Aoibheann Ni Shuilleabhain Harassment Story

Yurt2

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

100% agree with you but i got called all sorts of names for having the same opinion so good luck !

No. You said she did it for publicity, which is a sh*tty read of a psychologically stressful and potentially dangerous situation for a young woman.

So you can stop feeling sorry for yourself.

ThewhiteJesus

Yurt! wrote: »

No. You said she did it for publicity, which is a sh*tty read of a psychologically stressful and potentially dangerous situation for a young woman.

So you can stop feeling sorry for yourself.

I never used those words, are you ok love ?

Yurt2

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

I never used those words, are you ok love ?

You said she did it to "promote her name". Direct quote.

You got filleted and now you're on a sulk.

walshb

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

100% agree with you but i got called all sorts of names for having the same opinion so good luck !

Sorry, but you went down the road of her being an attention seeker and looking for column inches..

That was not why she did that. She is NOT that type person at all..

walshb

walshb wrote: »

Sorry, but you went down the road of her being an attention seeker and looking for column inches..

That was not why she did that. She is NOT that type person at all..

To be fair, I did not think the accused was "that type of person" either, even though I somewhat knew the guy personally.

So I don't think you can outright claim that she is "not that type of person" when you don't know her personally at all.

ThewhiteJesus

Yurt! wrote: »

You said she did it to "promote her name". Direct quote.

You got filleted and now you're on a sulk.

Ok so two things, one that is not what you said so you lied, they were not my words, ouch.
Second show me that direct quote love ?

ThewhiteJesus

walshb wrote: »

Sorry, but you went down the road of her being an attention seeker and looking for column inches..

That was not why she did that. She is NOT that type person at all..

Again not words I used

LiquidZeb

tobefrank321 wrote: »

Very tricky situation.
If a male friend confronted him, it might make the situation even worse. She'd be accused of encouraging something or other, or he'd make a complaint.
I'd say she hoped to keep the thing quiet, hope he'd go away by himself and HR would do something about it.

I don't understand this whole male fantasy that pummeling the **** out of the creep suddenly magics everything okay again. Oftentimes the mindset around it seems to be avenging his damaged goods than any concern or regard for the woman at the centre of it.

Yurt2

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

Ok so two things, one that is not what you said so you lied, they were not my words, ouch.
Second show me that direct quote love ?

Page 3 of this thread. Suck it up. Drop the "love" as well, as if your posts aren't dripping in weirdness enough.

ThewhiteJesus

Yurt! wrote: »

Page 3 of this thread. Suck it up. Drop the "love" as well, as if your posts aren't dripping in weirdness enough.

Why didn’t you quote love ?? I wonder

MrStuffins

Yurt! wrote: »

No. You said she did it for publicity

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

I never used those words, are you ok love ?

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

Very pretentious person imo, and now making it public has obviously been done to promote her name even more.

Pretty clear here.....

LiquidZeb

MrStuffins wrote: »

Pretty clear here.....

Threads like these really bring out the incels. I bet he'd piss himself if a girl so much as made eye contact with him.

Yurt2

MrStuffins wrote: »

Pretty clear here.....

He must have been on the hooch and forgot he posted it.

ThewhiteJesus

MrStuffins wrote: »

Pretty clear here.....

Thanks hun and the other accusations ?

ThewhiteJesus

Yurt! wrote: »

He must have been on the hooch and forgot he posted it.

And the other accusations love ?

walshb

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

Again not words I used

Whatever words you used, it read to me, and others that you were getting a dig at her for exposing this. Implying she was using it to keep her name in the public domain..

ThewhiteJesus

LiquidZeb wrote: »

Threads like these really bring out the incels. I bet he'd piss himself if a girl so much as made eye contact with him.

Now that’s weird

walshb

Deleted User wrote: »

To be fair, I did not think the accused was "that type of person" either, even though I somewhat knew the guy personally.

So I don't think you can outright claim that she is "not that type of person" when you don't know her personally at all.

Well, she is not that type person...in the context I am espousing..that being:

“Using this horrendous ordeal that she went through simply to promote herself/career.”

Yurt2

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

Thanks hun and the other accusations ?

As much as this may surprise you, this thread isn't about your name and how you feel it's been besmirched by people mocking you for attacking a woman who has been subject to stalking. Do us all a favour and toddle off.

ThewhiteJesus

walshb wrote: »

Whatever words you used, it read to me, and others that you were getting a dig at her for exposing this. Implying she was using it to keep her name in the public domain..

Wow so you make up what people say with no evidence? Punch drunk perhaps

MrStuffins

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

Thanks hun and the other accusations ?

When you make a statement like the one above, and then not only try to back-track on it but out and out lie claiming you'd never said it, it rings alarm bells.

ThewhiteJesus

Yurt! wrote: »

As much as this may surprise you, this thread isn't about your name and how you feel it's been besmirched by people mocking you for attacking a woman who has been subject to stalking. Do us all a favour and toddle off.

Who’s attacking who yurt ?? It’s you love any mod will see that

MrStuffins

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

Wow so you make up what people say with no evidence? Punch drunk perhaps

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

Very pretentious person imo, and now making it public has obviously been done to promote her name even more.

