Al Porter Scandal

DickSwiveller

david75 wrote: »

‘Ah poor sex predator getting a hard time. Heart goes out to him.’

He deserves the abuse he’s getting. The defence of him is baffling to me

"Sex predator" Jesus, calm down. He's not Sidney Cooke.

Bunny Colvin

He's finished. No one is going to take the chance of employing him again. Imagine if he was hired by someone and got up to his tricks again, it would be even worse because it was public knowledge what he was like. Why even take the chance?

I've no sympathy for him.

Cienciano

SnakePlissken wrote: »

So such an attack on a woman would be rightly classed as a sexual assault which should by all means be reported to the Gardai, but when it happens to "a lad" it's just bantz?

Jesus wept, I've no idea what decade your mindset is stuck in, but should I ever be so unfortunate to be assaulted in such a manner I will most certainly not meekly brush it off.

Sexual assault is equally reprehensible whether the victim is male or female.

Depends on the person it happens to. I'm a guy, if a girl grabbed my arse in a nightclub I'm not going to go to the gardai and file a sexual assault charge. If she grabbed my cock I won't do it either. If al porter did it I couldn't really give a rats ass, it wouldn't really bother me tbh. Depends on the person it's happened to, circumstance and the way it happened is important. If I was in work and a supervisor did the exact same thing it would be different. Circumstances surrounding the incident is everything.

SnakePlissken

Cienciano wrote: »

SnakePlissken wrote: »

So such an attack on a woman would be rightly classed as a sexual assault which should by all means be reported to the Gardai, but when it happens to "a lad" it's just bantz?

Jesus wept, I've no idea what decade your mindset is stuck in, but should I ever be so unfortunate to be assaulted in such a manner I will most certainly not meekly brush it off.

Sexual assault is equally reprehensible whether the victim is male or female.

Depends on the person it happens to. I'm a guy, if a girl grabbed my arse in a nightclub I'm not going to go to the gardai and file a sexual assault charge. If she grabbed my cock I won't do it either. If al porter did it I couldn't really give a rats ass, it wouldn't really bother me tbh. Depends on the person it's happened to, circumstance and the way it happened is important. If I was in work and a supervisor did the exact same thing it would be different. Circumstances surrounding the incident is everything.

Just to be clear, we're not talking a sly slap across the arse here, my comment was in relation to someone putting their hands beneath clothing and physically grabbing the penis.

Do you not consider this sexual assault?

Beechwoodspark

waylander2002 wrote: »

Ive seen some messages sent to a 15 yr old boy he met at a olpympia , totally in appropriate from a adult to a chld. Also did the crotch grabbing and a request for phone number and facebook details. What a silly man losing everything like that.

Wow. If true that's a very serious allegation to add to the already extensive charge sheet. 15 is below the age of consent.

gramar

SnakePlissken wrote: »

Just to be clear, we're not talking a sly slap across the arse here, my comment was in relation to someone putting their hands beneath clothing and physically grabbing the penis.

Do you not consider this sexual assault?

It can't be that easy to put your hands down the front of someone's pants if they're in front of you without them stopping you if they wanted.

david75

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Wow. If true that's a very serious allegation to add to the already extensive charge sheet. 15 is below the age of consent.

Also screenshots of him laying it on heavy in a message to a guy (saying he’s got a bag of coke and gonna lick his hole etc. The screenshots are the nail in the coffin. No judgement on the coke thing it’s blatantly obvious any time you see him he’s flying but hey it’s just to help his flamboyant personality.

Cienciano

SnakePlissken wrote: »

Just to be clear, we're not talking a sly slap across the arse here, my comment was in relation to someone putting their hands beneath clothing and physically grabbing the penis.

Do you not consider this sexual assault?

