A man who is almost paralytic? I'd imagine a large number of these cases are between two people who were both too pissed to have made a clear judgement call.
A clear thinking sober man who takes advantage of a paralytic woman is an animal...I'd have a hard time making that call if they were both incredibly drunk.
To put it as delicately as I can, not so 'paralytic' that he couldn't perform, though?
A. Teaching people not to have sex with someone who is too drunk to consent
B. We're teaching people not to get drunk.
If you're successful with B, you don't get to A. You also don't get women who are completely paralytic but somehow still conscious enough to voluntarily make the decision to go to a guy's hotel room, thus giving him the come on, happily doing the horizontal mambo with him, and them screaming rape when she wakes up in the morning with a thumping headache. If she's capable of making the decision to go to the hotel room, then she's capable of declining sex. She either didn't decline it, or couldn't remember if she did. In that situation, as far as I'm concerned, she has no case. Does sex now have to be a written and signed contract?
All this "I didn't consent" is bollocks. She consented to it when she got pissed and decided to she wanted to go back to the guy's hotel room. It what's men and women have done since the dawn of time.
Going to someone's hotel room is NOT consenting to sex. At all. Actually starting and going through with having sex is consenting. What kind of a man wants to have sex with someone that drunk anyway? The one time in my life I was so drunk that my memory was fuzzy the next day, I could barely lift up my head. I was in no state to consent to anything as serious as sex and the idea that some people think being in that state makes you fair game is horrific to me.
I feel sorry for her, she's 66 and is coming of with comments that are bit dotty, I've heard other old people say crazy stuff, it's what they do. She's a little old woman who doesn't have it in her to hurt anyone. She's the wrong person to be involving definitions of rape on, it's people who are abusers that are the problem not some little old woman with an opinion.
People don't agree with it, that's fine but all this vile abuse towards a little old woman is not gonna change rape situations.
Going to someone's hotel room is NOT consenting to sex. At all. Actually starting and going through with having sex is consenting. What kind of a man wants to have sex with someone that drunk anyway? The one time in my life I was so drunk that my memory was fuzzy the next day, I could barely lift up my head. I was in no state to consent to anything as serious as sex and the idea that some people think being in that state makes you fair game is horrific to me.
As I said earlier, the state she was in is pretty irrelevant. She went back to his hotel room late at night, pissed off her bonce, with a bloke who she'd been drinking with. Now, what did she think she was going there for? Coffee and biscuits? That he'd tuck her up in bed with a teddy and hot water bottle while he slept on the floor?
She's either got a severe intelligence deficit, or she lied her arse off to the police.
Not a flattering picture of Judy on the front of the Mirror today!
During the Press Preview on Sky News last night, when the front of The Mirror came up on the video wall, one of the guys kept coming out with one line after another about that photos of Judy. They were all in such stifled hysterics, the gallery had to cut to adverts.
No, they're not. They're footballers. Nothing more, nothing less.
The only role models a child should have should be their parents.
He is perfectly entitled to resume his career when he is released. Or do you think he should be punished again after release?
Nowadays Football teams foster links in the community with local schools, he shouldn't be allowed to play at a professional level. Football games are a family event, no place for someone who's been convicted of a violent crime.
To me, anyone who tries to paint one kind of rape as being no big deal compared to other kinds, whether its a jury or someone like Judy Finnigan or just your average member of the public, is a person who desperately needs to be educated on the damage rape and ANY sort of non consensual sex can do to someone.
But that's the thing. I don't think anyone is trying to paint that... are they?
It is a big deal, a big deal which led to a man being convicted and punished for it. And the damage it caused is undeniable. However as with any crime when the punishment is dished out you can not do that without taking into account the situation, factors leading into it, the motives behind it etc. That's the viewpoint of a woolly liberal, I'd say yours erred more on the conservative side of lock em up and throw away the key.
I mean I suppose taking another example i.e. when a persons actions cause the death of another person. To the victim and their family the damage is done and can never be undone. However how the person who cause the death is punished depends on the situation that caused it.
