Not really. You know it is going to be someone being beaten up, what do you expect to gain from watching it other than satisfying some morbid curiousity? Do you want to know the extent to which he is beaten, is there blood, is he screaming and so on - if so why? If someone asks you to pass comment on a video of a rape, do you unquestioningly go and watch it because you 'have to' ?
Are you for real? I'm expected to comment on and make judgment on something specific I haven't seen, nor which is offered for perusal?
1. A person who derives sexual gratification from observing the naked bodies or sexual acts of others, especially from a secret vantage point.
2. An obsessive observer of sordid or sensational subjects.
It looks like you have googled a dictionary definition rather than giving your own ideas, which does not surprise me. Nevertheless, item 2 on your list seems to ffit the bill, although I would say the 'obsessive' bit need not necessarily apply.
you say there are no voyeurs here. Would you apply the term to people who like to watch people having sex on the internet? Are there none of them here? Would you apply it to people who watch real life violent acts on the internet? Are there none of them here?
Are you for real? You do things because someone else expects you to do them?
What are you on about at all? If somebody invites discussion about a specific incident then they're expecting precisely that, but how are participants expected to comment when they don't know what is being discussed as they haven't seen it, and it isn't offered for perusal?
How are they supposed to form their own judgment of what is being berated?
Are they expected to make something up? Agree with the thread starter? Disagree with them? Say nothing?
Exactly. Whilst cases of slavery still exist in the UK and Europe, thankfully they are extremely rare.
In Saudi and the Gulf states foreign worker abuse and slavery is rampant. If you come from the subcontinent or the Phillipines you are viewed as and treated like shit.
This is so true. I met a Philipino woman who answered an ad for hotel workers in Saudi. When she arrived her passport was taken from her and for 12 years she worked as a cleaner in a private home and was a complete prisoner. She was taken with the family to London where she escaped and contacted the police. She said her case was very common and not at all unique. She lives and works in London, still as a servant but the family she is with pay her flight home every year to see her children who live with her elderly parents.
What are you on about at all? If somebody invites discussion about a specific incident then they're expecting precisely that, but how are participants expected to comment when they don't know what is being discussed as they haven't seen it, and it isn't offered for perusal?
How are they supposed to form their own judgment of what is being berated?
Are they expected to make something up? Agree with the thread starter? Disagree with them? Say nothing?
You're having a laugh, surely?
So have you passed your judgement on what is being berated and did you need to watch someone beaten up to do it?
It looks like you have googled a dictionary definition rather than giving your own ideas, which does not surprise me. Nevertheless, item 2 on your list seems to ffit the bill, although I would say the 'obsessive' bit need not necessarily apply.
you say there are no voyeurs here. Would you apply the term to people who like to watch people having sex on the internet? Are there none of them here? Would you apply it to people who watch real life violent acts on the internet? Are there none of them here?
I thought you wanted a dictionary definition. My mistake.
Seeing one video doesn't make someone a voyeur.
I don't know if there are any of the voyeurs you describe on this thread. Why are you asking me?
So have you passed your judgement on what is being berated and did you need to watch someone beaten up to do it?
Did I need to watch the video of somebody being beaten to know what was being asked or pass invited judgment or comment on the video of somebody being beaten?
No, I thought I'd just make something up instead, so here goes:
Did I need to watch the video of somebody being beaten to know what was being asked or pass invited judgment or comment on the video of somebody being beaten?
No, I thought I'd just make something up instead, so here goes:
Because of your earlier assertion that nobody here is a voyeur.
Yes, in response to your first post, in which you intimated posters on this thread who wanted to see the footage before making a judgement, were voyeurs. If you didn't mean to suggest that, fair enough.
So having reviewed the footage, what is your judgement of what happened?
You see, this is something that makes me real uneasy about the internet, that there are examples of brutality that people can't help but want to see out of curiosity, or a form of perverted entertainment, it's so easy, just a click etc, there's something wrong wit hthat. And of course for every person who is filmed suffering, there are probably hundreds of voyeurs who will derive pleasure from watching it, what a sad and disrespectful state of affairs!
Yes, in response to your first post, in which you intimated posters on this thread who wanted to see the footage before making a judgement, were voyeurs. If you didn't mean to suggest that, fair enough.
I did mean to suggest that, I made it clear enough. Anyone looking at the footage did so because they wanted to see someone beaten up.
Let's hope you're never asked to do jury service. Don't bother with the available evidence about a specific incident before making your mind up, just go off your past experience whilst at the same time berating the other jurors for insisting on seeing it.
Let's hope you're never asked to do jury service. Don't bother with the available evidence about a specific incident before making your mind up, just go off your past experience whilst at the same time berating the other jurors for insisting on seeing it.
This isn't a court case. The OP already told us what was happening on the video. We are not a jury. Perhaps you think you are, but having watched the video and saying it was bad, where does that leave you?
My main issue is this - and it's not with you in particular. What is worse, someone being beaten, or people choosing to watch him being beaten? You, the jury, should decide.
I did mean to suggest that, I made it clear enough. Anyone looking at the footage did so because they wanted to see someone beaten up.
Absolute nonsense.
Without watching the video, I had no way of knowing, from my own judgement, to what extent he was being attacked. Now I've seen it, I judge it to be severe.
