The Snapper-debate

Here we go

Interesting debate haven't got a great memory of it so I'll not get off the fence yet the debate reminds me of an episode of law and order SVU where a guy pretended to be a principal in a top collage and women slept with him willingly in return to get there kid in and the argument being they where decived into it but willing and have men not exaggerated stories in bars for years to come across more attractive to women was there a difference in this and say telling a women in a bar you had a slitly better job then you did to empress her

the_pen_turner

Here we go wrote: »

Interesting debate haven't got a great memory of it so I'll not get off the fence yet the debate reminds me of an episode of law and order SVU where a guy pretended to be a principal in a top collage and women slept with him willingly in return to get there kid in and the argument being they where decived into it but willing and have men not exaggerated stories in bars for years to come across more attractive to women was there a difference in this and say telling a women in a bar you had a slitly better job then you did to empress her

barney Stinson is going to be seen in a whole new light in a few years time. at this rate he is a serial rapist having duped thousands of women into bed with him. god only knows what they will say about his play book

TheChizler

LadyMacBeth_ wrote: »

I'm not sure if he was drunk as well? If that was the case then it certainly isn't rape. If he was sober then I still don't think it was rape but I do think it was taking advantage of a drunk woman

Having rewatched I'm not fully sure what I think, but can you expand on what you mean here? Are you saying there could be a point at which sex may or may not be rape depending on the level of drunkenness of the accused? How does the accused's state of mind affect the victim's ability to give consent?

I'm taking in general terms here not strictly about the scene.

the_pen_turner

TheChizler wrote: »

Having rewatched I'm not fully sure what I think, but can you expand on what you mean here? Are you saying there could be a point at which sex may or may not be rape depending on the level of drunkenness of the accused? How does the accused's state of mind affect the victim's ability to give consent?

I'm taking in general terms here not strictly about the scene.

if you look at it black and white like that it is very hard to argue that it should make a difference

in the scene though it is consensual sex one is mildly drunk the other we are not sure about. TV doesn't look like it but the book he is. but 2 drunk people having sex its hard to say that one raped the other because of being drunk and not have it so both are being raped

StupidLikeAFox

Watched this over Christmas and was surprised at the number of times Sharon got locked whilst pregnant, and it is never commented on or mentioned in the film. Surely this wasn't normal even in the 80s?

Jesus Wept

HOW am I the first person to point out that this is Pat Mustard.
Sharon was blessed that Pat Mustard put his massive tool in her box.
A1.

Barry Badrinath

Jesus Wept wrote: »

HOW am I the first person to point out that this is Pat Mustard.
Sharon was blessed that Pat Mustard put his massive tool in her box.
A1.

Youre not

Jesus Wept

Barry Badrinath wrote: »

Youre not

ah baz.

TheChizler

the_pen_turner wrote: »

if you look at it black and white like that it is very hard to argue that it should make a difference

in the scene though it is consensual sex one is mildly drunk the other we are not sure about. TV doesn't look like it but the book he is. but 2 drunk people having sex its hard to say that one raped the other because of being drunk and not have it so both are being raped

I dunno I wouldn't call her mildly drunk, she could hardly walk a few seconds previously, could barely slur the word "man" when she saw him, and didn't seem to comprehend what had happened a few seconds after. In his defence I suppose he didn't see all the viewer has seen and from his point of view might have had no reason to believe he was doing anything wrong, in the few seconds he saw her maybe she seemed perfectly sober. He certainly felt she wasn't "all right" though hence asking her.

I'd agree you probably couldnt call it rape when 2 people are so out of their minds drunk that neither would be capable of consenting equally but were still equal participants (not exactly sure what that would look like), but here their states of drunk are so wildly different I don't think that could come in to it.

the_pen_turner

TheChizler wrote: »

I dunno I wouldn't call her mildly drunk, she could hardly walk a few seconds previously, could barely slur the word "man" when she saw him, and didn't seem to comprehend what had happened a few seconds after. In his defence I suppose he didn't see all the viewer has seen and from his point of view might have had no reason to believe he was doing anything wrong, in the few seconds he saw her maybe she seemed perfectly sober. He certainly felt she wasn't "all right" though hence asking her.

