Louise O'Neill on manned mission to Mars: "Why not go to Venus?" (MOD Warning post 1)

Outlaw Pete

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Sexual consent is all about inferences. Rarely if ever do people ask for sexual consent. It's just not reality.

Consent is more often than not conveyed rather than verbally given, which is of course why it's so frustrating listening to people suggesting (/ making laws) that say someone must have been given a verbal 'Yes' otherwise they have committed rape.

This is why the Cup of Tea analogy was so ridiculous a few years back.

If someone has reasonably inferred that they have consent (and the person is not in a state which would render them legally incapable of giving it) then they are having consensual sex.

The danger is the flexibility that "withdrawal of consent" is being applied. While people are suggesting that consent should be verbally given (which as you said isn't done that often, and perhaps only with a stranger), withdrawal of consent can be verbal, non-verbal, or after the event.

This is why consent is becoming such a thorny issue. It isn't so much about when consent is actually being given, but when it is being withdrawn, or breaking down into parts what consent was given. She gave consent for oral sex but not for penetrative sex, and yet, no verbal rejection or objection was given until after the fact. etc. These kind of examples are becoming more common as real life cases, rather than bizarre examples on a discussion board.

Outlaw Pete

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Oh no. Go and report back! The regulars will dine out on a bad review for weeks!

Well, as I said earlier in the thread, it could actually be a good play and I (genuinely) hope it is as I go to see all plays at the Abbey and won't be making an exception for this.

I haven't read the book but I did watch the docu on the Steubenville case and so there is no reason why a play based around it set in Ireland (which is basically what this is) shouldn't be a good one.

Especially if the playwright has plugged some of the reported holes in the plot with her adaption and dialed back on some of the victimhood nonsense within it and also some of the more bizarre sections of it on evidence in the following clip of a reading she gave.

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

Yeah_Right

Yeah_Right wrote: »

I'm talking about consent classes for adults. They're BS. Its simple: if you have permission then go for it. If you don't have permission, stop. Any adult that can't understand that is a asshole.

Now if you are talking consent classes as part of a comprehensive sex education program that should begin in primary school, then yes that's a good thing.

And as part of those consent classes (that both genders attend), they should be taught a variety of ways to express "no". Not relying on vague body-language, or expecting the guy to read her mind.

I see no problem with these kind of classes if it's approached in an even-handed manner, although I suspect it'll follow in the steps of women's classes in University, and a way to beat males up about rape.

In my experience, any woman who didn't want sex with me, was very expressive about it. Still, no doubt the rejoinder would be... how would I know? I might have raped someone without knowing it. :rolleyes:

RabbleRouser2k

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Delighted to hear it. The conversation is happening whether or not men take an active part. Better that men stay engaged and shape the discussion

Did you just assume my gender?

the purple tin

Omackeral wrote: »

Bae

What the 'ell did she do? Mug Mr T?

RabbleRouser2k

the purple tin wrote: »

What the 'ell did she do? Mug Mr T?

I pity the foo'!!!

Yeah_Right

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

That’s grand. There’s a real discussion about this stuff happening out there. You seem to think you have it all sussed to the extent that you only seem to discuss it in sarcasm. As I said earlier, I don’t have any confidence that you have a clue what you’re talking about.

Well I've been sexually active for over 25 years without raping anyone so maybe I do know a little bit about what I'm saying. And that was without consent classes :eek:

DickSwiveller

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Delighted to hear it. The conversation is happening whether or not men take an active part. Better that men stay engaged and shape the discussion

Let us know when it's over

El_Duderino 09

Deleted User wrote: »

The danger is the flexibility that "withdrawal of consent" is being applied. While people are suggesting that consent should be verbally given (which as you said isn't done that often, and perhaps only with a stranger), withdrawal of consent can be verbal, non-verbal, or after the event.

This is why consent is becoming such a thorny issue. It isn't so much about when consent is actually being given, but when it is being withdrawn, or breaking down into parts what consent was given. She gave consent for oral sex but not for penetrative sex, and yet, no verbal rejection or objection was given until after the fact. etc. These kind of examples are becoming more common as real life cases, rather than bizarre examples on a discussion board.