And that's what this argument was about wasn't it. Should a person who has been punished for his crime be allowed to return to work or should that punishment continue to extend beyond the prison term the legal system handed down to him. Judy I think was trying to express that he had been punished suitably for the crime he committed but maybe didn't quite articulate as tactfully as she might have like. And I pretty much agree with that standpoint. The legal system is there to do it's job and it's deeply unethical for a person to pick and choose what they do and don't accept. If I am to trust a guilty verdict then I have to trust the sentence passed.
Though saying that I think a person or firm has a certain amount of right to choose not to employ a person based on their criminal past but at the same time I also would defend their right to employ them of they so wished.
Nowadays Football teams foster links in the community with local schools, he shouldn't be allowed to play at a professional level. Football games are a family event, no place for someone who's been convicted of a violent crime.
my thinking too,he's looked up too by lads and lasses he can't go walking back in all here I am like when he's been done for rape he needs to get a paper round and start upwards
During the Press Preview on Sky News last night, when the front of The Mirror came up on the video wall, one of the guys kept coming out with one line after another about that photos of Judy. They were all in such stifled hysterics, the gallery had to cut to adverts.
My point is very simple. Judy viewpoint is not so out of touch with mainstream opinion on this subject as you might believe. Liberals like yourself can have your view on this subject and it is totally valid but until such time as mainstream opinion shifts then the conviction rate for 'date rape' is not going to rise significantly. Juries are made up of 12 everyday folk from all walks of life, different life experiences and opinions. They come together to reach a decision on guilt or not of rape. The guilty verdicts are not coming through so there must still be a majority (in this instance 10 out of 12) who do not see these cases as rape. Or are not sufficiently convinced beyond reasonable doubt that it is. You are dealing with a he said/she said situation which is always going to be difficult.
You are being really dehumanising towards rape victims by making it all about politics. Also, "liberals like yourself"...what a bizarre thing to say!
As far courts failing to secure convictions for rape, I would say that is down to lack of evidence most of the time.
Your point of view on the matter is seriously lacking in empathy. To be so invested in political belief that you appear to pigeon hole everybody in the way you're doing is an absured and seriously over simplified view of human beings.
Going to someone's hotel room is NOT consenting to sex. At all. Actually starting and going through with having sex is consenting. What kind of a man wants to have sex with someone that drunk anyway? The one time in my life I was so drunk that my memory was fuzzy the next day, I could barely lift up my head. I was in no state to consent to anything as serious as sex and the idea that some people think being in that state makes you fair game is horrific to me.
Actually the jury didn't seem to agree with you on that point. The guy she went back to the hotel with was found not guilty. It was his friend who turned up later to share in the action who went to prison. It's seems to me that a lot of people are commenting on this case without being fully aware of the facts ...
Actually the jury didn't seem to agree with you on that point. The guy she went back to the hotel with was found not guilty. It was his friend who turned up later to share in the action who went to prison. It's seems to me that a lot of people are commenting on this case without being fully aware of the facts ...
Yes, I have to say that the GD thread on this same topic has really enlightened me. Far from being a straightforward 'rape', the female in question didn't actually press charges; it was only the police who did that. And apparently she told her friends on social media that she would be coming into some money and she was going to treat them all (presumably as a result of selling her story or some compensation or something)?
The conviction itself - from what I have read of the actual facts (not the outraged 'headlines' of some of the redtops, who are only interested in the salacious and woudn't know 'truth if it slapped them on the face) seemed actually to be very questionable.
And whilst I would never minimise what rape is and what it does to its victims (and why hopefully the legal system is changing for the better in getting convictions for this heinous crime, although there is still a long way to go, especially in domestic abuse cases), once someone has served their time and shown remorse and been rehabilitated then they should be allowed to resume their life.
In cases of repeat offenders, there should be mandates for locking away for a 'life' term (I don't know if there are because I'm not up on the law). But i doubt very much that this applies in this case.