Again, you present the evidence yourself. It's quoted right there.

LiquidZeb

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

Now that’s weird

While accusing a woman of using her sexual harassment ordeal to get publicity is the height of normal.

walshb

walshb wrote: »

Well, she is not that type person...in the context I am espousing..that being:

“Using this horrendous ordeal that she went through simply to promote herself/career.”

Yes, that is what I assumed you meant. I don't believe that she is that type of person of course, but that is just my opinion as an outsider and not a factual statement I can make because I do not know her personally.

Yurt2

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

Who’s attacking who yurt ?? It’s you love any mod will see that

I'll take a card for for this but I don't care. Stop being a sook and posting weird tripe about someone who has been subject to serious harassment. The thread will be all the better for it.

Mod

Forum and thread ban

ThewhiteJesus

LiquidZeb wrote: »

While accusing a woman of using her sexual harassment ordeal to get publicity is the height of normal.

You really have a one track small mind, but ok Zed if you say so

ThewhiteJesus

Yurt! wrote: »

I'll take a card for for this but I don't care. Stop being a sook and posting weird tripe about someone who has been subject to serious harassment. The thread will be all the better for it.

What’s a sook ?

Kaybaykwah

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Does anyone think she elected to involve the media for fear of any backlash from within UCD? I get the feeling she went so public about the matter to highlight the issue but to also ensure she has a positive future within UCD?

Could she have had other motivations for involving the press?

Before you jump down my throat here, I think it is fair to point out. There are a lot of women who have gone through hell and back with their harassment stories and not involved the media. So I think it is a relevant point? Why did she chose to go actively public with the matter? Is it a journalist "scoop" or was she hoping to reinforce herself against any negativity within UCD down the line?

Well, it could be a scoop, a belated one at that, but what does it matter how it came out in the press?

This matter, in the wake of "me too" and anything related to harassment of any kind needs airing out. Any individual who "doesn't get" that the sollicited party isn't interested needs to be stopped early on. His obsession doesn't need to become someone else's cross to bear. It doesn't matter if it is a woman or a man by the way, there are plenty of people who have problems understanding proper boundaries in human relations.

LiquidZeb

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

You really have a one track small mind, but ok Zed if you say so

It's zeb lad. Are you going to try and back track any more?

ThewhiteJesus

LiquidZeb wrote: »

It's zeb lad. Are you going to try and back track any more?

I’m not backtracking zeb you make no sense lad

MrStuffins

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

I’m not backtracking zeb you make no sense lad

Yurt! wrote: »

You said she did it for publicity

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

I never used those words, are you ok love ?

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

Very pretentious person imo, and now making it public has obviously been done to promote her name even more.

Embarrassing!

IAMAMORON

I think once you involve the countries main broadsheet ( with respect to the Indo and the Examiner etc etc )you are automatically exposing yourself to potential for negative feedback.

Lets be honest, this is not some column inches in the legal/courts section of a Wednesday afternoon. This is a full exposé on a contentious sexual harassment case, pictures, quotes the whole shebang.

Given that to be the case it does warrant discussion as to the motivations of the article and the compliance of Ní Shuilleabhain, not in her harassment btw, but in her willingness to give the media her side of a very big story. She has worked in broadcasting since 2006.

I would just be interested in knowing what were her motivations for going public? It may well be as innocuous as giving her some public reinforcement in her battle with UCD, I get that. But it would be nice to hear her come out and say it.

Morgans

IAMAMORON wrote: »

I think once you involve the countries main broadsheet ( with respect to the Indo and the Examiner etc etc )you are automatically exposing yourself to potential for negative feedback.

Lets be honest, this is not some column inches in the legal/courts section of a Wednesday afternoon. This is a full exposé on a contentious sexual harassment case, pictures, quotes the whole shebang.

Given that to be the case it does warrant discussion as to the motivations of the article and the compliance of Ní Shuilleabhain, not in her harassment btw, but in her willingness to give the media her side of a very big story. She has worked in broadcasting since 2006.

I would just be interested in knowing what were her motivations for going public? It may well be as innocuous as giving her some public reinforcement in her battle with UCD, I get that. But it would be nice to hear her come out and say it.

What's contentious about this case?

IAMAMORON

Morgans wrote: »

What's contentious about this case?

For me the fact that it has happened in one of our largest universities, a place where we are sending out youth for further education, for starters.

But there is a litany of subject matter.

How many women working for a big 4 Accounting firm or a large solicitor firm are dealing with the same torment? Not as easy to challenge harassment in the private sector?

Would you like any more bones of contention, I have all afternoon?

walshb

IAMAMORON wrote: »

I think once you involve the countries main broadsheet ( with respect to the Indo and the Examiner etc etc )you are automatically exposing yourself to potential for negative feedback.

Lets be honest, this is not some column inches in the legal/courts section of a Wednesday afternoon. This is a full exposé on a contentious sexual harassment case, pictures, quotes the whole shebang.

