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

skooterblue2

Can we get back to some light hearted stuff poking fun at LON? please.

Peter Denham

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

To be honest, his friend doesn't sound all that clever to start off with.



Here, I disagree with you. He sounds more like a simple, somewhat confused fool than a psychotic rapist.

There will be some people who don't care and will commit sexual crime. The difference is, they'll know full well and yes, education will make no difference. But that's not everyone.

I think not stopping sex when a person wants you to stop goes beyond "ah sure he's not the sharpest tool in the shed."

Pretty warped that those lecturing about consent actually think this is not a big deal. I also fully believe the story is made up.

Peter Denham

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

How funny it is that you’re willing to throw a man under the bus and I’m in favour of educating young people to make sure they can make informed decisions in the first case.

How funny that you're defending your friend who wouldn't stop sex when his girlfriend wanted him to because he thought rape against a partner isn't a thing. Sounds to me like he thought she was his possession. I'm sure you'll invent another anecdote now to widen the goalposts though.

No good person continues to have sex when told to stop. It's that simple, he deserves to be thrown under the bus.

I'm all for debating about more complicated cases. I think it's ridiculous though that you blame a lack of consent classes for your friend starting sex with a sleeping woman then continuing when she didn't to carry on.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

He definitely isn’t the sharpest but he’s a normal guy with a good job. Not a complete fool either.
He was a dipstick on this particular topic because he was uneducated on it and had a completely faulty belief.

He definitely isn't a psychopath. He had a wrong understanding of consent. Thankfully once he thought about it and asked his stepdad for guidance, he accepted that he was wrong. Ignorance was the problem, not psychopathy. And education was the cure. Pity he didn’t get the education he needed earlier.

Therein lies the crux of the matter: education did work.

Regardless of whather or not the story is true or not, as one poster said, there are most certaily people out there with that attitude.

Someone mentioned sexual violence: well, you can rape someone without being violent. A lot of people don't get this.

skooterblue2 wrote: »

Can we get back to some light hearted stuff poking fun at LON? please.

Suggest a new thread title.
"Lousie O'Neill versus El Duderino's friend"

El_Duderino 09

Peter Denham wrote: »

I think not stopping sex when a person wants you to stop goes beyond "ah sure he's not the sharpest tool in the shed."

Pretty warped that those lecturing about consent actually think this is not a big deal. I also fully believe the story is made up.

I haven't commented on he seriousness of the specific incident because I don't have the details and it's separate from the salient point which is that the guy thought it wasn't possible to rape your girlfriend.

Believe it or not, it's what happened. The guy in his early 20s held the belief that is isn't possible to rape your girlfriend. Ignorance was the problem and education was the issue.

Assume it was made up of you like and treat it as a hypothetical situation.

Funny how some posters are all in favour of discussing consent but actually couldn't be bothered to discuss it beyond saying they don't believe the situation could exist. I hope anyone who can't actually discuss it isn't ever charged with contributing to the course.

The Rape of Lucretia

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Someone mentioned sexual violence: well, you can rape someone without being violent. A lot of people don't get this.

Its a modern mutation of the term though. It takes time for modified views and definitions to become consistent with all.

Peter Denham

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I haven't commented on he seriousness of the specific incident because I don't have the details and it's separate from the salient point which is that the guy thought it wasn't possible to rape your girlfriend.

Believe it or not, it's what happened. The guy in his early 20s held the belief that is isn't possible to rape your girlfriend. Ignorance was the problem and education was the issue.

Assume it was made up of you like and treat it as a hypothetical situation.

Funny how some posters are all in favour of discussing consent but actually couldn't be bothered to discuss it beyond saying they don't believe the situation could exist. I hope anyone who can't actually discuss it isn't ever charged with contributing to the course.

It's not separate though. You have stated he started when she was asleep and then continued when she didn't want to. It's very easy to claim ignorance after committing a crime, anyone who looks at another human during sex and sees that they want to stop but continues for his own gratification is a bad person. Rugby captain or not.

The Rape of Lucretia

Peter Denham wrote: »

But I genuinely don't know anyone who has ever said it's ok to push on with sex regardless, those who do it know it's wrong but don't care.

I am quite sure you do. Although they may have changed their view in recent years. Pushing on with sex regardless was considered perfectly acceptable by many, if not most, in Ireland, among married people, as marriage was considered to be the consent. Maybe not very nice. But not rape.

Peter Denham

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

I am quite sure you do. Although they may have changed their view in recent years. Pushing on with sex regardless was considered perfectly acceptable by many, if not most, in Ireland, among married people, as marriage was considered to be the consent.

Lots of things were acceptable in the past that aren't now. What's your point? This was 2013.

