Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Register Log in

[Football] Touching-up v Snowflakes



C

CliveWalkerWingWizard

Well-known member
Aug 31, 2006
2,667
surrenden
Thunder Bolt said:
Misleading. She said contact ranged from handholding, to being inappropriately touched, dragged onto laps, & downright sexual assault.

Some of the comments here are typical victim blaming. They knew what they were getting into. They were asking for it.
There is such a thing as look don't touch.
Click to expand...

I am not excusing any of the behaviour, but it the journalist changed her story from her first interview. This morning she specifically said holding hands touching arms touching on the lower back, all which is inappropriate, later on she said touching bums. It just feels like there are some embellishments to make the story news worthy. This was headline news ahead of the conviction of a serial child abuser.
 






Thunder Bolt

Thunder Bolt

Silly old bat
Aug 18, 2009
65,481
Beside the seaside, beside the sea
CliveWalkerWingWizard said:
I am not excusing any of the behaviour, but it the journalist changed her story from her first interview. This morning she specifically said holding hands touching arms touching on the lower back, all which is inappropriate, later on she said touching bums. It just feels like there are some embellishments to make the story news worthy. This was headline news ahead of the conviction of a serial child abuser.
Click to expand...

I saw her interview on BBC Breakfast this morning, so,it hasn't changed. I have no doubt the news edited her interview for the eRly evening news where youngsters would be viewing.
 




W

worthingseagull123

Well-known member
May 5, 2012
2,579
marlowe said:
The whole thing was disgusting. Sexual harassment in the name of charity. The girls were made to sign confidentiality agreements as part of the condition of their employment for the event. This gave the male guests more of a licence to behave inappropriately towards the women. While some of the women might have been prepared to tolerate the behaviour a lot of them weren't.
Click to expand...

I am so sorry your feelings were hurtz

Give your GP a shout if you think the effects will be lasting.
 




surlyseagull

surlyseagull

Well-known member
Aug 23, 2008
839
marlowe said:
Everyone looks perfectly consenting in those photos. A half naked consenting female being ogled and groped by a group of men would be equally acceptable. It is when the groping is not consensual when it becomes unacceptable whether the person being groped is male or female. However in the case of non consenting women they are more likely to feel threatened and vulnerable and intimidated by the situation whereas a man is more able to defend himself in such a situation.
Click to expand...

I take it you have never seen a hen party or a group of women out.
Attila the Hun would be intimidated .
 


dingodan

dingodan

New member
Feb 16, 2011
10,080
CliveWalkerWingWizard said:
I am not excusing any of the behaviour, but it the journalist changed her story from her first interview. This morning she specifically said holding hands touching arms touching on the lower back, all which is inappropriate, later on she said touching bums. It just feels like there are some embellishments to make the story news worthy. This was headline news ahead of the conviction of a serial child abuser.
Click to expand...

Yes, I heard that too, infact she said it "ranged from" touching hands "all the way to" touching lower back, implying that was the range from least to most. Then "general sexual harassment" unqualified was added in on the end.

Since then I saw the same interview on the BBC with the "lower back" description cut out, probably because it sounds completely ridiculous to conflate that with a sexual assault.

People need to realize that when you conflate some mild unwanted affection with actual sexual assault you are minimizing and trivializing the seriousness of sexual assault.
 






C

cunning fergus

Well-known member
Jan 18, 2009
4,747
There is a lot of outrage from Labour MPs on this matter, time will tell if its deserved or not, my own point of reference on this issue is that such outrage seems disproportionate, especially given what has been happening in this country, and in Labour constituencies.

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...y-left-falls-silent-when-issues-touch-on-race

It’s all very well seeing Jess Phillips going into salivary spitting overdrive about rich and powerful men abusing women..........the cat certainly caught her tongue and others when it came to grooming gangs in places like Rotherham.

Then again, I expect their were no Labour votes in the Presidents Club, so the gloves can come off.
 




dingodan

dingodan

New member
Feb 16, 2011
10,080
Thunder Bolt said:
Tolerating lecherous men is ok? I hope you haven't got a daughter.
Click to expand...

Would you want your daughter to feel that she has been the victim of a sexual assault because someone placed their hand on her lower back?

I respect women, that's precisely why I don't believe that they need to be infantilized like this.
 




Hamilton

Hamilton

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 7, 2003
12,461
Brighton
We really don’t seem to be capable of well thought through debate anymore are we?

Are there some women prepared to take money today to flirt with fat rich businessmen? Yes.

Are there male strippers that women are prepared to pose next to? Yes. Will some women go even further? Yes.

Are there women that will work as hostesses at events who don’t want to be groped? Yes.

Is there an abuse of power problem in society? Yes.