This is exactly it. Consent can be given for certain acts but not for others. And consent can be withdrawn after it’s given. But I can’t imagine how consent can be given and consensual sex happens while, then consent can be retrospectively withdrawn. How does that work?

It’s this something which should he openly discussed and thrashed our? Or are you happy to let LON do all the work and shape the discussion, then complain that your view isn’t represented?

El_Duderino 09

Deleted User wrote: »

The danger is the flexibility that "withdrawal of consent" is being applied. While people are suggesting that consent should be verbally given (which as you said isn't done that often, and perhaps only with a stranger), withdrawal of consent can be verbal, non-verbal, or after the event.

This is why consent is becoming such a thorny issue. It isn't so much about when consent is actually being given, but when it is being withdrawn, or breaking down into parts what consent was given. She gave consent for oral sex but not for penetrative sex, and yet, no verbal rejection or objection was given until after the fact. etc. These kind of examples are becoming more common as real life cases, rather than bizarre examples on a discussion board.

This is exactly it. Consent can be given for certain acts but not for others. And consent can be withdrawn after it’s given. But I can’t imagine how consent can be given and consensual sex happens while, then consent can be retrospectively withdrawn. How does that work?

It’s this something which should he openly discussed and thrashed our? Or are you happy to let LON do all the work and shape the discussion, then complain that your view isn’t represented?

El_Duderino 09

Deleted User wrote: »

And as part of those consent classes (that both genders attend), they should be taught a variety of ways to express "no". Not relying on vague body-language, or expecting the guy to read her mind.

I see no problem with these kind of classes if it's approached in an even-handed manner, although I suspect it'll follow in the steps of women's classes in University, and a way to beat men up

Stall the ball horse. ‘No’ should be expressed clearly and verbally. No relying on vague body language or mind reading.

How then should ‘yes’ be expressed? Through a clear verbal ‘yes’ not relying on vague body language or mind reading?

Or should the ‘yes’ be deduced through vague body language and mind reading but the ‘no’ be clearly and verbally expressed?

Why would there be different approaches to expressing yes and no?

Completely agree about education for children btw.

El_Duderino 09

DickSwiveller wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Delighted to hear it. The conversation is happening whether or not men take an active part. Better that men stay engaged and shape the discussion

Let us know when it's over

Your peers will let you know when it’s over. When LON and other interested parties have shaped the culture, your peers will be be crying, pissing, whinging and moaning full time.

DickSwiveller

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Stall the ball horse. ‘No’ should be expressed clearly and verbally. No relying on vague body language or mind reading.

How then should ‘yes’ be expressed? Through a clear verbal ‘yes’ not relying on vague body language or mind reading?

Or should the ‘yes’ be deduced through vague body language and mind reading but the ‘no’ be clearly and verbally expressed?

Why would there be different approaches to expressing yes and no?

Completely agree about education for children btw.

That's great. Now, can we get back to Louise?

El_Duderino 09

Yeah_Right wrote: »

Well I've been sexually active for over 25 years without raping anyone so maybe I do know a little bit about what I'm saying. And that was without consent classes :eek:

Legend

El_Duderino 09

Yeah_Right wrote: »

Well I've been sexually active for over 25 years without raping anyone so maybe I do know a little bit about what I'm saying. And that was without consent classes :eek:

Legend

Sweetemotion

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

But I can’t imagine how consent can be given and consensual sex happens while, then consent can be retrospectively withdrawn. How does that work?

It's basically a get out of jail free card for a woman who has had to much to drink and regrets her action from the night before.

Now you can say the man should have known better which is true but if both are under the influence why is it only the male who is held responsibly for their actions?

El_Duderino 09

DickSwiveller wrote: »

That's great. Now, can we get back to Louise?

Heaven forbid you discuss anything of substance about what LON is actually doing.

Back to the ‘LON is such an eejit’ circle jerk.

I’ll get you started, ahem.

Gawd lads LON is such an eejit. She’s out there discussing culturally relevant issues and creating art on the topics, adding to the discussion and shaping the culture. What an eejit.

Zulu

soiseztomabel

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Heaven forbid you discuss anything of substance about what LON is actually doing.

Back to the ‘LON is such an eejit’ circle jerk.

I’ll get you started, ahem.

