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

py2006

You have to laugh at these so called consent classes. It's just the system pandering to deluded feminists.

The type of person is is going to rape is going to rape regardless. The penny isnt going to drop by attending a class that says it's wrong.

That's like telling Ted Bundy in school that murder is wrong.

LLMMLL

Yeah_Right wrote: »

Scenarios and discussions beyond "she said no so you should stop"? You must have associated with some real scumbags or morons if you think guys need a better explanation than that.

I guess that’s the issue. You’ll never understand how willing men are to push someone’s sexual boundaries unless you experience it yourself.

El_Duderino 09

Yeah_Right wrote: »

I've given you answers. Go back and read them. What is it that you don't understand when it comes to consent? Say yes or no. Its only subtle and an issue if people aren't clear about it or are allowed to claim regret equals lack of consent. Thats what got Paddy into trouble and thats what LON supports.

‘Say yes or no’. Earlier you said that people don’t actually verbalise it. So how should it be expressed? It’s probably a lot more difficult to consent to X but not to Y through body language.

I know you don’t see the point in discussing it but others do. Parliament sees the point in discussing it with children. If you think it’s as simple as ‘say yes or no‘ then you’re not equipped to influence the discussion.

Imagine the fool you would have looked after the committee heard evidence from the rape crisis centre and various academics. You step up and say ‘it’s simple. Say yes or no. Class dismissed’. You’d look a clown.

Owryan

To those bickering about consent classes, can i ask if you have ever attended one?

I did, it covered no means no, behaviour from both men and women and that every time a man has sex with a woman it's rape.

JohnMc1

py2006 wrote: »

You have to laugh at these so called consent classes. It's just the system pandering to deluded feminists.

I'd laugh too if it wasn't for the fact these classes paint all Men as rapists.

Yeah_Right

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

‘Say yes or no’. Earlier you said that people don’t actually verbalise it. So how should it be expressed? It’s probably a lot more difficult to consent to X but not to Y through body language.

I know you don’t see the point in discussing it but others do. Parliament sees the point in discussing it with children. If you think it’s as simple as ‘say yes or no‘ then you’re not equipped to influence the discussion.

Imagine the fool you would have looked after the committee heard evidence from the rape crisis centre and various academics. You step up and say ‘it’s simple. Say yes or no. Class dismissed’. You’d look a clown.

When did I say people don't actually verbalise it? I don't think I did. I'd say if you don't verbalise and just go along with what the other person is doing then you've consented. If you don't want to do it, say no.

Talking about it with children, yes that's a good thing. Consent classes at university like what LON advocates, is stupid. If you don't understand what consent is by the time you reach university, you probably just don't care what it means in which case a class is a waste of time.

El_Duderino 09

Maxpfizer wrote: »

Teacher: OK class, who here thinks rape is OK?
Class: *silence*
Teacher: Hm, I'll try again. Who thinks it's OK to have sex with someone without their consent?
Class: *more silence*
Teacher: Wow, tough crowd. OK who thinks it's OK to have sex with someone who is passed out.
Student A: Sorry, did you say "someone who is up for it".
Teacher: No I said "someone who is passed out"
Student A: Oh, OK, well not me then.
Teacher: Anyone? Anyone think it's OK?
Rest of Class: *continued silence*
Teacher: OK, next weeks lesson is "Don't Dress Like A Slag" and for next weeks homework just try to not rape anybody. Class dismissed.

This little skit was done yesterday too. It got big laughs then too. Did your class cover what consent is?

Did it cover how you consent to something and not to other things?

I have asked a couple of questions repeatedly and all I’ve got back is ridicule or ridiculous sarcastic answers.

So to anyone who is able to offer an answer to the following questions, feel free to answer them.

How should consent be communicated? How should withdrawal of consent be communicated? How should the subtleties of consent be communicated (Consent to X but not to Y)?

El_Duderino 09

Yeah_Right wrote: »

When did I say people don't actually verbalise it? I don't think I did. I'd say if you don't verbalise and just go along with what the other person is doing then you've consented. If you don't want to do it, say no.

Talking about it with children, yes that's a good thing. Consent classes at university like what LON advocates, is stupid. If you don't understand what consent is by the time you reach university, you probably just don't care what it means in which case a class is a waste of time.

You did your hilarious little skit yesterday where people said yes or no. Then you agreed that people almost never verbalise it in reality.

Anyway it’s like I said, I’ve no confidence that you have a coherent idea of consent so I won’t hold you to yesterday’s opinions.

To deal with today’s opinion, if you just go along with it you’re consenting. But if you do t consent then you have to actually say ‘no’ is that what you’re saying above?

