realcockney Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 Welcome to the most un-PC event of the year i see the snowflakes are out in force again:roll: wheres the harm? so what a men only do! with some pretty waitresses who were probably paid very well and who are used to making men look very small with advances of this type . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stranza Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 i see the snowflakes are out in force again:roll: wheres the harm? so what a men only do! with some pretty waitresses who were probably paid very well and who are used to making men look very small with advances of this type . You don't happen to be single do you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realcockney Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 You don't happen to be single do you? no sorry i am taken:love: but thanks anyway:o Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cgksheff Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 Why does no one read the FT article before spouting off? The article which includes: "An image from inside the Dorchester during the Presidents Club event captured by hidden camera" Nothing untoward to be seen on the image published, but someone had a camera. It also clearly states: "The Financial Times last week sent two people undercover to work as hostesses on the night. Reporters also gained access to the dining hall and surrounding bars." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 My Bold. Ive been asking this from the start and as a result been at the receiving end of some ugly comments. Apparently asking for proof is a no no. We are all just expected to go along with these damaging accusations. Well, in fairness, thats been happening an awful lot at the moment, certainly in tinseltown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stranza Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 no sorry i am taken:love: but thanks anyway:o Shame, you sound ace. I could have demonstrated the art of non contact wooing. (Without attempting to do sex at you) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ENG601PM Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 "alleges she and other hostesses were sexually harassed." And you have to ask "just what is the problem"... Wow. "she" was undercover Financial Times reporter. Now just what do you think and undercover journalist would be doing working as a hostess at a private men only dinner with a prior reputation for seedy behaviour? Well? I put it to you that she was creating a story where there wasn't one. If the event was as reputed it's a bit like signing up as a stripper and later feigning surprise about finding out that she was expected to take her clothes off. There's less to this story than meets the eye so far. Consenting adults can do what they like and until there's some evidence of mass sexual assaults I'm putting it in the fake news pile. So yes, wow indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 Yet again, a small number of (presumably rather insecure) men are trying to defend the indefensible; what part of not treating women like objects for your own gratification aren't you getting? Victim blaming, left, right and centre. God help the victims if any of you ever get called to jury service on a rape trial. ---------- Post added 24-01-2018 at 17:17 ---------- i see the snowflakes are out in force again:roll: wheres the harm? so what a men only do! with some pretty waitresses who were probably paid very well and who are used to making men look very small with advances of this type . In sexually assaulting women? Are you for real? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 One assumes that these women understood what the event was, were their of their own free will, and were paid for their time. So aside from it being a bit seedy, just what is the problem here? Next we'll be having husbands complaining that women leer at Chippendales. Oh hang on, that never happens. Not a surprise that you seek to mount a defence of this. There’s a massive problem with what happened at the event and your argument is only going to work if the women were explicitly employed as prostitutes. And that in itself is a massive can of worms. You’ve got no shame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realcockney Posted January 24, 2018 Share Posted January 24, 2018 Yet again, a small number of (presumably rather insecure) men are trying to defend the indefensible; what part of not treating women like objects for your own gratification aren't you getting? Victim blaming, left, right and centre. God help the victims if any of you ever get called to jury service on a rape trial. ---------- Post added 24-01-2018 at 17:17 ---------- In sexually assaulting women? Are you for real? utter tosh what are you on about? this is a non story brought about by a reporter who somehow managed to get a job that night as a hostess! it doesnt look like there was a shortage as there were 130 odd who knew exactly the type of job it was. who was assulted do you have info on charges??? or is it just a silly reporter making a story up that wasn't there :roll: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now