I'm not the biggest fan of Judy and 'Loose Women' is something I go out of my way to avoid if I'm at home when it's on; and she should have thought more carefully about how she was going to voice this opinion. As it is, she was wrong in HOW she said it (minimising the effects of rape), but not in what was behind her stance.
Yes, I have to say that the GD thread on this same topic has really enlightened me. Far from being a straightforward 'rape', the female in question didn't actually press charges; it was only the police who did that. And apparently she told her friends on social media that she would be coming into some money and she was going to treat them all (presumably as a result of selling her story or some compensation or something)?
The conviction itself - from what I have read of the actual facts (not the outraged 'headlines' of some of the redtops, who are only interested in the salacious and woudn't know 'truth if it slapped them on the face) seemed actually to be very questionable.
And whilst I would never minimise what rape is and what it does to its victims (and why hopefully the legal system is changing for the better in getting convictions for this heinous crime, although there is still a long way to go, especially in domestic abuse cases), once someone has served their time and shown remorse and been rehabilitated then they should be allowed to resume their life.
In cases of repeat offenders, there should be mandates for locking away for a 'life' term (I don't know if there are because I'm not up on the law). But i doubt very much that this applies in this case.
I'm not the biggest fan of Judy and 'Loose Women' is something I go out of my way to avoid if I'm at home when it's on; and she should have thought more carefully about how she was going to voice this opinion. As it is, she was wrong in HOW she said it (minimising the effects of rape), but not in what was behind her stance.
Well she did get over 5K in victim compensation but never sold her story - perhaps the campaign of abuse lunched by Evans family and friends put her off doing that. Still it's a fair sum of money.
I'm not a fan of Judy or Loose Women or any kind of talking head show for that matter but I agree with what you say - her remarks were unfortunate in that a rape might be achieved with intimidation rather than actual violence - but with regard to this case she had a point as evidence seems to point to the 'victim' actually participating willingly in the sexual activity with both men, rather than being taken advantage of.
my thinking too,he's looked up too by lads and lasses he can't go walking back in all here I am like when he's been done for rape he needs to get a paper round and start upwards
But what about all the children doing paper rounds. Surely he'd be a bad example to all of them??
Like it or not, he's done the time and will be released. Once that has happened he has every right to carry on working on in the industry he was in before. There are players in the league who have done far worse than him and they have carried on with their careers once released.
As I said earlier, the state she was in is pretty irrelevant. She went back to his hotel room late at night, pissed off her bonce, with a bloke who she'd been drinking with. Now, what did she think she was going there for? Coffee and biscuits? That he'd tuck her up in bed with a teddy and hot water bottle while he slept on the floor?
She's either got a severe intelligence deficit, or she lied her arse off to the police.
Actually the jury didn't seem to agree with you on that point. The guy she went back to the hotel with was found not guilty. It was his friend who turned up later to share in the action who went to prison. It's seems to me that a lot of people are commenting on this case without being fully aware of the facts ...
It's still not consent. Going to someone's room is not automatically giving consent. Maybe she was extremely naïve. I've known girls like that. I've been a girl like that. Now I'm older, I know better, but at one point I would happily be close to a guy without even thinking of sleeping with him.
Actually the jury didn't seem to agree with you on that point. The guy she went back to the hotel with was found not guilty. It was his friend who turned up later to share in the action who went to prison. It's seems to me that a lot of people are commenting on this case without being fully aware of the facts ...
The more I read of this case, the more confusing I find the outcome. Judy definitely didn't express herself well but I'm starting to see where she might have been coming from.
Vile woman. Absolutely unforgivable comments. Rape is rape. Her attitude is disgusting. Anyone who thinks that the offence is somehow lessened if it is not violent needs to have their head examined. It is STILL an absolute violation of someone, and to suggest otherwise is sick and disgusting and Judy should retire because the thought of seeing this ignorant woman on TV sickens me to the stomach. Shame on her husband as well.