If that is what your saying, then why the difference in standard for consenting and not consenting? Wouldn’t it make sense that both consent and non consent would have the same signals?

sydthebeat

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Wouldn’t it make sense that both consent and non consent would have the same signals?

No

El_Duderino 09

The thing that really gets me about this discussion is that so many posters seem to see consent as something that men need to get. What a disempowering position to take. It sounds like you’re begging for sex.

It sounds like some men see sex as something women give to men. What a weak way to view relationships. Consent is a 2 way thing.

El_Duderino 09

sydthebeat wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Wouldn’t it make sense that both consent and non consent would have the same signals?

No

Ok. Elaborate.

Yeah_Right

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

How should consent be communicated? How should withdrawal of consent be communicated? How should the subtleties of consent be communicated (Consent to X but not to Y)?

I thought we'd covered this but ok. Communicate it by words and actions. If you don't want to do something say it and don't do it. What part of that is hard to understand?

El_Duderino 09

Maxpfizer wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Now I know I’m a terrible eejit for asking what men would like to contribute to the discussion because it’s oh so fcuking obvious. But humour me. What would you like to contribute to the discussion that isn’t being said?

I'd like to contribute rebuttals to some of the absolute BS that gets published uncontested. Probably just start with LONs latest article about women taking mens names and work backwards from there. Or maybe focus on consent. I don't know. ANYTHING to challenge the nonsense that gets to go unchallenged. THEN maybe we could work forward from that point.

Feminists aren't simply contributing to discussions on consent or the pay gap or any other gender related issues. They are controlling the discussions. They've controlled the discussions (in mainstream media at least) for so long that the best anyone could hope to contribute at this point is just to clean up the mess.

Now please stop playing dumb. You know what men would like to contribute to the conversation. You've read this thread and others, haven't you?

"Oh I just don't know what men would like to contribute". Riiiiight. This thread is almost up to 5000 posts now but you just somehow don't know what points people want to get across?

There's obviously a debate to be had here. People would be contributing if they had the opportunity but they don't so they aren't.

So why does one side of the argument get a national platform to put forward their points but the opposing view is confined to message boards etc?

Contribute rebuttals to what exactly? I’m sure you could ‘destroy’ her arguments (in the lingo of YouTube). But you’re allowing the dreaded feminists to pick the battlefield.

I’ve said loads of times before that LON and her peers are pressing ahead with their agenda and the men are pressing ahead with rebutting the feminists.

I can’t for the life of me figure out why men aren’t interested in advancing their own arguments instead of just rebutting pay gap arguments or whatever. Why always allow LON and her peers decide what the arguments should be about.

LON and her peers focus on changing society, the men’s side focuses on arguing with LON. No wonder they’re winning.

El_Duderino 09

Yeah_Right wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

How should consent be communicated? How should withdrawal of consent be communicated? How should the subtleties of consent be communicated (Consent to X but not to Y)?

I thought we'd covered this but ok. Communicate it by words and actions. If you don't want to do something say it and don't do it. What part of that is hard to understand?

Words and actions, great. Now we’re getting somewhere even if it’s still very without any detail.

Is it the same words and actions for consent and non consent?

What words and what actions are realistic in the moment? Be specific. You seem convinced you have it all figured out so it should be easy to explain

upandcumming

LLMMLL wrote: »

Well not telling obvious lies that they didn’t get together and come up with a cover story when one of them gave the wrong story that another also gave. That would be a start.

Sorry was this the cover story the next day, in the coffee shop, that PJ went to all the time, where he was well known, down the road from his house, with other 'high profile' rugby players? To concoct a cover story? Right...

Yeah_Right

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

You did your hilarious little skit yesterday where people said yes or no. Then you agreed that people almost never verbalise it in reality.

Anyway it’s like I said, I’ve no confidence that you have a coherent idea of consent so I won’t hold you to yesterday’s opinions.

To deal with today’s opinion, if you just go along with it you’re consenting. But if you do t consent then you have to actually say ‘no’ is that what you’re saying above?

If that is what your saying, then why the difference in standard for consenting and not consenting? Wouldn’t it make sense that both consent and non consent would have the same signals?

I get the impression that you are quite conservative when it comes to sex and possibly even ignorant about it. Me, I'm very open and experimental. Maybe you're not comfortable expressing yourself openly with another person and telling them what you like and what you don't. I've found that communication is key to good sex. Talk to your partner. Try things. If it's not comfortable or enjoyable, say something. It will improve your sex life.

As for debating things with LON, have a word with her and get her to engage. At the moment she just fires shots and then hides in her room protected by her fans. She is scared of any dissenting opinions.