He seems to be roughly the same age as me, none of my friends or collegues would be surprised to learn that you can't rape your girlfriend.

It's very convenient that I suggested consent classes are unnecessary because good people don't rape and then someone comes along about a rugby captain teacher, a pillar of the community, though not very smart, raped his girlfriend because nobody told him not to!

The Rape of Lucretia

Peter Denham wrote: »

Lots of things were acceptable in the past that aren't now. What's your point?

The point being that you say you genuinely dont know anyone who has ever said its OK to push on etc. And that, unless you have never met someone over the age of 30 or 40, you probably do know people who would have said just that, if many decades ago now. They dont say it now or possibly even think it now. But once, for people still around it, it was OK to push on, and it not be rape.

El_Duderino 09

Peter Denham wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

How funny it is that you’re willing to throw a man under the bus and I’m in favour of educating young people to make sure they can make informed decisions in the first case.

How funny that you're defending your friend who wouldn't stop sex when his girlfriend wanted him to because he thought rape against a partner isn't a thing. Sounds to me like he thought she was his possession. I'm sure you'll invent another anecdote now to widen the goalposts though.

Do me a massive favour and find one thing I've said in defence of what he did or what he believed. Otherwise I'll thank you not to put words in my mouth. Do that and then talk to me about goalposts. Cheers.

Peter Denham wrote: »

No good person continues to have sex when told to stop. It's that simple, he deserves to be thrown under the bus.

Oh now you're making up more details. Did I tell you She said stop? Did I tell you anything beyond he started having sex with her and she wasn't into it? Did I tell you whether they continued to have sex or not? Didn't tell you anything of those things because I don't know any of those details. It seems you have made up so many details that you probably know more about the incident than I do at this stage.

You've been adding details to the story for a few posts and I have ignored it because the salient point is the belief he held, not the incident. The incident he was talking about was just the catalyst for telling us about the belief that you can't rape your girlfriend.

Peter Denham wrote: »

I'm all for debating about more complicated cases. I think it's ridiculous though that you blame a lack of consent classes for your friend starting sex with a sleeping woman then continuing when she didn't to carry on.

Here's a great example of you embellishing the story. I didn't say he carried on. I don't know whether he did or not. I also didn't say lack of consent classes are then cause I've said consistently that discussion of consent would be great. Consent classes are one way to do it. In the cad above the discussion came with me, my Mrs and his step dad.

Do me a massive favour and read back the details I actually told you and the ones you made up. Makes for amusing reading.

The salient point is the belief he held and the solution was education.

El_Duderino 09

Peter Denham wrote: »

It's not separate though. You have stated he started when she was asleep and then continued when she didn't want to. It's very easy to claim ignorance after committing a crime, anyone who looks at another human during sex and sees that they want to stop but continues for his own gratification is a bad person. Rugby captain or not.

Yes. They're were 2 elements to then story. One where i wasn't there, don't know all the details and isn't relevant to the question you asked about how someone could unknowingly commit rape. And one where I was there, know what happened and is relevant to the question of how someone could commit rape without intending to.

You're mad to discuss the less relevant part and desperately avoidant of the part that answers the question you asked. Oh how convenient it is to dismiss it as a lie so you don't have to discuss it.

As I said, treat it as a hypothetical.

El_Duderino 09

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Therein lies the crux of the matter: education did work.

Regardless of whather or not the story is true or not, as one poster said, there are most certaily people out there with that attitude.

Someone mentioned sexual violence: well, you can rape someone without being violent. A lot of people don't get this.

This is exactly it. He probably had never thought about it but had a faulty belief, then he had to think about it, then he got the right outcome. It's the basic principles of education. Imagine arguing against education and discussion because you're ideologically opposed to the person who proposed it. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.

Peter Denham

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Yes. They're were 2 elements to then story. One where i wasn't there, don't know all the details and isn't relevant to the question you asked about how someone could unknowingly commit rape. And one where I was there, know what happened and is relevant to the question of how someone could commit rape without intending to.

You're mad to discuss the less relevant part and desperately avoidant of the part that answers the question you asked. Oh how convenient it is to dismiss it as a lie so you don't have to discuss it.

As I said, treat it as a hypothetical.

Changing what you've said now. You said your friend started sex when his girlfriend was asleep and she didn't want it. He thought it was OK because you can't rape one's girlfriend. This implies that he knows this is rape if he did it to any other person.

I'll take it as hypothetical, and my conclusion is he knows he has done something wrong and is trying to weasel out of it by claiming he didn't know better.

Much like the other guy you know who killed some with a punch, this story doesn't help your argument.