It's hard to relate to this one because it would be impossible to just put your hand down my jeans. Assuming it's in a pub, I'd need to be wearing a tracksuit, and if it did happen I wouldn't be too bothered about it tbh. If it was done in work I'd be annoyed alright. I wouldn't go to the police about it either. More a HR thing.

is that true?? WTF!!! bags of coke ha ha ha

I had to laugh at matt cooper, the whole thing was very moot yesterday and they just outlined the timeline of events. When trump was caught just talking about being able to grab a woman downstairs, Matt cooper was on a orn for days...impeach impeach!! he's a sexual predator etc etc!!!! now we have a Today FM member acutally being reported for really grabbing guys by the mickey and it's cough cough, eh 2 minute statement but no discussion!!! for legal reasons me hole!

showpony1

waylander2002 wrote: »

Ive seen some messages sent to a 15 yr old boy he met at a olpympia , totally in appropriate from a adult to a chld. Also did the crotch grabbing and a request for phone number and facebook details. What a silly man losing everything like that.

has he been found to be going after minors now too?

SnakePlissken

Cienciano wrote: »

SnakePlissken wrote: »

Just to be clear, we're not talking a sly slap across the arse here, my comment was in relation to someone putting their hands beneath clothing and physically grabbing the penis.

Do you not consider this sexual assault?

It's hard to relate to this one because it would be impossible to just put your hand down my jeans. Assuming it's in a pub, I'd need to be wearing a tracksuit, and if it did happen I wouldn't be too bothered about it tbh. If it was done in work I'd be annoyed alright. I wouldn't go to the police about it either. More a HR thing.

So if one was to do the same to a woman, i.e. place their hand beneath her clothing and physically grab her vagina, she should also just shrug such an attack off?

Noveight

rusty cole wrote: »

I had to laugh at matt cooper, the whole thing was very moot yesterday and they just outlined the timeline of events. When trump was caught just talking about being able to grab a woman downstairs, Matt cooper was on a orn for days...impeach impeach!! he's a sexual predator etc etc!!!! now we have a Today FM member acutally being reported for really grabbing guys by the mickey and it's cough cough, eh 2 minute statement but no discussion!!! for legal reasons me hole!

Not surprising, unfortunately. Cooper would draw a target on his own back if he added to Porter being thrown under the bus.

Noveight

Noveight wrote: »

Not surprising, unfortunately. Cooper would draw a target on his own back if he added to Porter being thrown under the bus.

how so?? are the dying to lay him off? good, he's an arse!! cant stand him.

david75

He or his manager seem to have invested in twitter defence. Endless amounts of obviously bots / fake accounts defending him on there.

splinter65

Joanna Poor Teardrop wrote: »

He'll play the homophobic attack card and then they'd get into trouble

I think he would have just absolutely loved that.
You can dine out in that for 40 years.

Grayditch

Don't mind them, Al. Don't mind the people angry at you sexualtiy assaulting people. We stand by you!!!

I wouldn't have expected people who like Al Porter to be showing great judgement in any aspect of their life, so I'm not that shocked at the absolute mutants on twitter, sailing through any cognitive dissonance.

Come back Al. Nobody else is good at making painful jokes about everything shaped even mildly phallic!

Muahahaha

cisk wrote: »

The groping and forced kissing of the young lad in the psychiatric ward is very Jimmy Savile. Abusing someone that vulnerable is pretty sickening.

Thats what I thought. Or Father Brendan Smith who once sexually abused a young girl in her own bedroom while she was bedridden with the flu.

Now that there are Facebook screenshots of Porter sniffing around a 15 year old Im beginning to wonder if he had other dealings with minors that have yet to come out?

LollipopJimmy

Muahahaha wrote: »

Thats what I thought. Or Father Brendan Smith who once sexually abused a young girl in her own bedroom while she was bedridden with the flu.

Now that there are Facebook screenshots of Porter sniffing around a 15 year old Im beginning to wonder if he had other dealings with minors that have yet to come out?

Given the speed of the resignations I can't help but wonder if there are skeletons under the bed that he's hoping will stay there if he keeps out of the limelight. Hopefully not

tayto lover

Never heard of him until this surfaced so he can't be that famous.
If he's guilty then I don't want to hear of him again except when he's being locked up.

seamus

jack hackett wrote: »

Why is that these sex pests are always men? like you will never see a headline saying Paula McSweeney caught being a sex pest or Muireann O Connell groped a member of Bellx1 in studio? What really annoys me is that Paula McSweeney is shoved into the 5am slot just so todayfm can say that they employee female presenters and Muireann O Connell, who should have actually got the lunchtime gig instead of Porter, she gets shoved around filling holes everywhere, dermot and dave get more holidays than teachers and she fills in and Porter was always off anyway so she may as well have been the lunchtime presenter, Todayfm need to learn from this hard lesson.

