles as it is.

Her life is pretty much ruined.

I feel sympathy for her. I can't pretend to understand why she did what she did. But I still don't think she deserves to be ground down so mercilessly based on her appearance.

Irishcrx

Say she loves it Doggy style...

NachoBusiness

NachoBusiness wrote: »

The fcuking humiliation she must feel now with her face plastered all over the internet for having sex with an animal too, I'd worry for her tbh.

That was my first thought. She'd want to have a very tough constitution not to be profoundly affected by the comments going around, particularly those focussed on her appearance. It must be just horrific for her.

mikom

Deleted User wrote: »

That was my first thought. She'd want to have a very tough constitution not to be profoundly affected by the comments going around, particularly those focussed on her appearance. It must be just horrific for her.

It'll be tough, but I'd say she'll lick it.

mikom

mikom wrote: »

It'll be tough, but I'd say she'll lick it.

And what if she doesn't?

What if the next headline is of the "teenager takes her life" variety?

Probably unlikely she'll be on Boards, but she's presumably getting the same treatment on US sites that she may well visit. Would those who are joining in the kicking then turn around and tut tut about the internet being an awful place?

mikom

mikom wrote: »

It'll be tough, but I'd say she'll lick it.

Deleted User wrote: »

And what if she doesn't?

The dog probably will......

Demonique

Deleted User wrote: »

If she is a teenager, then I thought she couldn't be named for legal reasons?

There's such a thing as being a teenager and a legal adult

bb1234567

I think this is really cruel, why is she not allowed privacy? Why do we not accept her sexual orientation? But instead we mock her on international news. We accept gay people today but didn't in the past because we thought they were mentally ill, just like with bestiality right now. And yeh people will shout about animal cruelty while they tuck into a beef burger and cosy up in their fur coat, Im sure you care a whole lot about animal rights. Its simply an equivalent fear of zoophiles, whatever the equivalent of homophobia would be in this case , not people looking out for animals rights.

And personally I am repulsed by the thought of humans and animals having sex, but that doesn't mean I support laws being made against people who feel attracted to animals. Im sure many people are repulsed by my homosexual orientation but still support the fact that I should be allowed the rights to my own sexual privacy and freedom to engage in homosexual intercourse...

Not a NSA agent

bb1234567 wrote: »

I think this is really cruel, why is she not allowed privacy? Why do we not accept her sexual orientation? But instead we mock her on international news. We accept gay people today but didn't in the past because we thought they were mentally ill, just like with bestiality right now. And yeh people will shout about animal cruelty while they tuck into a beef burger and cosy up in their fur coat, Im sure you care a whole lot about animal rights. Its simply an equivalent fear of zoophiles, whatever the equivalent of homophobia would be in this case , not people looking out for animals rights.

Someone doesn't understand what consent is.

bb1234567

Not a NSA agent wrote: »

Someone doesn't understand what consent is.

Did animals consent to being killed in factories for your dinner? Somebody is hypocritical