I didn't see Judy Finnigan on LW, however I have got the gist of what she said & IMHO, she, perhaps chose her words wrongly but was no way condoning what Ched Evans did by any means, she (I believe) simply said, he'd been punished & in her opinion should be allowed to carry on with his career which she's entitled to say without the abuse she's faced from the press & social media.
Judy Finnigan is not a stupid woman by any means, therefore I'm pretty sure she'll have researched the case before voicing her opinion.
Rape is an abhorrent crime & of course he should have been punished but (I'm trying to choose my words carefully here) if you read the link I posted, there is a lot more to this story than the public may be aware of.
It was with reluctance I posted on this thread as I'm loathe to think anyone would believe I'm in the "she was drunk, her skirt was too short, therefore she was asking for it" brigade.
I just feel JF is receiving horrendous criticism, not to mention threats of raping her daughter for simply giving her thoughts on the matter, which at the end of the day weren't actually about the rape itself, the discussion was, should Ched Evans be allowed to return to professional football.
I agree with her too. If a girl goes out and gets so drunk to the extent that she doesn't know what she is doing and is happy to go to a hotel with a stranger then I am sorry but don't go crying rape.
The rapist knew what he was doing, though, didn't he? What kind of "man" has sex with a woman who's practically unconscious, unable to consent, unable to actively participate? Just because she's sexually active, doesn't mean she's not entitled to her personal safety. Just because she's drunk doesn't mean she deserves to be violated.
It's still not consent. Going to someone's room is not automatically giving consent. Maybe she was extremely naïve. I've known girls like that. I've been a girl like that. Now I'm older, I know better, but at one point I would happily be close to a guy without even thinking of sleeping with him.
When a woman picks up a complete stranger in the street and insists on coming with him to his hotel I think both parties would assume it is for sex. And no one is arguing that she thought she was going back for any other reason. The argument is that even though she wanted sex she was too drunk to be responsible for her own decisions. And also that she only agreed to have sex with one bloke, by going back, not his mate as well.
I didn't see Judy Finnigan on LW, however I have got the gist of what she said & IMHO, she, perhaps chose her words wrongly but was no way condoning what Ched Evans did by any means, she (I believe) simply said, he'd been punished & in her opinion should be allowed to carry on with his career which she's entitled to say without the abuse she's faced from the press & social media.
Judy Finnigan is not a stupid woman by any means, therefore I'm pretty sure she'll have researched the case before voicing her opinion.
Rape is an abhorrent crime & of course he should have been punished but (I'm trying to choose my words carefully here) if you read the link I posted, there is a lot more to this story than the public may be aware of.
It was with reluctance I posted on this thread as I'm loathe to think anyone would believe I'm in the "she was drunk, her skirt was too short, therefore she was asking for it" brigade.
I just feel JF is receiving horrendous criticism, not to mention threats of raping her daughter for simply giving her thoughts on the matter, which at the end of the day weren't actually about the rape itself, the discussion was, should Ched Evans be allowed to return to professional football.
It's all very muddy, isn't it? Judy was absolutely wrong to 'grade' rape, no excuse for that and, as a seasoned professional, she should really have known better than to approach the argument in the way she did, but while I don't take that link you've posted as gospel either, I do find something a bit disconcerting about the circumstances and a verdict that allowed one man to go free for doing exactly - as far as I can see? - the same thing as the one who went to jail for rape. And I wonder how much of that informed Judy's take on this...?
Vile woman. Absolutely unforgivable comments. Rape is rape. Her attitude is disgusting. Anyone who thinks that the offence is somehow lessened if it is not violent needs to have their head examined. It is STILL an absolute violation of someone, and to suggest otherwise is sick and disgusting and Judy should retire because the thought of seeing this ignorant woman on TV sickens me to the stomach. Shame on her husband as well.
I couldn't agree with Judy's comments because of the level of presumption - "it wasn't violent" and "there was no bodily harm". Unless she was in the room at the time I am not sure how she has drawn these conclusions so readily.
Once it is suggested that "sometimes it's OK, because of this reason, or that reason...." it sends out very mixed messages, particularly to younger people who are most likely to end up in these situations.