LLMMLL

upandcumming wrote: »

Sorry was this the cover story the next day, in the coffee shop, that PJ went to all the time, where he was well known, down the road from his house, with other 'high profile' rugby players? To concoct a cover story? Right...

The third guy whose name I’ve forgotten have the exact same story as Stuart Olding, practically word for word, claiming he’d received oral from her when she herself, PJ, and SO all said he had not.

How would he be able to repeat SOs version of events as his own if they had not gone over their stories together?

sydthebeat

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Ok. Elaborate.

I took it as a yes or no question.

The answer is obviously no.

Maxpfizer

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I have asked a couple of questions repeatedly and all I’ve got back is ridicule or ridiculous sarcastic answers.

Getting what you deserve so.

My "little skit" was just a joke FFS. I was having a laugh.

upandcumming

LLMMLL wrote: »

The third guy whose name I’ve forgotten have the exact same story as Stuart Olding, practically word for word, claiming he’d received oral from her when she herself, PJ, and SO all said he had not.

How would he be able to repeat SOs version of events as his own if they had not gone over their stories together?

I'm not talking about the content. I'm talking about where it was supposed to have happened.
Strikes me as really fucking stupid to come up with their story where they are said to have done it.

DickSwiveller

https://twitter.com/ColetteKelleher/status/1007531010404298752

DickSwiveller

Why did we not get rid of the Seanad

upandcumming

DickSwiveller wrote: »

https://twitter.com/ColetteKelleher/status/1007531010404298752

My sides will never be seen again.

soiseztomabel

the purple tin wrote: »

I have a sneaking suspicion that LLML could actually be Lou's mammy. Maybe her sister would be more likely. Lou said her sis found this thread and it made her really angry.
🕵

I have a fiver bet on it being RMC

givyjoe

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

The thing that really gets me about this discussion is that so many posters seem to see consent as something that men need to get. What a disempowering position to take. It sounds like you’re begging for sex.

It sounds like some men see sex as something women give to men. What a weak way to view relationships. Consent is a 2 way thing.

Again with the underhanded jibes at the men in this thread.

are you saying that men shouldn't seek consent?! Getting consent is somehow begging?!

El_Duderino 09

Yeah_Right wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

You did your hilarious little skit yesterday where people said yes or no. Then you agreed that people almost never verbalise it in reality.

Anyway it’s like I said, I’ve no confidence that you have a coherent idea of consent so I won’t hold you to yesterday’s opinions.

To deal with today’s opinion, if you just go along with it you’re consenting. But if you do t consent then you have to actually say ‘no’ is that what you’re saying above?

If that is what your saying, then why the difference in standard for consenting and not consenting? Wouldn’t it make sense that both consent and non consent would have the same signals?

I get the impression that you are quite conservative when it comes to sex and possibly even ignorant about it. Me, I'm very open and experimental. Maybe you're not comfortable expressing yourself openly with another person and telling them what you like and what you don't. I've found that communication is key to good sex. Talk to your partner. Try things. If it's not comfortable or enjoyable, say something. It will improve your sex life.

As for debating things with LON, have a word with her and get her to engage. At the moment she just fires shots and then hides in her room protected by her fans. She is scared of any dissenting opinions.

Ok. Don’t presume to know about me similar to the way I haven’t presumed to know about you. But do read the post you responded to and try answering the specific questions. Cheers.

Taytoland

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8EK6Y1X_xa4

Perception vs facts.

Yeah_Right

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Ok. Don’t presume to know about me similar to the way I haven’t presumed to know about you. But do read the post you responded to and try answering the specific questions. Cheers.

You have presumed to know about me. You said I have no coherent idea of consent. With double standards like that, it's fairly obvious you are a true disciple of LON.

Specific question about consent vs non-consent: if you are an active participant and don't convey 'no' that is consent. If you say 'no' and/or resist then that is not consent. Is that clear enough?

I have some questions for you. Have you ever done anal? Tried anal? Rimming? Bum play? Had someone try it on you? What happened? How did you respond? How did they respond?

In the interest of fairness, I have. Some partners weren't into it so we didn't do it. Others were willing to try it but didn't really like it so we stopped or didn't do it again. Others loved it so it was part of our sex life. It's called two-way communication. You and LON should try it.

givyjoe

givyjoe wrote: »

Again with the underhanded jibes at the men in this thread.

are you saying that men shouldn't seek consent?! Getting consent is somehow begging?!

Damned if you do, and damned if you don't.

Yer Da sells Avon

soiseztomabel wrote: »

I have a fiver bet on it being RMC

I have a fiver bet on half the lads on this thread being the same boring, humourless, obsessive MRA weirdo.