But all the while we get into a ‘they do this’ ‘they do that’ argument we’ll get nowhere.

The facts are that this has been, and still is largely, a man’s world. The only snowflakes around are the men and women that can’t accept that things need to change and we all play a role in that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 


BadFish

BadFish

Huge Member
Oct 19, 2003
17,109
Ruling classes have no respect for working people. What a shocker!!!

It is not really surprising that they are out of step with the changing values of respect. They only need a flimsy veneer of 'its for charity' to convince themselves that their behaviour is okay.

I don't know if it makes me a 'snowflake' to those apologists who want to bathe in the reflected light of these pillars of our society but personally i don't think it is okay to treat fellow human beings (i don't care if they are men or women) in the manner that has been reported here (and yes that doesn include DingoDan's Whatabout!). Maybe the women didn't really mind and knew what was expected of them on the night. This, for me, doesn't excuse the disrespectful behaviour of those that are supposed to be leaders in our community.

"Money for hospitals? Sure I need a tax right off..... But I am also going to need a night out with my pals where I can grope some pretty poor people."
 


GT49er

GT49er

Well-known member
Feb 1, 2009
46,736
Gloucester
Thunder Bolt said:
I'm not speaking from experience but I should be surprised that hostesses would work for waitresses wages.
Click to expand...
I don't know the going rate for hostesses, but £150 sounds pretty good for a shift as a waitress. For some of them too, that £150 may just have been a starter on their night's earnings - but not for waitressing, of course!

Thunder Bolt said:
I suspect that some where hostesses, but others were misled.
Click to expand...
Did you not read the joining instructions they were given? Did that not just give you the teeny weeniest little clue?

Thunder Bolt said:
Why would a journalist go undercover, if there wasn't something that needed to be investigated?
Click to expand...
Because she wanted a good juicy story, one which was, moreover, something closely related to her agenda?

Thunder Bolt said:
The Presidents Club has been disbanded today, with all the trustees resigning.
Click to expand...
Yes, I know.

I wonder, just out of curiosity, if the outrage would have been greater or less had they advertised for prostitutes instead of hostesses...........
 




BadFish

BadFish

Huge Member
Oct 19, 2003
17,109
dingodan said:
Yes, I heard that too, infact she said it "ranged from" touching hands "all the way to" touching lower back, implying that was the range from least to most. Then "general sexual harassment" unqualified was added in on the end.

Since then I saw the same interview on the BBC with the "lower back" description cut out, probably because it sounds completely ridiculous to conflate that with a sexual assault.

People need to realize that when you conflate some mild unwanted affection with actual sexual assault you are minimizing and trivializing the seriousness of sexual assault.
Click to expand...

The FT article that had the undercover reporters at the scene talks about much more than touching the lower back.

https://www.ft.com/content/075d679e-0033-11e8-9650-9c0ad2d7c5b5
 


kevo

kevo

Well-known member
Mar 8, 2008
9,102
Jesus wept, some of the replies on this thread.... incredibly sad that so many on here are living in the dark ages.
 


BadFish

BadFish

Huge Member
Oct 19, 2003
17,109
One thing is for sure, the perma offended at anyone expressing an opinion about anything have killed any meaning of their 'snowflake' buzz word by using it in every possible discussion.

I find it ironic that those who have 'snowflaked' and 'virtue signalled' etc their way to shuttin down any debate are the same muppets that accused Political Correctness of doing the same thing.
 
Last edited:






S

sussex_guy2k2

Well-known member
Jun 6, 2014
3,740
marlowe said:
Everyone looks perfectly consenting in those photos. A half naked consenting female being ogled and groped by a group of men would be equally acceptable. It is when the groping is not consensual when it becomes unacceptable whether the person being groped is male or female.However in the case of non consenting women they are more likely to feel threatened and vulnerable and intimidated by the situation whereas a man is more able to defend himself in such a situation.
Click to expand...

I love how you’ve done your best to make a very valid point and then backed it up by the most sexist of statements. You may as well have written “but these poor, helpless little women can’t defend themselves against all the touching and need a big strong man to help them”.
 


S

seagulls4ever

New member
Oct 2, 2003
4,338
In the first interview with the FT lady I saw she referred to "hands up skirts, hands on bums but also hands on hips, hands on stomachs, arms going round your waist unexpectedly". She said that some of the women there knew the kind of thing they were getting themselves into and some women enjoy it - that wasn't the problem. The problem was many of the ladies had "no idea that was the kind of event it would be" and were shocked. I don't see how that's acceptable. If people know it's that kind of event and they are happy with that - fine, that's not what she was complaining about. It becomes an issue when hostesses don't understand what they are letting themselves in for, and, from what I understand, there were hostesses who were in exactly that position.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p05vwtnp
 


You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here