I'd agree you probably couldnt call it rape when 2 people are so out of their minds drunk that neither would be capable of consenting equally but were still equal participants (not exactly sure what that would look like), but here their states of drunk are so wildly different I don't think that could come in to it.

I'm using mildly drunk specifically to differentiate between her condition and being totally off her tree passed out drunk

Peregrinus

TheChizler wrote: »

Having rewatched I'm not fully sure what I think, but can you expand on what you mean here? Are you saying there could be a point at which sex may or may not be rape depending on the level of drunkenness of the accused? How does the accused's state of mind affect the victim's ability to give consent?

I'm taking in general terms here not strictly about the scene.

For the accused to be convicted of rape (or, in general, any serious crime) he has to have the necessary intent. Thus, it's not enough that Sharon was too drunk to consent; George had to be aware that she was too drunk to consent.

If I have sex with you in the dark in the mistaken belief that you are my spouse, I am not consenting to sex with you. If you know of my misunderstanding but carry on regardless, you'll be convicted of rape. But if you don't know, if you think I'm just someone who likes to have sex with strangers in the dark, you won't be convicted. So, yeah, the accused's knowledge is a relevant factor.

TheChizler

I agree knowledge and intent comes into it, but I was talking about being drunk specifically, same amount of knowledge involved.

Peregrinus

TheChizler wrote: »

I agree knowledge and intent comes into it, but I was talking about being drunk specifically, same amount of knowledge involved.

Well, in principle it's possible to be too drunk to be aware that another person is also too drunk to consent to sex.

(Not that I'm saying this is the case represented in the George/Sharon scene.)

ChunkyLover54

Deleted User wrote: »

It's hardly rape. She initiated it and didn't tell him to stop. Consent was given and not withdrawn. It's an indication of 'poor' judgment for both parties but not rape.

Excellent judgement m'lud.

ChunkyLover54

LadyMacBeth_ wrote: »

I've never watched the film but I watched the clip.

What?! Seriously watch the whole film online somewhere today, it's brilliant.

Peregrinus

StupidLikeAFox wrote: »

Watched this over Christmas and was surprised at the number of times Sharon got locked whilst pregnant, and it is never commented on or mentioned in the film. Surely this wasn't normal even in the 80s?

It was not. I'm old enough to remember watching the film on its first release. I watched it with an American relative who noted the amount of drinking-while-pregnant, and assumed the plot was setting up some point about the associated dangers, or about attitudes to them, but of course this never happens.

The focus of the book is on the relationship between Sharon and her father Jimmy, and he's presented as being comically ignorant about every aspect of pregnancy (despite having fathered six children himself). So it's entirely credible that he wouldn't be aware that drinking is discouraged during pregnancy, and the reasons why. But the readers/audience would certainly have known.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Deleted User wrote: »

pgj2015 wrote: »

but even worse as a young woman would be very unlikely to go for an old creep like burgess,

I suspect We have all ended up with people we wouldn't normally go for... both while drunk and sober. I know I would rather forget a few memories of women I discovered or remembered the 'following' morning... :rolleyes:

Frankly... I find it annoying that people can't take responsibility for their own choices. If I'm drunk and do something terrible... I'm responsible as a man. Being drunk is a factor, but I'm still responsible for what happens. If a woman does the same, then there's all manner of excuses being thrown out in her 'defense'.

Not strictly true.

You're always responsible for what you do, and for the state of drunkiness you're in, yes; but not what someone else does to you. There is a difference.

cursai

I'm never getting drunk and having sex with a drunk girl again. It's like firing off skuds over Japan.

kneemos

He wouldn't be prosecuted for rape=therefore not rape.

QED.

