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

Water John

Hapax, totally agree with you on this line;
'tiny, tiny minority of ****ty, but very vocal men.'
Problem is LON indicates that this is widespread and condoned by men in general, by saying we have a, rape culture.
Men are finding this, very offensive.

Rubberchicken, family member, who has read her first two books, says she is a very good writer.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

And yet she has made a career from claiming that this 'rape culture' phenomenon is widespread. She hasn't provided any stats or an iota of proof though. Just hysterical nonsense. Yes there is bastards of men who behave unacceptably but how widespread exactly is this problem? Ive had women behave obnoxiously to me and invade my personal space on a night out but i put it down to a minority of idiots being idiots and not a widespread problem amongst women.

She's feeding off this Jackson case like a leech and deserves every bit of stick she is getting. If you are going to make audacious claims then back them up at least

What is your "proof" that it is a minority of idiots being idiots?

Surely if she must "prove" her opinions on rape culture you must "prove" your opinions on it being confined to a minority.

Water John

No, LON must prove her contention, it is widespread and generally condoned.
Her saying it continuously, doesn't constitute, proof.

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

What is your "proof" that it is a minority of idiots being idiots?

Surely if she must "prove" her opinions on rape culture you must "prove" your opinions on it being confined to a minority.

Oh jeeeesus??!! Are you actually seriously making this strawman argument?

Because the vast majority of people i tend to encounter are fairly respectful, nice and courteous but ill be sure to count these people over the next few months to reassure you :rolleyes:

retro:electro

garbo speaks wrote: »

Louise gets to have her cake and eat it here. She posts retweets of alleged instances that link the defendants in the trial to deviant behavior, yet Louise herself has her hands washed of any accusations of libel.

Also, if those alleged instances she retweeted are true, so what? Are people not allowed to have conversations anymore (even sleazy ones) without overzealous, pc wackos, trying to overhear every word so they can be "outraged" on Twitter? Jesus.

I just had a look. This is the woman who “winced” and shamed people for using the word “scumbags” to describe the Lidl incident but has no problem calling two people acquitted of rape rapists.

And why on earth are people DM’ing her telling her anything. She doesn’t actually care. She’ll use your story as a cog in her wheel to further her agenda but that’s about the extent of it.

LLMMLL

Water John wrote: »

No, LON must prove her contention, it is widespread and generally condoned.
Her saying it continuously, doesn't constitute, proof.

But the other contention that it's confined to a small number of people must also be proved if you assert it. However, both are unprovable. People treating social theories like physics........

garbo speaks

AttentionBebe wrote: »

Why in the name of Jaysus are you all so obsessed with this woman? Is she the feminist bogey(wo)man or something?

Because she makes her money from taking advantage of the nonsensical, leftist fundamentalism that has taken control of the Irish media with seemingly no challenge or criticism.

Ronaldinho

Hat tip to whoever is changing the thread title

Sweetemotion

LLMMLL wrote: »

But the other contention that it's confined to a small number of people must also be proved if you assert it. However, both are unprovable. People treating social theories like physics........

In the prison system here, people who are charged with rape are kept away from the general population.

Why is that?

mzungu

Deleted User wrote: »

Can I just say that the ongoing renaming of this thread makes it way funnier..

Ronaldinho wrote: »

Hat tip to whoever is changing the thread title

+ 1. The above cannot be stated enough.

Hande hoche!

The thread titles are magnificent. Impressed by the restraint users are showing as regards the thread tags.

AttentionBebe

garbo speaks wrote: »

Because she makes her money from taking advantage of the nonsensical, leftist fundamentalism that has taken control of the Irish media with seemingly no challenge or criticism.

She does in her fcuk. The most I ever hear about her is on this thread from a few fellas who seem to analyse her every move. Do you not think it's a bit weird to have a really long thread dedicated to "woman I don't agree with" being added to for months now?

Fann Linn

AttentionBebe wrote: »

She does in her fcuk. The most I ever hear about her is on this thread from a few fellas who seem to analyse her every move. Do you not think it's a bit weird to have a really long thread dedicated to "woman I don't agree with" being added to for months now?

