Jim Stark Posted May 1, 2013 Share Posted May 1, 2013 I'm sure you'd agree that it would be grossly unfair of me to assume that you think genital mutilation of children is a great idea on the grounds that you never said otherwise. Equally for you to infer something about Suffragette because she's never expressed an opinion about is is equally stupid. Unwise I would say for the first part. Second part, what have I inferred exactly? ---------- Post added 01-05-2013 at 20:53 ---------- I like a lot of women, but I wouldn't dream of touching their backsides. In my opinion it crosses a line and shows disrespect. How would you feel if your wife or girlfriend had their bum touched regularly by a man at work. Would you be so sanguine then? Look at it another way. If she liked something, what kind of a person would I be to stop her from doing/having it done? If she didn't like it, believe me, she would soon put a stop to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeX Posted May 1, 2013 Share Posted May 1, 2013 Firstly, why shouldn't they? Secondly, how does that prove money was a motivating factor in reporting/inventing historic abuse? How precisely are you differentiating between the victims who are telling the truth and pursuing a perfectly acceptable legal avenue of redress and those who you are assuming are lying in order to be fraudulently remunerated? To view it as anything other than victims (no need for disparaging quotations marks arond the word) seeking deserved compensation takes you right back to opinion and suspicions. Unless, of course, you have any evidence. I'm sorry I wasn't saying they shouldn't nor that those with legitimate claims should not, I was giving you the reason why I made the comment in reply to your request of "Based on what?". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEDROCK Posted May 1, 2013 Share Posted May 1, 2013 Roy 'Chubby' Brown is screwed then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted May 1, 2013 Share Posted May 1, 2013 I touch my mississus backside but I'm not hauled up before the judge because guess what? Yeah she likes me. What's your point? My point is that you seem from your various contributions to this thread and others to be doing a number of things - trying to minimise sexual violence against women trying to belittle a woman who has expert opinion on sexual violence against women agreeing with the suggestion that some rapes aren't worth bothering with I think it tells a very sad story about you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metalman Posted May 1, 2013 Share Posted May 1, 2013 I like a lot of women, but I wouldn't dream of touching their backsides. In my opinion it crosses a line and shows disrespect. How would you feel if your wife or girlfriend had their bum touched regularly by a man at work. Would you be so sanguine then? That wasn't the case however back in the 1970s - just watch any sitcom or Carry On film of the time. Will every man who pinched a girl's bum in the 1970s now be hauled before the courts for serious sexual assault? They're going to be pretty busy if that's the case. I do agree that the name of the accused in cases like Bill Roache should also be kept anonymous until after they're convicted. And I also think that the chances of any conviction in all these cases are small given that there's likely to be absolutely no evidence whatsoever, and it will be just one person's word against the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted May 1, 2013 Share Posted May 1, 2013 Unwise I would say for the first part. Second part, what have I inferred exactly? ---------- Post added 01-05-2013 at 20:53 ---------- Look at it another way. If she liked something, what kind of a person would I be to stop her from doing/having it done? If she didn't like it, believe me, she would soon put a stop to it. Maybe the 1970s were a different era, but I'm not naive enough to believe that every man was a lecherous Carry On / On the Buses character. Ther were plenty of decent men with standards and respect. Maybe Michelle Keegan does put up with it - however the fact that he does do it on a regular basis says more about him than his defenders are prepared to let on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinz Posted May 1, 2013 Share Posted May 1, 2013 My point is that you seem from your various contributions to this thread and others to be doing a number of things - trying to minimise sexual violence against women trying to belittle a woman who has expert opinion on sexual violence against women agreeing with the suggestion that some rapes aren't worth bothering with I think it tells a very sad story about you. The forum seem to be alive with them..well this thread certainly. The same apologists would be thrashing around and dribbling all over themselves with revenge if the accused were Islamic..which is ironic when you consider the misogynistic points you've outlined above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suffragette1 Posted May 1, 2013 Share Posted May 1, 2013 It goes back to a thread about women in the gym, long story but suffragette1 seems to think that most men go to the gym to leer at women and well, like I said, a long story. A gross distortion of what I said, I clearly stated that some men lech at women at the gym so stop twisting things to suit your own agenda to portray me as a man hater who believes that all men are rapists in your attempt to undermine my argument. ---------- Post added 01-05-2013 at 21:17 ---------- The forum seem to be alive with them..well this thread certainly. The same apologists would be thrashing around and dribbling all over themselves with revenge if the accused were Islamic..which is ironic when you consider the misogynistic points you've outlined above. Well said. Some of whom froth at the mouth when it comes to gender issues and gendered sexual violence pertaining to Islam. Interesting how the most vociferous celeb defenders of the Savile expose, Operation Yewtree and others have since been arrested; am thinking Davidson, Roache, Clifford et al and let us not forget Savile's defence of Glitter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Stark Posted May 1, 2013 Share Posted May 1, 2013 Maybe the 1970s were a different era, but I'm not naive enough to believe that every man was a lecherous Carry On / On the Buses character. Ther were plenty of decent men with standards and respect. Maybe Michelle Keegan does put up with it - however the fact that he does do it on a regular basis says more about him than his defenders are prepared to let on. You've completely lost me there. If Michelle Keagan doesn't like something then why doesn't she do something about it? ---------- Post added 01-05-2013 at 21:20 ---------- The forum seem to be alive with them..well this thread certainly. The same apologists would be thrashing around and dribbling all over themselves with revenge if the accused were Islamic..which is ironic when you consider the misogynistic points you've outlined above. The rascists have arrived. ---------- Post added 01-05-2013 at 21:24 ---------- My point is that you seem from your various contributions to this thread and others to be doing a number of things - trying to minimise sexual violence against women trying to belittle a woman who has expert opinion on sexual violence against women agreeing with the suggestion that some rapes aren't worth bothering with I think it tells a very sad story about you. 1. Where? 2.No, I am putting my points of view across to a poster who seems intent on preaching the same old stuff and seems to refuse point blank to listen to anyone else's thoughts, see her post, something like, I'm right live with it. 3. True So, if we're being honest with our thoughts of each other, I think your nothing but a keyboard warrior out to belittle MANY people, from your many posts on this forum. ---------- Post added 01-05-2013 at 21:28 ---------- A gross distortion of what I said, I clearly stated that some men lech at women at the gym so stop twisting things to suit your own agenda to portray me as a man hater who believes that all men are rapists in your attempt to undermine my argument. ---------- Post added 01-05-2013 at 21:17 ---------- Well said. Some of whom froth at the mouth when it comes to gender issues and gendered sexual violence pertaining to Islam. Interesting how the most vociferous celeb defenders of the Savile expose, Operation Yewtree and others have since been arrested; am thinking Davidson, Roache, Clifford et al and let us not forget Savile's defence of Glitter. 1. If your honest, you'll agree that I was correct in what I stated. 2. I really can't believe you typed that Froth at the mouth regarding gender issues? Classic! 3. Your correct there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hots on Posted May 1, 2013 Share Posted May 1, 2013 All entertainers from the sixties, seventies and eighties must be bracing themselves for accusations from superannuated groupies; and you can't say that "if they're innocent they have nothing to worry about" because as we all know, mud sticks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.