BillyBobBS

It's getting to the stage where lads will need to get the ladies to blow into a breathalyzer before they blow them.

Katgurl

Christ, really?!

I have many regrettable incidents from my youth that I have forced myself to forget (if I could remember in the first place.)

I did give myself a few stern talking tos over the years and overhauled my drinking habits.

I wouldn't dream of trying to pin blame on someone who went along with it.

Certainly it would be a more appealing explanation than being witnessed having sex with creepy old Burgess on the bonnet of a car.

Maybe it is considered rape in today's society. It wouldn't be my personal view and I think she is accountable for the state she was in and her subsequent actions.

NIMAN

Has anyone posted this clip yet?

Hector Savage

Repsulive wrote: »

A friend was teaching English to adults in Sweden. He played this movie in class. One of his students reported him to the principal.

Wow.

Swedens response is very "Pennywise pound foolish" on all of this.

They bring in laws that say sex without EXPLICIT CONSENT is rape ???
This is there way to deal with the huge spike in sexual violence in Sweden.

Ignoring the elephant in the room...

andekwarhola

I mildly resent having to think strenuously about anything by Roddy Doyle.

LadyMacBeth_

TheChizler wrote: »

Having rewatched I'm not fully sure what I think, but can you expand on what you mean here? Are you saying there could be a point at which sex may or may not be rape depending on the level of drunkenness of the accused? How does the accused's state of mind affect the victim's ability to give consent?

I'm taking in general terms here not strictly about the scene.

Well I think that if both people are quite drunk and they engage in consensual sex, I don't see why it is considered rape. Some argue that the woman was too drunk to consent but if the man is as drunk as her then surely the same could be said for him.

razorblunt

Don't get me started on the scene in 40 Days and 40 Nights too.

Actually don't get me started on that movie in general.

B.A._Baracus

It ain't fecking rape.
Yes, she's clearly too drunk and burgess should have said as such. But what did she say when she looked at him?.... "a man" - she was horny. She was drunk. Mistakes happen

Because if anyone think that's rape then there are millions of rapists out there every weekend in this world.

Adamocovic

When does the trial begin?

Hector Savage

the_pen_turner wrote: »

just remembered a funny story from school
we watched the snapper that year and It went viral in the school (or what ever the 20 year ago version was) .
one of the guys in class was always quoting it in other classes , just mild ones mostly.
he said one to one of the soundest youngest teachers and we all had a laugh. that evening we were queuing up for the bus . the teacher must have planed it or it was a stroke of timing but as he drove out the student walked across to the bus. he rolled down the window and roared out GET OUT OF ME WAY YA BLEEDIN BOLLIX.
the hole area burst into laughter. brilliant.

By any chance was the school in North Dublin ? - Dublin 13 area ?

Kermit.de.frog

Wheety wrote: »

Yup.

Also people tend to forget about the attempted rape in Back to the Future :eek:

Which scene was this? In the car?

Hector Savage

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Which scene was this? In the car?

Yeah, the scene with Biff presumably.

Odyssey 2005

Maybe that's why colm meany changed his name and went on the run.....in space.;(

Ralf and Florian

Ralf and Florian wrote: »

BTW has anyone mentioned that Mr Burgess is also Pat Mustard in Fr Ted? "I'm a very careful man".

Jesus Wept wrote: »

HOW am I the first person to point out that this is Pat Mustard.
Sharon was blessed that Pat Mustard put his massive tool in her box.
A1.

You're not.

optogirl

SimpleDimples wrote: »

She was clearly too drunk to consent to anything.

as well as the fact that he's her friends's Dad - the onus was on him to stay well clear of it

AndrewJRenko

Deleted User wrote: »

It's hardly rape. She initiated it and didn't tell him to stop. Consent was given and not withdrawn. It's an indication of 'poor' judgment for both parties but not rape.

How/where/when did she give consent to have sex, specifically?