Arguably there are even higher barriers to men making a complaint about a woman doing the same thing. The popular perception that if an attractive and friendly woman gave you a little cupping or stuck her hands down your pants, you should be glad of the attention. And if you don't like you must be a pussy or a fag.

Look at the posts here asking why the victims didn't fight back. If you're a man assaulted by a woman, what's your excuse? Even myself, I think ..might...tell my wife, but I may not go to the Gardai. Even telling my wife is a "depends". If it could be twisted in such a way that it suggested I've been cheating, I might be forced to keep it to myself.

I would also suggest that the raw volume of sexual assaults by women on men is lower than men on women, simply down to very basic factors like size, strength and authority. That is, sexual assaults are more likely to happen when the abuser is in a position of power - physically, professionally or socially - over the abused. And men occupy these positions more than women do.

_Brian

gramar wrote: »

It can't be that easy to put your hands down the front of someone's pants if they're in front of you without them stopping you if they wanted.

Classic victim blaming.

This is what the likes of Jimmy Savile and countless other predators have preyed upon for decades.


This folks is how monsters are continuously allowed to roam free even after being accused of their heinous crimes.

Potential victims have come out and made serious credible accusations, Porter excused his actions as him just being flamboyant, but never denied nor really apologised for them. And yet, there are those among us that will see it as the victims fault for not stopping him.

david75

_Brian wrote: »

Classic victim blaming.

This is what the likes of Jimmy Savile and countless other predators have preyed upon for decades.


This folks is how monsters are continuously allowed to roam free even after being accused of their heinous crimes.

Potential victims have come out and made serious credible accusations, Porter excused his actions but never denied nor apologised for them. And yet, there are those among us that will see it as the victims fault for not stopping him.

Have to agree. Just because it’s never happened to you personally, you can’t understand how it’s possible so therefore it isn’t posisble?

Seriously?

Cienciano

SnakePlissken wrote: »

So if one was to do the same to a woman, i.e. place their hand beneath her clothing and physically grab her vagina, she should also just shrug such an attack off?

That's the exact opposite of what I said. I said it depends on the person and the circumstances.

FrancieBrady

The public are not going to be saved I see.
Rory Cowan to take over his role in de Panto.

splinter65

Grayditch wrote: »

Don't mind them, Al. Don't mind the people angry at you sexualtiy assaulting people. We stand by you!!!

I wouldn't have expected people who like Al Porter to be showing great judgement in any aspect of their life, so I'm not that shocked at the absolute mutants on twitter, sailing through any cognitive dissonance.

Come back Al. Nobody else is good at making painful jokes about everything shaped even mildly phallic!

Dry ****e holy feckin joes ! This country would sicken ya!

Cienciano

So if one was to do the same to a woman, i.e. place their hand beneath her clothing and physically grab her vagina, she should also just shrug such an attack off?

Cienciano wrote: »

That's the exact opposite of what I said. I said it depends on the person and the circumstances.

gramar

_Brian wrote: »

Classic victim blaming.

This is what the likes of Jimmy Savile and countless other predators have preyed upon for decades.


This folks is how monsters are continuously allowed to roam free even after being accused of their heinous crimes.

Potential victims have come out and made serious credible accusations, Porter excused his actions as him just being flamboyant, but never denied nor really apologised for them. And yet, there are those among us that will see it as the victims fault for not stopping him.

I'm not blaming the 'potential' victims as you call them. Just questioning the veracity and credibility of the claims.

splinter65

gramar wrote: »

I'm not blaming the 'potential' victims as you call them. Just questioning the veracity and credibility of the claims.

But the accused has acknowledged that the “assaults” actually happened, he just chooses to regard the incidents as slapstick tomfoolery in keeping with his public persona.
As far as can be ascertained from his “statement” the veracity and credibility is not in question on the accusers side at all.
It’s the interpretation of his behavior that he objects to.

tinpib

Apparently the Secret RTE Producer on Twitter is going to tell all about Al working on Electric Picnic last year. @rtesecretpro

SnakePlissken

SnakePlissken wrote: »

Just to be clear, we're not talking a sly slap across the arse here, my comment was in relation to someone putting their hands beneath clothing and physically grabbing the penis.