I certainly do not condone the subsequent, predictably abusive reaction towards Judy's family on Twitter and other social media, however. That does not help at all.
Comments
To put it as delicately as I can, not so 'paralytic' that he couldn't perform, though?
very drunk people make big mistakes that in the cold light of day they regret
men for centuries have got drunk and slept with women that they would probably not sober
women have only had 30 yrs of it so they need to wise up and either get with the program
or know when theyve had enough
Going to someone's hotel room is NOT consenting to sex. At all. Actually starting and going through with having sex is consenting. What kind of a man wants to have sex with someone that drunk anyway? The one time in my life I was so drunk that my memory was fuzzy the next day, I could barely lift up my head. I was in no state to consent to anything as serious as sex and the idea that some people think being in that state makes you fair game is horrific to me.
People don't agree with it, that's fine but all this vile abuse towards a little old woman is not gonna change rape situations.
As I said earlier, the state she was in is pretty irrelevant. She went back to his hotel room late at night, pissed off her bonce, with a bloke who she'd been drinking with. Now, what did she think she was going there for? Coffee and biscuits? That he'd tuck her up in bed with a teddy and hot water bottle while he slept on the floor?
She's either got a severe intelligence deficit, or she lied her arse off to the police.
During the Press Preview on Sky News last night, when the front of The Mirror came up on the video wall, one of the guys kept coming out with one line after another about that photos of Judy. They were all in such stifled hysterics, the gallery had to cut to adverts.
It is a big deal, a big deal which led to a man being convicted and punished for it. And the damage it caused is undeniable. However as with any crime when the punishment is dished out you can not do that without taking into account the situation, factors leading into it, the motives behind it etc. That's the viewpoint of a woolly liberal, I'd say yours erred more on the conservative side of lock em up and throw away the key.
I mean I suppose taking another example i.e. when a persons actions cause the death of another person. To the victim and their family the damage is done and can never be undone. However how the person who cause the death is punished depends on the situation that caused it.
And that's what this argument was about wasn't it. Should a person who has been punished for his crime be allowed to return to work or should that punishment continue to extend beyond the prison term the legal system handed down to him. Judy I think was trying to express that he had been punished suitably for the crime he committed but maybe didn't quite articulate as tactfully as she might have like. And I pretty much agree with that standpoint. The legal system is there to do it's job and it's deeply unethical for a person to pick and choose what they do and don't accept. If I am to trust a guilty verdict then I have to trust the sentence passed.
Though saying that I think a person or firm has a certain amount of right to choose not to employ a person based on their criminal past but at the same time I also would defend their right to employ them of they so wished.
my thinking too,he's looked up too by lads and lasses he can't go walking back in all here I am like when he's been done for rape he needs to get a paper round and start upwards
Normally avoid Sky News like the plague.
You are being really dehumanising towards rape victims by making it all about politics. Also, "liberals like yourself"...what a bizarre thing to say!
As far courts failing to secure convictions for rape, I would say that is down to lack of evidence most of the time.
Your point of view on the matter is seriously lacking in empathy. To be so invested in political belief that you appear to pigeon hole everybody in the way you're doing is an absured and seriously over simplified view of human beings.
Actually the jury didn't seem to agree with you on that point. The guy she went back to the hotel with was found not guilty. It was his friend who turned up later to share in the action who went to prison. It's seems to me that a lot of people are commenting on this case without being fully aware of the facts ...
Yes, I have to say that the GD thread on this same topic has really enlightened me. Far from being a straightforward 'rape', the female in question didn't actually press charges; it was only the police who did that. And apparently she told her friends on social media that she would be coming into some money and she was going to treat them all (presumably as a result of selling her story or some compensation or something)?
The conviction itself - from what I have read of the actual facts (not the outraged 'headlines' of some of the redtops, who are only interested in the salacious and woudn't know 'truth if it slapped them on the face) seemed actually to be very questionable.