Also you've stated a few times that I'm opposed to Louise O' Neill. I already told you I don't know much about her. Care to " educate me to achieve the right outcome ?"

El_Duderino 09

Peter Denham wrote: »

It's very convenient that I suggested consent classes are unnecessary because good people don't rape and then someone comes along about a rugby captain teacher, a pillar of the community, though not very smart, raped his girlfriend because nobody told him not to!

I would have thought it was decidedly inconvenient for your argument. But then you solved that argument by deciding you don't believe the story ever happened (or presumably ever could happen). Now that is convenient.

Peter Denham

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I would have thought it was decidedly inconvenient for your argument. But then you solved that argument by deciding you don't believe the story ever happened (or presumably ever could happen). Now that is convenient.

So like the guy being killed with a punch story you've been inventing stories and portraying them as evidence to your arguments?

Regardless, one example of someone that didn't know it's wrong to rape his girlfriend is hardly evidence that we lack education on consent. How this guy had the faculties to become a teacher I'll never know.

By the way, a quick glance at this thread seems to suggest Louise O' Neill wouldn't be so accepting of your analysis of your "friends" actions. Is that fair to say?

As the topic is Louise O' Neill, how would you explain to her that your friend is in fact a good guy despite having sex with his girlfriend when she was asleep? Do you think she would be understanding? You obviously hold this guy in high regard despite his sexual crimes so I'm interested to hear.

givyjoe

skooterblue2 wrote: »

Can we get back to some light hearted stuff poking fun at LON? please.

Why do that when you can piss all over the thread until everyone loses interest

El_Duderino 09

Peter Denham wrote: »

Changing what you've said now.

What have I changed? You've made up lots of details and im sorry that I have to correct the story you've added. Seriously tell me what you think I've changed because you seem completely side tracked by the details you've embellished.

Peter Denham wrote: »

You said your friend started sex when his girlfriend was asleep and she didn't want it. He thought it was OK because you can't rape one's girlfriend. This implies that he knows this is rape if he did it to any other person.

Perfect now you're getting it . Yeah he thought rape didn't apply to your girlfriend. Im sure he did know it would be rape if it was a stranger. That's the faulty belief! That's the point I've been trying to get through to you. The got there in the end.

Peter Denham wrote: »

I'll take it as hypothetical, and my conclusion is he knows he has done something wrong and is trying to weasel out of it by claiming he didn't know better.

And your discussion of the hypothetical situation is to change the situation to one where he knew what he was doing and was just lying to cover his tracks. Great discussion there PD

El_Duderino 09

Peter Denham wrote: »

So like the guy being killed with a punch story you've been inventing stories and portraying them as evidence to your arguments?

Regardless, one example of someone that didn't know it's wrong to rape his girlfriend is hardly evidence that we lack education on consent. How this guy had the faculties to become a teacher I'll never know.

By the way, a quick glance at this thread seems to suggest Louise O' Neill wouldn't be so accepting of your analysis of your "friends" actions. Is that fair to say?

As the topic is Louise O' Neill, how would you explain to her that your friend is in fact a good guy despite having sex with his girlfriend when she was asleep? Do you think she would be understanding?

Ha classic. Now you're telling me another experience from my life is made up. Jeez it must be great to so clever that you can dismiss anything that doesn't suit your narrative.

In spite of you dancing around all day instead of discussing the issue, I will answer your point directly.

I don't know what LON would think. I think you and she and I would be in agreement that you can rape your girlfriend. I think he probably committed a sexual assault and he might have committed a rape. I don't know what you want me to tell LON. Im neither the police nor the rugby club president nor the minister for education. So I don't get to decide how his career or personal life goes.

He's my mate and apart from that one faulty belief, he's a normal guy. He's not a hero, he's a normal guy who held a really harmful belief, then he got educated.

You're mad to discuss anything except the interesting part.

You'd do anything to avoid the admission that discussing consent is a good idea.

El_Duderino 09

givyjoe wrote: »

skooterblue2 wrote: »

Can we get back to some light hearted stuff poking fun at LON? please.

Why do that when you can piss all over the thread until everyone loses interest

Other people are allowed to post. You have my consent

Peter Denham

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Ha classic. Now you're telling me another experience from my life is made up. Jeez it must be great to so clever that you can dismiss anything that doesn't suit your narrative.

In spite of you dancing around all day instead of discussing the issue, I will answer your point directly.

I don't know what LON would think. I think you and she and I would be in agreement that you can rape your girlfriend. I think he probably committed a sexual assault and he might have committed a rape. I don't know what you want me to tell LON. Im neither the police nor the rugby club president nor the minister for education. So I don't get to decide how his career or personal life goes.