Do you not consider this sexual assault?

Cienciano wrote: »

I'm a guy, if a girl grabbed my arse in a nightclub I'm not going to go to the gardai and file a sexual assault charge. If she grabbed my cock I won't do it either.

Cienciano wrote: »

I wouldn't be too bothered about it tbh. If it was done in work I'd be annoyed alright. I wouldn't go to the police about it either. More a HR thing.

SnakePlissken wrote: »

So if one was to do the same to a woman, i.e. place their hand beneath her clothing and physically grab her vagina, she should also just shrug such an attack off?

Cienciano wrote: »

That's the exact opposite of what I said. I said it depends on the person and the circumstances.

I really don't understand your reasoning, you clearly stated you don't believe it's a matter for the police if a man is to have a stranger's hand thrust down their pants and their private's molested, but when drawn for an answer whether you're of the belief that this does indeed constitute sexual assault when the victim is female you claim I've misunderstood you.

Capajoma

Could anyone PM me the screenshots of the whatsapp/facebook conversations?

Thank You.

gramar

Capajoma wrote: »

Could anyone PM me the screenshots of the whatsapp/facebook conversations?

Thank You.

That is of course what most are interested in and not the largely faux outrage on behalf of the 'victims'.

pjohnson

gramar wrote: »

That is of course what most are interested in and not the largely faux outrage on behalf of the 'victims'.

Yes lets get annoyed at the people who got groped. Not the groper. Flamboyant groping is cool.

Cienciano

SnakePlissken wrote: »

I really don't understand your reasoning, you clearly stated you don't believe it's a matter for the police if a man is to have a stranger's hand thrust down their pants and their private's molested, but when drawn for an answer whether you're of the belief that this does indeed constitute sexual assault when the victim is female you claim I've misunderstood you.

Where did I clearly state that? copy and paste the line, because I never said that. I repeatedly said I said it depends on the person and the circumstances how it effects people. It's not black and white.

Adamocovic

K.Flyer wrote: »

What I am trying to figure out is this. If said allegations did take place why didn't any of his accusers, individually or collectively, take it to the Garda if they felt so offended, outraged and distraught about it and have him charged or cautioned, instead of running to the papers with it years later.

There may well be a few people wanting attention, but I'd say a lot didn't go to the Garda because of the reaction they expected to get.

It sounds bizarre, and I'm trying to phrase it in the best way possible, but personally think that despite the fact that what he did was sexual assault many people to register the same severity to it due to the fact that sexual assault like this, against men is something that wouldn't have previously been as widely reported. I think growing up it may be something people overlook a little leading to it not being taken as seriously. Obviously that's changing.

It's easy for us to question why they didn't go straight to the Garda, but I can understand why they wouldn't.

This isn't related to the above, but some of the comments he reportedly made while he did it were extremely creepy.

Foxtrol

Surprised and disappointed by Colm O’Gorman’s response to this. Not sure how he can be in his role as head of Amnesty International and give what amounts to a character reference to Al Porter. I wonder how he would feel if his abuser was called ‘kind and decent’.

It’s a stark contrast to how O’Gorman was one of the lead torchbearers against George Hook for his poorly chosen words. Al doing some fund raisers for him must be enough to get some special dispensation from outrage from the SJW.

pilly

Foxtrol wrote: »

Surprised and disappointed by Colm O’Gorman’s response to this. Not sure how he can be in his role as head of Amnesty International and give what amounts to a character reference to Al Porter. I wonder how he would feel if his abuser was called ‘kind and decent’.

It’s a stark contrast to how O’Gorman was one of the lead torchbearers against George Hook for his poorly chosen words. Al doing some fund raisers for him must be enough to get some special dispensation from outrage from the SJW.

I've no idea who Colm O'Gorman is? But the amount of people on this thread somehow trying to compare it to the George Hook situation is unreal!!!

The two situations are completely different, what have they even got to do with each other?

cloudatlas

Foxtrol wrote: »

Surprised and disappointed by Colm O’Gorman’s response to this. Not sure how he can be in his role as head of Amnesty International and give what amounts to a character reference to Al Porter. I wonder how he would feel if his abuser was called ‘kind and decent’.