And whilst I would never minimise what rape is and what it does to its victims (and why hopefully the legal system is changing for the better in getting convictions for this heinous crime, although there is still a long way to go, especially in domestic abuse cases), once someone has served their time and shown remorse and been rehabilitated then they should be allowed to resume their life.
In cases of repeat offenders, there should be mandates for locking away for a 'life' term (I don't know if there are because I'm not up on the law). But i doubt very much that this applies in this case.
I'm not the biggest fan of Judy and 'Loose Women' is something I go out of my way to avoid if I'm at home when it's on; and she should have thought more carefully about how she was going to voice this opinion. As it is, she was wrong in HOW she said it (minimising the effects of rape), but not in what was behind her stance.
Well she did get over 5K in victim compensation but never sold her story - perhaps the campaign of abuse lunched by Evans family and friends put her off doing that. Still it's a fair sum of money.
I'm not a fan of Judy or Loose Women or any kind of talking head show for that matter but I agree with what you say - her remarks were unfortunate in that a rape might be achieved with intimidation rather than actual violence - but with regard to this case she had a point as evidence seems to point to the 'victim' actually participating willingly in the sexual activity with both men, rather than being taken advantage of.
But what about all the children doing paper rounds. Surely he'd be a bad example to all of them??
Like it or not, he's done the time and will be released. Once that has happened he has every right to carry on working on in the industry he was in before. There are players in the league who have done far worse than him and they have carried on with their careers once released.
It's still not consent. Going to someone's room is not automatically giving consent. Maybe she was extremely naïve. I've known girls like that. I've been a girl like that. Now I'm older, I know better, but at one point I would happily be close to a guy without even thinking of sleeping with him.
The more I read of this case, the more confusing I find the outcome. Judy definitely didn't express herself well but I'm starting to see where she might have been coming from.
I didn't see Judy Finnigan on LW, however I have got the gist of what she said & IMHO, she, perhaps chose her words wrongly but was no way condoning what Ched Evans did by any means, she (I believe) simply said, he'd been punished & in her opinion should be allowed to carry on with his career which she's entitled to say without the abuse she's faced from the press & social media.
Judy Finnigan is not a stupid woman by any means, therefore I'm pretty sure she'll have researched the case before voicing her opinion.
Rape is an abhorrent crime & of course he should have been punished but (I'm trying to choose my words carefully here) if you read the link I posted, there is a lot more to this story than the public may be aware of.
It was with reluctance I posted on this thread as I'm loathe to think anyone would believe I'm in the "she was drunk, her skirt was too short, therefore she was asking for it" brigade.
I just feel JF is receiving horrendous criticism, not to mention threats of raping her daughter for simply giving her thoughts on the matter, which at the end of the day weren't actually about the rape itself, the discussion was, should Ched Evans be allowed to return to professional football.
Blame the rapist for rape, not the victim.
When a woman picks up a complete stranger in the street and insists on coming with him to his hotel I think both parties would assume it is for sex. And no one is arguing that she thought she was going back for any other reason. The argument is that even though she wanted sex she was too drunk to be responsible for her own decisions. And also that she only agreed to have sex with one bloke, by going back, not his mate as well.
It's all very muddy, isn't it? Judy was absolutely wrong to 'grade' rape, no excuse for that and, as a seasoned professional, she should really have known better than to approach the argument in the way she did, but while I don't take that link you've posted as gospel either, I do find something a bit disconcerting about the circumstances and a verdict that allowed one man to go free for doing exactly - as far as I can see? - the same thing as the one who went to jail for rape. And I wonder how much of that informed Judy's take on this...?
I couldn't agree with Judy's comments because of the level of presumption - "it wasn't violent" and "there was no bodily harm". Unless she was in the room at the time I am not sure how she has drawn these conclusions so readily.
Once it is suggested that "sometimes it's OK, because of this reason, or that reason...." it sends out very mixed messages, particularly to younger people who are most likely to end up in these situations.
I certainly do not condone the subsequent, predictably abusive reaction towards Judy's family on Twitter and other social media, however. That does not help at all.