Omackeral

Some people in this thread are like this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9IlKM_3JSs

It was a drunken ride, anyone who thinks it is even on the same planet as rape needs to have serious think about themselves.

Roger Hassenforder

Ralf and Florian wrote: »

You're not.

Youre not even the first person to point out that hes not the first person to point out the Mustard-Burgess connection !

Roger Hassenforder

Hector Savage wrote: »

Yeah, the scene with Biff presumably.

And that was an actual/imminent sexual assault.

danganabu

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

It ain't fecking rape.
Yes, she's clearly too drunk and burgess should have said as such. But what did she say when she looked at him?.... "a man" - she was horny. She was drunk. Mistakes happen

Because if anyone think that's rape then there are millions of rapists out there every weekend in this world.

Exactly and I myself a 30 something male have been ''raped'' too many times to remember, and will be slightly dissapointed if I'm not ''raped'' the next good saturday night out!

TheChizler

danganabu wrote: »

Exactly and I myself a 30 something male have been ''raped'' too many times to remember, and will be slightly dissapointed if I'm not ''raped'' the next good saturday night out!

Nobody's saying being drunk automatically means rape, it's being drunk to the extent of not being able to give consent is what is the problem. It's hard to define but personally I wouldn't be comfortable having sex with someone who was having difficulty standing and could barely register anything about me apart from my gender.

That said Pat Mustard possibly didn't realise that before doing the deed but I'd like to think people take more than 4 seconds to assess someone before riding them these days.

the_pen_turner

Hector Savage wrote: »

By any chance was the school in North Dublin ? - Dublin 13 area ?

no school in tipp

danganabu

TheChizler wrote: »

Nobody's saying being drunk automatically means rape, it's being drunk to the extent of not being able to give consent is what is the problem. It's hard to define but personally I wouldn't be comfortable having sex with someone who was having difficulty standing and could barely register anything about me apart from my gender.

That was my understanding of what you were describing as well

sbsquarepants

the_pen_turner wrote: »

it would be more to her not being my type or not liking half drunk women.

Me either, if they can't even commit to getting rat arsed, they ain't going to commit to you my friend.

Hector Savage wrote: »

Ignoring the elephant in the room...

Which is?

Aidan Hot Hill wrote: »

It was a drunken ride, anyone who thinks it is even on the same planet as rape needs to have serious think about themselves.

Planet of the rapes - now there's a movie:D

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

kneemos wrote: »

He wouldn't be prosecuted for rape=therefore not rape.

QED.

There's most certainly enough evidence for a prosecution there. Not necessarily a conviction, though. Problem is, you never ever know what way a rape case is going to go.

Hector Bellend

He could have gone deep in the gick pipe.

Twice as quick and no babies.

Tried and tested.

Gwynplaine

Did you not see me over by the vegetables

Steve F

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MR4vk9xnomE

Ha ha !!!

SEANoftheDEAD

TheChizler wrote: »

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

Okay, let's pretend this has gone to court and this video was presented.

Sharon falls out of the hotel clearly under the influeance.

There appears to be some sort of celebrations taking place (Local football team winning a cup?) and just outside the door her friend Jackie is getting it on with some lad. Sharon smiles at this and probably starts thinking that she wouldn't mind a bit of the same.

While sitting on the bonnet of a car having a drink, her neighbour Mr. Burgess approches and first asks her if she is alright in what appears to be asked out of concern. She responds by going towards him and ends up kissing him.

Now we know Georgie is a manager of the football team so it is unclear if he is drunk or not, but I would imagine if the club won a cup, then he had a few himself. He is a ugly fecker, so was probably delighted to have a young one throw herself at him so went along with it.

Poor judgement from Sharon. Georgie took full advantage of her state when he should of been sticking her in a taxi back to Barry Town.

If this video was presented in court as evidence, I'd highly doubt it lead to a rape conviction.

suicide_circus

Odyssey 2005 wrote: »

Maybe that's why colm meany changed his name and went on the run.....in space.;(