Woman murdered in Tullamore..

[Matlock]

Look... We can't all spend our youth tending rose gardens in the local nunnery.

But off you go.

There shouldn't be an expectation that a woman's choices are to either be in a nunnery or be sexually assaulted.

You seem to think that being sexually assaulted is just something that teenage girls should have to accept. Poor young men who have had a few drinks can't possibly be expected to ask for consent or to stop themselves from assaulting women, and we can't possibly teach them about consent because that upsets the middle aged men of the proc too much.

The reason this story and others like it upset people so much is that it cut too close to the bone for lots of men, and it is easier to think " its PC gone mad" than it is to think " there might be some woman out there who would categorise how I treated her as sexual assault".

Just because people weren't convicted in the past didn't make it right.

 

[TheOutdoorThreadmill]

The reason this story and others like it upset people so much is that it cut too close to the bone for lots of men, and it is easier to think " its PC gone mad" than it is to think " there might be some woman out there who would categorise how I treated her as sexual assault".

Just because people weren't convicted in the past didn't make it right.

I think it definitely an era thing now. Not saying that anyone is right or wrong in this case but there is obviously a conviction but I'd say most here would have done some sort of sexual experimentation at that age (up the fields, or behind the school etc).

 

[sigourney's knickers]

There shouldn't be an expectation that a woman's choices are to either be in a nunnery or be sexually assaulted.

You seem to think that being sexually assaulted is just something that teenage girls should have to accept. Poor young men who have had a few drinks can't possibly be expected to ask for consent or to stop themselves from assaulting women, and we can't possibly teach them about consent because that upsets the middle aged men of the proc too much.

The reason this story and others like it upset people so much is that it cut too close to the bone for lots of men, and it is easier to think " its PC gone mad" than it is to think " there might be some woman out there who would categorise how I treated her as sexual assault".

Just because people weren't convicted in the past didn't make it right.

Hah Hah... Oh fuck off. I was referring to you and your pearl clutching re: nunnery

Any rational person knows what went on there.

I do think the response was hugely disproportionate. Life ruined.

I'm not going to argue with you on this anymore as I know how it will go. I am in agreement with you on other discussions about this yet have no appetite in arguing over an X Y graph of scale.

You've lost the 'plot' on this one.

 

[Matlock]

Hah Hah... Oh fuck off. I was referring to you and your pearl clutching re: nunnery

Any rational person knows what went on there.

I do think the response was hugely disproportionate. Life ruined.

I'm not going to argue with you on this anymore as I know how it will go. I am in agreement with you on other discussions about this yet have no appetite in arguing over an X Y graph of scale.

You've lost the 'plot' on this one.

Yes, a young man sexually assaulted a young woman. He admits that he did so.

You, for whatever reason, want to pretend that he didn't sexually assault her. Which begs the question, why the fuck did he confess and plead guilty to an offence that you say never happened?

 

[Matlock]

I think it definitely an era thing now. Not saying that anyone is right or wrong in this case but there is obviously a conviction but I'd say most here would have done some sort of sexual experimentation at that age (up the fields, or behind the school etc).

Again though, why are ye equating sexual experimentation with sexual assault?

Why are ye assuming that something that the young man himself categorised as sexual assault was not sexual assault?

Do ye not think there is a difference between the two things?

 

[sigourney's knickers]

Yes, a young man sexually assaulted a young woman. He admits that he did so.

You, for whatever reason, want to pretend that he didn't sexually assault her. Which begs the question, why the fuck did he confess and plead guilty to an offence that you say never happened?

Ah now. You're only hurting yourself now.

 

[Matlock]

Ah now. You're only hurting yourself now.

It should be an easy question to answer.

The young man in this case says that he sexually assaulted his friend. That is a matter of fact. Given that, why are you insistent that he didn't?

 

[Matlock]

Jealous husband whose son shoved curtain pole up dad's love rival's anus is jailed

A jealous husband whose son shoved a broken curtain pole up his dad's love rival's anus has been jailed.

www.sundayworld.com

Now that's what I call sexual assault, not copping a feel.

There are degrees of sexual assault. It isn't just one offence.

Again, not sure why you are intent on minimising the sexual assault that this young man pleaded guilty to by pretending that it was just "copping a feel".

 

[TheOutdoorThreadmill]

Again though, why are ye equating sexual experimentation with sexual assault?

Why are ye assuming that something that the young man himself categorised as sexual assault was not sexual assault?

Do ye not think there is a difference between the two things?

They were both pissed and tbh, I don't really know what he did, I'm just making a generalisation or observation.
Just saying like years ago if he or she dropped the hand and was stopped, nought said and you move on. These days it would be a degree of sexual assault.

 

[Matlock]

They were both pissed and tbh, I don't really know what he did, I'm just making a generalisation or observation.
Just saying like years ago if he or she dropped the hand and was stopped, nought said and you move on. These days it would be a degree of sexual assault.

Clearly!

The fact is that no one apart from the guards and the judge and themselves know what he did as there wasn't a full trial. Obviously though, what he did was enough that once the guards called to him he knew that he was in the wrong and immediately admitted it.

If he had denied it, or denied the consent element of it it is highly unlikely that he would have gotten a conviction, so if he really didn't do anything wrong (or didn't feel he did anything wrong) I can see no reason why he would have confessed and pleaded.

He didn't just "drop the hand". He sexually assaulted someone.