There may be people who get off on watching such stuff, I'm not one of them - you can speak for yourself, but not for me.
Exactly. Whilst cases of slavery still exist in the UK and Europe, thankfully they are extremely rare.
In Saudi and the Gulf states foreign worker abuse and slavery is rampant. If you come from the subcontinent or the Phillipines you are viewed as and treated like shit.
This is very true.
I actually know of graduates from UK uni's who came from Pakistan that went to Dubai to get work and now cannot leave as they don't earn enough to get out of the country.
We must not offend the Saudis , some years ago we published this http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00litlinks/naim/txt_naim_princess.pdf
All hell broke loose and they threatened to cut off our oil supplies and diplomatic ties with us .
At the same time a secretly shot video of the execution of her and a man were shown on TV , she was shot and he was beheaded , barbaric shytes:mad::mad:
This isn't a court case. The OP already told us what was happening on the video. We are not a jury. Perhaps you think you are, but having watched the video and saying it was bad, where does that leave you?
Are you being deliberately obtuse here, because I get the feeling I'm having my leg pulled?
Let me know if this is the case, then I can go do something else and stop having my time wasted.
The OP can lay any claim s/he likes, but if you invite discussion surrounding a specific something, it is usual for the participants to know what they are supposed to be discussing, and to be able to formulate their own judgment by having access to it?
Do you not agree with this very fundamental principle?
Comments
So why mention about how they work hard in the UK?
Are you for real? I'm expected to comment on and make judgment on something specific I haven't seen, nor which is offered for perusal?
It looks like you have googled a dictionary definition rather than giving your own ideas, which does not surprise me. Nevertheless, item 2 on your list seems to ffit the bill, although I would say the 'obsessive' bit need not necessarily apply.
you say there are no voyeurs here. Would you apply the term to people who like to watch people having sex on the internet? Are there none of them here? Would you apply it to people who watch real life violent acts on the internet? Are there none of them here?
Are you for real? You do things because someone else expects you to do them?
What are you on about at all? If somebody invites discussion about a specific incident then they're expecting precisely that, but how are participants expected to comment when they don't know what is being discussed as they haven't seen it, and it isn't offered for perusal?
How are they supposed to form their own judgment of what is being berated?
Are they expected to make something up? Agree with the thread starter? Disagree with them? Say nothing?
You're having a laugh, surely?
This is so true. I met a Philipino woman who answered an ad for hotel workers in Saudi. When she arrived her passport was taken from her and for 12 years she worked as a cleaner in a private home and was a complete prisoner. She was taken with the family to London where she escaped and contacted the police. She said her case was very common and not at all unique. She lives and works in London, still as a servant but the family she is with pay her flight home every year to see her children who live with her elderly parents.
So have you passed your judgement on what is being berated and did you need to watch someone beaten up to do it?
Seeing one video doesn't make someone a voyeur.
I don't know if there are any of the voyeurs you describe on this thread. Why are you asking me?
They didn't. Read the post properly. The poster lives in Saudi.
Did I need to watch the video of somebody being beaten to know what was being asked or pass invited judgment or comment on the video of somebody being beaten?
No, I thought I'd just make something up instead, so here goes:
It's very, very, very bad.
Because of your earlier assertion that nobody here is a voyeur.
I agree, it is very very bad to beat someone up.
Yes, in response to your first post, in which you intimated posters on this thread who wanted to see the footage before making a judgement, were voyeurs. If you didn't mean to suggest that, fair enough.
How have you reached your conclusion regarding this specific incident?
I already knew it's bad to beat someone up.
I did mean to suggest that, I made it clear enough. Anyone looking at the footage did so because they wanted to see someone beaten up.
Let's hope you're never asked to do jury service. Don't bother with the available evidence about a specific incident before making your mind up, just go off your past experience whilst at the same time berating the other jurors for insisting on seeing it.
This isn't a court case. The OP already told us what was happening on the video. We are not a jury. Perhaps you think you are, but having watched the video and saying it was bad, where does that leave you?
My main issue is this - and it's not with you in particular. What is worse, someone being beaten, or people choosing to watch him being beaten? You, the jury, should decide.
Absolute nonsense.
Without watching the video, I had no way of knowing, from my own judgement, to what extent he was being attacked. Now I've seen it, I judge it to be severe.
There may be people who get off on watching such stuff, I'm not one of them - you can speak for yourself, but not for me.
This is very true.
I actually know of graduates from UK uni's who came from Pakistan that went to Dubai to get work and now cannot leave as they don't earn enough to get out of the country.
It is all too prevalent.
http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00litlinks/naim/txt_naim_princess.pdf
All hell broke loose and they threatened to cut off our oil supplies and diplomatic ties with us .
At the same time a secretly shot video of the execution of her and a man were shown on TV , she was shot and he was beheaded , barbaric shytes:mad::mad:
Oh. Wanting to see evidence of something does not mean getting an enjoyment from it. That's where you're going wrong.
Are you being deliberately obtuse here, because I get the feeling I'm having my leg pulled?
Let me know if this is the case, then I can go do something else and stop having my time wasted.
The OP can lay any claim s/he likes, but if you invite discussion surrounding a specific something, it is usual for the participants to know what they are supposed to be discussing, and to be able to formulate their own judgment by having access to it?
Do you not agree with this very fundamental principle?