Gawd lads LON is such an eejit. She’s out there discussing culturally relevant issues and creating art on the topics, adding to the discussion and shaping the culture. What an eejit.

Yes yes yes

El_Duderino 09

Sweetemotion wrote: »

It's basically a get out of jail free card for a woman who has had to much to drink and regrets her action from the night before.

Now you can say the man should have known better which is true but if both are under the influence why is it only the male who is held responsibly for their actions?

Well it was trumped by paddy Jackson’s ‘assumed consent’ card under NI law. I’d disagree with anyone who says removing consent after the act is a valid action. Who supports removing consent after the fact?

But the locals don’t want to discuss that, they want to get back to the circle jerk

El_Duderino 09

Zulu wrote: »

Ah Zulu, I just get invalid image message for all your images. I’ll just assume they’re terribly clever and they’re where you put all your wit when posting to me.

You’re not as good at ignoring me as you think.

DickSwiveller

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Heaven forbid you discuss anything of substance about what LON is actually doing.

Back to the ‘LON is such an eejit’ circle jerk.

I’ll get you started, ahem.

Gawd lads LON is such an eejit. She’s out there discussing culturally relevant issues and creating art on the topics, adding to the discussion and shaping the culture. What an eejit.

You are 100 per cent on a wind up.

givyjoe

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

.. your peers will be be crying, pissing, whinging and moaning full time.

Classic el duderino. It's no wonder so many are eager to debate with you. Honestly, I would really really love to know what your gripe with men really is. Some would say that's all LON does, piss moan and whinge full time and get paid for it.

The Crowman

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Heaven forbid you discuss anything of substance about what LON is actually doing.

Back to the ‘LON is such an eejit’ circle jerk.

I’ll get you started, ahem.

Gawd lads LON is such an eejit. She’s out there discussing culturally relevant issues and creating art on the topics, adding to the discussion and shaping the culture. What an eejit.

Are you calling her phoning it in chick lit art?

Yeah_Right

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Legend

Thanks. Hope LON thinks so too. Now please tell us more about her "art".

RabbleRouser2k

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

This is exactly it. Consent can be given for certain acts but not for others. And consent can be withdrawn after it’s given. But I can’t imagine how consent can be given and consensual sex happens while, then consent can be retrospectively withdrawn. How does that work?

It’s this something which should he openly discussed and thrashed our? Or are you happy to let LON do all the work and shape the discussion, then complain that your view isn’t represented?

Yet LON and co believe you can withdraw consent after the whole encounter-so if a man and woman engage in coitus, and both enjoy it, the woman can withdraw consent a week later, and claim rape.

Or withdraw consent 20 years later, and cry rape.

The also do the 'believe the rapist'-but if one were to accuse LON or her cohorts of rape, knowingly and falsely, we would have to believe the accuser? That's what LON believes.

upandcumming

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Your peers will let you know when it’s over. When LON and other interested parties have shaped the culture, your peers will be be crying, pissing, whinging and moaning full time.

This is hilarious. Bravo!

RabbleRouser2k

I doubt it-when less and less girls and women identify with O'Neill and company, our 'peers' will be moving on with their lives.

Not whining Trump won.

Silentcorner

To be fair this thread has gone on longer than anyone would have predicted.

LON and those like her are like those self help charlatans that emerged back in the 80s in the States, they prey on weak willed individuals desperate for something to grasp to...anything will do....and good luck to them.

Modern feminism is a pile of nonsense, it is class driven, using gender as a shield! How many women working on zero hour contracts in sh#t conditions in this very country would identify with Irish modern day feminism, indeed how many Irish feminists reach out to those mostly foreign national women who serve up those afternoon teas, clean those hotel rooms, vacuum the homes of the wealthy, etc...absolutely none...feminists don't even see those women, they cannot relate to them. They are only concerned with equality for SOME women, you know, their own kind!

Outlaw Pete

Yeah_Right wrote: »

Well I've been sexually active for over 25 years without raping anyone so maybe I do know a little bit about what I'm saying. And that was without consent classes :eek:

Doesn't matter, sure Tommy Tiernan has six kids and she still lectured him on consent and even at one point gave him some patronizing applause and a cheer (the kind you might give a toddler when they've eat up all their din dins) when he said something in the context of consent which she approved of.