It’s a stark contrast to how O’Gorman was one of the lead torchbearers against George Hook for his poorly chosen words. Al doing some fund raisers for him must be enough to get some special dispensation from outrage from the SJW.

What response?

All I found was the following - "To be absolutely and unequivocally clear, any person, whoever they are who commits sexual assault needs to be held to account. Without exception. And again, the men who spoke out about Al Porter must be heard and taken seriously." Colm O'Gorman

Adamocovic

Cienciano wrote: »

Where did I clearly state that? copy and paste the line, because I never said that. I repeatedly said I said it depends on the person and the circumstances how it effects people. It's not black and white.

I understand what you are saying about context, those situations are consensual ones, but surely this specific situation is black and white.

Al Porter may chalk it down as joking around but clearly the men who came forward didn't find it that way. It was groping. Plain and simple it seems.

seamus

pilly wrote: »

I've no idea who Colm O'Gorman is? But the amount of people on this thread somehow trying to compare it to the George Hook situation is unreal!!!

The two situations are completely different, what have they even got to do with each other?

One were actual statements, recorded and verifiable, by George Hook, which were not criminal, but incredibly ignorant and insensitive.

The other are allegations of criminal behaviour, unverified and unproven, of sexual assault.

How anyone can rationally expect the media to respond to both in the same way, I don't know. One has legal constraints on what you can discuss, the other does not.

Of course, all of those people whinging about it aren't really interested in rights and wrongs. Like all conservatives and right-wingers, it's about scoring points and proving hypocrisy, not about looking at ethics and morals.

splinter65

pilly wrote: »

I've no idea who Colm O'Gorman is? But the amount of people on this thread somehow trying to compare it to the George Hook situation is unreal!!!

The two situations are completely different, what have they even got to do with each other?

You’ve got it wrong.
People on this thread are comparing the public REACTION to George Hook expressing an unpopular opinion ( some were calling for George to be arrested) to the reaction to a psychiatric patient alleging that Al Porter molested him (Colm O’Gorman the head of Amnesty Ireland, himself a survivor of clerical sexual abuse has given a character reference to Al) .
The fact is G Hook is a white straight male Christian man.
Al Porter is gay.

Trond

Porters Facebook page is actually scary. The sheer amount of people blindly defending him.

Whoever made the comparison with McGregors fans who refuse to acknowledge his wrong doings is a great shout.

20Cent

splinter65 wrote: »

You’ve got it wrong.
People on this thread are comparing the public REACTION to George Hook expressing an unpopular opinion ( some were calling for George to be arrested) to the reaction to a psychiatric patient alleging that Al Porter molested him (Colm O’Gorman the head of Amnesty Ireland, himself a survivor of clerical sexual abuse has given a character reference to Al) .
The fact is G Hook is a white straight male Christian man.
Al Porter is gay.

O Gorman's response seems to be unequivocal someone above posted it.

Got a link to what amounts to a character reference?

pilly

splinter65 wrote: »

You’ve got it wrong.
People on this thread are comparing the public REACTION to George Hook expressing an unpopular opinion ( some were calling for George to be arrested) to the reaction to a psychiatric patient alleging that Al Porter molested him (Colm O’Gorman the head of Amnesty Ireland, himself a survivor of clerical sexual abuse has given a character reference to Al) .
The fact is G Hook is a white straight male Christian man.
Al Porter is gay.

No, still don't see any comparison between the 2 situations?

Seems to me just Hook apologists thinking "yayy, look what Al Porter the big gay fella did". Childish in the extreme.

By the way, I never called for Hook to be arrested and I don't recall anyone else doing so but if they did that's obviously ridiculous.

splinter65

seamus wrote: »

One were actual statements, recorded and verifiable, by George Hook, which were not criminal, but incredibly ignorant and insensitive.

The other are allegations of criminal behaviour, unverified and unproven, of sexual assault.

How anyone can rationally expect the media to respond to both in the same way, I don't know. One has legal constraints on what you can discuss, the other does not.

Of course, all of those people whinging about it aren't really interested in rights and wrongs. Like all conservatives and right-wingers, it's about scoring points and proving hypocrisy, not about looking at ethics and morals.