Agreed. Never heard of her until this thread. Then again, not being on twitter has probably denied me her pleasure.

garbo speaks

AttentionBebe wrote: »

She does in her fcuk. The most I ever hear about her is on this thread from a few fellas who seem to analyse her every move. Do you not think it's a bit weird to have a really long thread dedicated to "woman I don't agree with" being added to for months now?

No, because at least here she can be called out and criticized on her nonsensical statements, unlike in the Irish media where she is revered like some sort of oracle.

Greybottle

Sweetemotion wrote: »

In the prison system here, people who are charged with rape are kept away from the general population.

Why is that?

For their own protection and to keep prisons quiet.

They are hated amongst other prisoners. Having them in the same block would lead to fights, attacks etc. Too much time would be taken up looking after them and doing paperwork etc after they were injured or murdered.

Its a policy that has been developed over decades and is for the well being of all.

You can also guarantee that if they had no protection then the ones leading the attacks on them would be the leaders in the prison, or the lowest level of scumbag in general society.

Omackeral

LLMMLL wrote: »

Surely if she must "prove" her opinions on rape culture you must "prove" your opinions on it being confined to a minority.

LLMMLL wrote: »

But the other contention that it's confined to a small number of people must also be proved if you assert it. However, both are unprovable. People treating social theories like physics........

Fine. Here's some real life proof. Spoke of it before on another thread but here goes anyway. I work in a prison. I work with actual and factual scumbags day in and day out. They are what a lot of people would consider lowlifes. So imagine how morally deplorable a rapist must be in society if society’s rejects absolutely abhor them and won’t mix with them. They long to carve them up and boil sugary water to destroy their skin with. It’s that extreme, that a separate prison is needed for sex offenders, never mind a separate wing. A whole different building is warranted for these dirt bags such is the bile directed at them. So you have the lowest of the low.... about 300 feet of crap... and then the sex offenders. Everyone rejects these scum. Rape is abhorred by every facet of decent society and, tellingly, indecent society ergo it is not widespread whatsoever.

Effects

Omackeral wrote: »

So imagine how morally deplorable a rapist must be in society if society’s rejects absolutely abhor them and won’t mix with them.

Is it not also a case that society's rejects have a warped sense of criminality?
I wouldn't let them judge what crimes are more or less morally deplorable than others.

They won't mix with rapists but have no issue with murderers or tiger kidnappers.

Omackeral

Effects wrote: »

They won't mix with rapists but have no issue with murderers or tiger kidnappers.

I this proves the point more than anything. Rapists and sex offenders are seen as infinitely below these types.

meeeeh

Omackeral wrote: »

Rape is abhorred by every facet of decent society and, tellingly, indecent society ergo it is not widespread whatsoever.

That is simply not true or Catholic Church wouldn't be able to cover up sexual abuse that long. If the crimes were so abhorred by everybody they wouldn't go on for so long. You have also that case couple of years ago where half of the village including priest shook hands with rapist after he was found guilty. I don't know how widespread rape is because statistics are hard to rely on because of low report rate.

Anyway is this and example of crime being abhorred by every facet of decent society.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/the-sex-case-that-divided-a-town-and-shocked-a-watching-nation-26593097.html

Zulu

meeeeh wrote: »

You have also that case couple of years ago where half of the village including priest shook hands with rapist after he was found guilty.

Every single time... :rolleyes:

Omackeral

meeeeh wrote: »

That is simply not true or Catholic Church wouldn't be able to cover up sexual abuse that long. If the crimes were so abhorred by everybody they wouldn't go on for so long. You have also that case couple of years ago where half of the village including priest shook hands with rapist after he was found guilty. I don't know how widespread rape is because statistics are hard to rely on because of low report rate.

That singular case was so shocking and appalling precisely because it disgusted wider society. Also, we're speaking about here and now, I doubt the Catholic Church is getting away with widespread sexual abuse. Poor points made, it must be said.

meeeeh

Omackeral wrote: »

That singular case was so shocking and appalling precisely because it disgusted wider society. Also, we're speaking about here and now, I doubt the Catholic Church is getting away with widespread sexual abuse. Poor points made, it must be said.