He's my mate and apart from that one faulty belief, he's a normal guy. He's not a hero, he's a normal guy who held a really harmful belief, then he got educated.

You're mad to discuss anything except the interesting part.

You'd do anything to avoid the admission that discussing consent is a good idea.

OK. No idea how one story about your rapist mate means that we absolutely need have consent classes. I would say it's so unbelievably rare for someone to think you're allowed to rape your girlfriend that it doesn't even warrant talking about. Your friend is a very very special case, and very very stupid. I would also urge you to report a rape that you suspect had happened to the Gardai. Pretty socially irresponsible not to.

El_Duderino 09

Peter Denham wrote: »

OK. No idea how one story about your rapist mate means that we absolutely need have consent classes. I would say it's so unbelievably rare for someone to think you're allowed to rape your girlfriend that it doesn't even warrant talking about. Your friend is a very very special case, and very very stupid. I would also urge you to report a rape that you suspect had happened to the Gardai. Pretty socially irresponsible not to.

At some stage you'll start responding to what I actually post. I have faith you can do it. Im surprised there isn't a torrent of posters pointing out your twisting, embellishments, moving goalposts and straight up lying.

I didn't say we absolutely need consent classes. I specifically said discussion of consent is really important and they can be formal and informal. I think discussing consent is a great idea.

As it goes I did chat to his girlfriend and said she didn't have to put up with being treated like that. Neither if us went into detail on the incident but that's as far as I saw my social responsibility going. She was more or less living together with him in the house but I wasn't very close with her at the time.

Peter Denham

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

As it goes I did chat to his girlfriend and said she didn't have to put up with being treated like that. Neither if us went into detail on the incident but that's as far as I saw my social responsibility going. She was more or less living together with him in the house but I wasn't very close with her at the time.

Wow what a top guy you are. I'm sure she was so comforted knowing her rapist's friend that stood by him came round to encourage her.

El_Duderino 09

Peter Denham wrote: »

OK. No idea how one story about your rapist mate means that we absolutely need have consent classes. I would say it's so unbelievably rare for someone to think you're allowed to rape your girlfriend that it doesn't even warrant talking about. Your friend is a very very special case, and very very stupid. I would also urge you to report a rape that you suspect had happened to the Gardai. Pretty socially irresponsible not to.

But but but, isn't it interesting that grown adults different on whether the incident was or wasn't rape? Doesn't that suggest even older adults like yourself have different understandings of what is and isn't rape. Even after years of experience you're not in agreement with other posters on that point. More discussion of consent and rape would be a good thing in my opinion.

El_Duderino 09

Peter Denham wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

As it goes I did chat to his girlfriend and said she didn't have to put up with being treated like that. Neither if us went into detail on the incident but that's as far as I saw my social responsibility going. She was more or less living together with him in the house but I wasn't very close with her at the time.

Wow what a top guy you are. I'm sure she was so comforted knowing her rapist's friend that stood by him came round to encourage her.

Lol. You've post the run of yourself now.

Peter Denham

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Take it up with Peter Denham. They’re the one who declared it rape.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I think he probably committed a sexual assault and he might have committed a rape.

I think this highlights your dishonest discussion technique quite well. You're happy to admit to one poster you don't believe it's rape while saying to another you believe it is.
You preach about education on consent yet happily leave a poster unchallenged when he displayed a similiar opinion to that of your mate, an opinion that you claim led to a sexual assault.

You've said repeatedly I invented the notion that he persisted with sex when she didn't want to:

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

after he came in late from a night out and he started having sex with her (o don’t remember the exact details but they’re not the important part of the story) She wasn’t into it but he persisted

The detail of him not stopping was introduced by you, not me.

Usually when someone contradicts themselves so much in a short space of time it means they are either lying about something or don't have an overall coherent argument but are trying to win the debate at all costs. Either way I've lost interest.

Ps. Don't harp on to people about the need for consent discussion while simultaneously defending the character of someone you believe raped someone. Makes you look silly.

Consent talks are definitely useless if they're going to be filled with as much contradictions as this one.

Cast Louise to the Moon, and not a moment too soon.

terryduff12

https://twitter.com/aliaabeed/status/1047871718369443846 ya think ya heard it all

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

terryduff12 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/aliaabeed/status/1047871718369443846 ya think ya heard it all

... and this would be why I'll never have a Twitter account. Can't be dealing with this muck (although I remain open to the idea the accound owner might be sarcasric).

Mother is consenting. End of argument.

sydthebeat

terryduff12 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/aliaabeed/status/1047871718369443846 ya think ya heard it all

Why post that when it's clearly a troll account


It adds nothing here