You thought Hooks comments were ignorant and you found them insensitive.
It’s just your opinion that Hook is ignorant and your feelings were hurt.
There was widespread condemnation of G Hook through the left wing media.
Al Porter hasn’t denied any of the allegations. Rather, he has sought to imply that his exuberance has been misinterpreted in some way and that his accusers have not been fair to him.
And there’s silence from Matt Cooper and Mary Coughlan and all who found G Hooks opinion (as you did) so terribly unbearably unpalatable.
Al Porters “apology” is not ignorant or insensitive apparently, but George Hooks comments were.

seamus

splinter65 wrote: »

And there’s silence from Matt Cooper and Mary Coughlan and all who found G Hooks opinion (as you did) so terribly unbearably unpalatable.
Al Porters “apology” is not ignorant or insensitive apparently, but George Hooks comments were.

Al Porter is accused of crimes. Hook was not.

I have already criticised Porter's ridiculous statement. People in the media don't have the same luxury. Any implication that they believe that Porter is guilty of the allegations could have them sued.

This is a double standard - on your part. Taking two entirely different scenarios and criticising the media for not reacting in the same way to both of them.

But since you're already spreading lies about Golm O'Gorman, and obsessing over Matt Cooper and George Hook, I have to assume that you're not interesting in engaging here but rather only interested in pushing a lame right-wing/left-wing argument.

splinter65

splinter65 wrote: »

You thought Hooks comments were ignorant and you found them insensitive.
It’s just your opinion that Hook is ignorant and your feelings were hurt.
There was widespread condemnation of G Hook through the left wing media.
Al Porter hasn’t denied any of the allegations. Rather, he has sought to imply that his exuberance has been misinterpreted in some way and that his accusers have not been fair to him.
And there’s silence from Matt Cooper and Mary Coughlan and all who found G Hooks opinion (as you did) so terribly unbearably unpalatable.
Al Porters “apology” is not ignorant or insensitive apparently, but George Hooks comments were.

I agree with the Matt cooper thing definitely splinter. Post Trump winning the election, he was constantly calling him out as a serial sex assaulter and ignoring the Clinton sex scandals. Trump is a sexist and a racist etc but lets not look too close to home as to who's lurking by the punch bowl at this years Xmas do!!

Al porter "Looking forward to a few nights of festive cheer at Taylors Three Rock , this will be my last stand up of 2017 before I announce big news for 2018" ......... ouch..this is awkward!

Foxtrol

pilly wrote: »

I've no idea who Colm O'Gorman is? But the amount of people on this thread somehow trying to compare it to the George Hook situation is unreal!!!

The two situations are completely different, what have they even got to do with each other?

He is an abuse survivor who is one of the well known campaigners for victims of sexual violence and go-to people for the media to go to on that topic. For some reason he has come out and called Al Porter ‘kind and decent’ which is totally perplexing and disappointing.

I fully agree that the two situations are completely different but the response from people who were outraged by Hook and staying quiet or supportive on this, much more serious, unrefuted allegation is clear hypocrisy.

seamus

Foxtrol wrote: »

He is an abuse survivor who is one of the well known campaigners for victims of sexual violence and go-to people for the media to go to on that topic. For some reason he has come out and called Al Porter ‘kind and decent’ which is totally perplexing and disappointing.

I fully agree that the two situations are completely different but the response from people who were outraged by Hook and staying quiet or supportive on this, much more serious, unrefuted allegation is clear hypocrisy.

Here you go. Just in case anyone wants to continue spreading this lie that Colm O'Gorman is on Porter's "side":
https://twitter.com/Colmogorman/status/932349587217674240

Anyone who claims that this is a "defence" of Porter or a character reference, clearly refuses to see beyond their own anti-liberal nonsense.

gramar

Foxtrol wrote: »

He is an abuse survivor who is one of the well known campaigners for victims of sexual violence and go-to people for the media to go to on that topic. For some reason he has come out and called Al Porter ‘kind and decent’ which is totally perplexing and disappointing.

I fully agree that the two situations are completely different but the response from people who were outraged by Hook and staying quiet or supportive on this, much more serious, unrefuted allegation is clear hypocrisy.

Everyone heard what Hook said. Here all people have to go on for now are allegations so are biding their time before they have to be seen to be outraged.