Right I made poor points which are supported by different reports and you are basing that on your observation how prisoners treat each other.

I also know someone who went to prison for statuary rape and all his wife would be constantly going on how well he got on with prison guards and how much they liked him and so on... Why would I believe your word over hers?

Effects

Omackeral wrote: »

I this proves the point more than anything. Rapists and sex offenders are seen as infinitely below these types.

Only by scumbags and killers. Not the same as general society. Surely being in prison shows that they don't think the same way as normal society.

_Dara_

garbo speaks wrote: »

Because she makes her money from taking advantage of the nonsensical, leftist fundamentalism that has taken control of the Irish media with seemingly no challenge or criticism.

Unfortunately there will always be people who earn their shekels in an questionable way. It was ever thus.

Omackeral

meeeeh wrote: »

I also know someone who went to prison for statuary rape and all his wife would be constantly going on how well he got on with prison guards and how much they liked him and so on... Why would I believe your word over hers?

Where did I say prison guards are gonna treat sex offenders badly? They're simply paid to do a job. That job doesn't include handing down extra curricular or self appointed judgement, that's for the courts. Anyway, I don't need you to believe my word, just look up the type of clientele in Arbour Hill prison and make a guess as to why they're there and everyone else is in every other prison.

Omackeral

Effects wrote: »

Only by scumbags and killers. Not the same as general society. Surely being in prison shows that they don't think the same way as normal society.

My original point was that both decent and indecent society see sex offenders as vile scum and I stand by that. Most people I know would put rapists and child molesters at the very bottom of the totem pole. There's a certain vindictive and controlling element to crimes of that nature that 99.99% of people can't forgive. Other crimes are absolutely appalling, don't get me wrong, but the forced sexual element of rape and child abuse has that extra sinister level to it that repulses people that much more, in my opinion anyway.

wakka12

LLMMLL wrote: »

What is your "proof" that it is a minority of idiots being idiots?

Surely if she must "prove" her opinions on rape culture you must "prove" your opinions on it being confined to a minority.

Doesnt work that way, accusatory/aggressive remarks are the ones that need to be backed up in the first place.

2smiggy

I seen at dinner time she is advertised to be on the show with daithi o'shea (what ever it's called) today for anyone interested

Jim Bob Scratcher

2smiggy wrote: »

I seen at dinner time she is advertised to be on the show with daithi o'shea (what ever it's called) today for anyone interested

I hope Daithi has protection, and I'm not talking about condoms

RabbleRouser2k

meeeeh wrote: »

That is simply not true or Catholic Church wouldn't be able to cover up sexual abuse that long. If the crimes were so abhorred by everybody they wouldn't go on for so long. You have also that case couple of years ago where half of the village including priest shook hands with rapist after he was found guilty. I don't know how widespread rape is because statistics are hard to rely on because of low report rate.

Anyway is this and example of crime being abhorred by every facet of decent society.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/the-sex-case-that-divided-a-town-and-shocked-a-watching-nation-26593097.html

Oh dear sweet...LON, is that you? Are you trying to sell your books on this site? Can I get a sponsorship deal? I can photoshop in famous people reading your books...

Yeah, the church covered up so much because they were seen as 'judge, jury and executioner' in this land-programs were banned or reviled because the sh!te they pulled.
And now nobody bar the middling less than 30 percent go to mass-it's been absolutely decimated since then.
So damage was done-courtcases were founded, and if a priest comes out and condemns a program, he's laughed at.

The listowel case-it wasn't because he had raped anyone. If it had been an assault (a physical beating), they'd have turned up there too. And everyone was appalled by that, and the priest who went there too-further signs of how the church has lost respect.
Those people who shook his hand were scorned and mocked for their idiocy. You couldn't find 50 people to shake one of those people's hands.

But go further up the country-when Tim Allen's wife Darina stood by her paedophile husband Tim, in court, as he was convicted of possession of child pornography. What happened to Darina? Oh, she got a show with RTE (Which they tried to defend in the most ridiculous way possible) And people walked up to her, and hugged her, at farmer's markets.
Her husband paid for images of children being molested and raped-and she was the victim?
Is that rape culture too?