Given that to be the case it does warrant discussion as to the motivations of the article and the compliance of Ní Shuilleabhain, not in her harassment btw, but in her willingness to give the media her side of a very big story. She has worked in broadcasting since 2006.

I would just be interested in knowing what were her motivations for going public? It may well be as innocuous as giving her some public reinforcement in her battle with UCD, I get that. But it would be nice to hear her come out and say it.

Maybe she feels that she was so let down and hurt by UCDs response to all this, that she simply wants to make it known how poorly they behaved here? And, I wouldn't slate her for it; albeit there being two sides to a story...

ThewhiteJesus

MrStuffins wrote: »

Embarrassing!

Actually if you look at the words it’s embarrassing for you, but way to go hun

StackSteevens

IAMAMORON wrote: »

For me the fact that it has happened in one of our largest universities, a place where we are sending out youth for further education, for starters.

But there is a litany of subject matter.

How many women working for a big 4 Accounting firm or a large solicitor firm are dealing with the same torment? Not as easy to challenge harassment in the private sector?

Would you like any more bones of contention, I have all afternoon?

None of the above whataboutery can in any way justify your use of the word 'contentious".

Please try harder.

IAMAMORON

walshb wrote: »

Maybe she feels that she was so let down and hurt by UCDs response to all this, that she simply wants to make it known how poorly they behaved here? And, I wouldn't slate her for it; albeit there being two sides to a story...

Fair enough, this would explain a lot.

No one is " slating " anyone here either.

MrStuffins

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

Actually if you look at the words it’s embarrassing for you, but way to go hun

It's pretty clear you've made a fool of yourself here sweetheart

ThewhiteJesus

Yurt what’s a sook ?

Morgans

IAMAMORON wrote: »

For me the fact that it has happened in one of our largest universities, a place where we are sending out youth for further education, for starters.

But there is a litany of subject matter.

How many women working for a big 4 Accounting firm or a large solicitor firm are dealing with the same torment? Not as easy to challenge harassment in the private sector?

Would you like any more bones of contention, I have all afternoon?

So, there is nothing in what she reported that was contentious.

Only a fool couldn't see that her target was UCD HR's and Senior positions. The private/public sector bull**** you are trying to introduce makes no difference. Continue to invent bones of contention in your head.

ThewhiteJesus

MrStuffins wrote: »

It's pretty clear you've made a fool of yourself here sweetheart

Not me love, just a couple of empty headed keyboard warriors in a love in, very modern

IAMAMORON

StackSteevens wrote: »

None of the above whataboutery can in any way justify your use of the word 'contentious".

Please try harder.

That list was suggestive and certainly not exhaustive.

My question is, what was her prerogative for approaching the Irish times and volunteering her story?

If you are happy to go public you should be happy and prepared to face the publics' perception?

Morgans

IAMAMORON wrote: »

That list was suggestive and certainly not exhaustive.

My question is, what was her prerogative for approaching the Irish times and volunteering her story?

If you are happy to go public you should be happy and prepared to face the publics' perception?

And the public's perception has been supportive, other than edgelords and assholes.

walshb

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Fair enough, this would explain a lot.

No one is " slating " anyone here either.

I know you weren’t slating her.

It was something I added.

IAMAMORON

Morgans wrote: »

So, there is nothing in what she reported that was contentious.

Only a fool couldn't see that her target was UCD HR's and Senior positions. The private/public sector bull**** you are trying to introduce makes no difference. Continue to invent bones of contention in your head.

Ah ah , no way. Lots of women out there going through similar crap in the private sector and cannot do a thing about it for fear of negating career prospects. You do not get that issue in the public sector.

For example if her harasser was a leading fee earner? Very easy for private companies to turn a blind eye then. In fact if you went to the media it is highly plausible you could get dismissed for bringing the company name into disrepute.

Just saying.

Kaybaykwah

Morgans wrote: »

What's contentious about this case?

Well, I think that if she complained to the proper channels at the University, and can prove they had overlooked or dismisssed her complaints for harassment, in this day and age, there is liability there. Opening to the media doesn't make the case any less appalling, just more blatant. University HR and other instances need to be accountable for these events, and in particular, since they should be in the forefront in addressing personal rights abuses where they arise.

LiquidZeb

IAMAMORON wrote: »

That list was suggestive and certainly not exhaustive.

My question is, what was her prerogative for approaching the Irish times and volunteering her story?

If you are happy to go public you should be happy and prepared to face the publics' perception?

I really don't understand how this can be perceived other than a woman being harassed relentlessly by a man in a position of power. Seeing all the scrutiny, criticism and locker room talk she's gotten on here I can see why men get away with it.

Morgans

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Ah ah , no way. Lots of women out there going through similar crap in the private sector and cannot do a thing about it for fear of negating career prospects. You do not get that issue in the public sector.

For example if her harasser was a leading fee earner? Very easy for private companies to turn a blind eye then. In fact if you went to the media it is highly plausible you could get dismissed for bringing the company name into disrepute.

Just saying.

You just don't have a clue what you are talking about. I say that having working in UCD and in private institutions. Not a clue.