• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • General Discussion Forums
  • General Discussion
Shock as pregnant woman performed oral sex on husband in Westfield
<<
<
4 of 11
>>
>
Red November
07-11-2015
Originally Posted by sorcha_healy27:
“So reporting this story about a couple who were disgusting enough to get it on in a shopping centre in front of children is islsmophobic now. What nonsense.”

There was no mention of islam or muslims in either the OP's comments or the C&P newspaper quote.

It's getting ridiculous now, when any story at all that has a negative tone about a muslim, is automatically seen by some as being 'islamophobic'

It's about time a new word was invented for those who blindly accuse others of islamophobia, regardless of the situation or context - how about islamophobiarrhea?
sorcha_healy27
07-11-2015
Originally Posted by Red November:
“There was no mention of islam or muslims in either the OP's comments or the C&P newspaper quote.

It's getting ridiculous now, when any story at all that has a negative tone about a muslim, is automatically seen by some as being 'islamophobic'

It's about time a new word was invented for those who blindly accuse others of islamophobia, regardless of the situation or context - how about islamophobiarrhea?”

I agree. The fact they were Muslim didn't enter my head at all until the people accusing the op of islamaphobia brought it up.

It appears that the subject of the article has now been deflected.

It's absolute nonsense to say this wouldn't have been discussed if they weren't Muslim either. This type of story is a DS staple regardless of who the disgusting couple were.
MAW
07-11-2015
Originally Posted by Hobbit Feet:
“No, I'm asking you to explain your statement, which appears to be based on precisely nothing

just in case you've forgotten it -”

He'd love us all to say 'filthy Muslims' or, in this case, 'Islamic man forces wife to carry out obscene act'. I'm trying to apologise for appearing to pander to his known proclivities, but still happen to think that's the most likely thing here. Apart from the fact that he's just your average bastard, and I doubt that being Muslim has got much to do with that.
James Frederick
07-11-2015
I have the OP on ignore but as soon as I saw who posted it I knew Muslims would be involved in the story somewhere.
sorcha_healy27
07-11-2015
Originally Posted by James Frederick:
“I have the OP on ignore but as soon as I saw who posted it I knew Muslims would be involved in the story somewhere.”

Why the focus on the Muslim angle? Do you not look at what happened in a shopping centre in front of children and not feel disgusted. Or is the fact that they happen to be Muslim exempt them from being disgusting human beings who at the very least are willfully inappropriate
bspace
07-11-2015
Originally Posted by James Frederick:
“I have the OP on ignore but as soon as I saw who posted it I knew Muslims would be involved in the story somewhere.”

Perhaps so but there others in this thread and similar whose knee jerk responses are in no way more insightful. I also note it wasn't the OP who brought Muslims into this although presumably they found the story during their relentless trawling for such tails.
James Frederick
07-11-2015
Originally Posted by sorcha_healy27:
“Why the focus on the Muslim angle? Do you not look at what happened in a shopping centre in front of children and not feel disgusted. Or is the fact that they happen to be Muslim exempt them from being disgusting human beings who at the very least are willfully inappropriate”

I think they got off to lightly and should be locked up I think the same for any public sex acts or nudity.
mounty
07-11-2015
guess she likes pork after all
MinaH
07-11-2015
I suspect, but accept I may be wrong, that those commentators that say the pregnant woman with her young children in attendance, voluntarily pleasured her man in the shopping centre, because she was horny and wanted to release her horniness there and then, are in fact men, and possibly young lads (at least in their heads).
Grouty
07-11-2015
We know which one she is then
skp20040
07-11-2015
Originally Posted by BanglaRoad:
“The agenda of the OP is becoming fairly desperate.”

I know nothing about the OP's agenda but do you feel this should not have been posted on DS ? if not why not ?
Mesostim
07-11-2015
Originally Posted by Hobbit Feet:
“where have I said that?

I was purely pointing out that both camps are offered bait, but please feel free to post anything I have said that is designed to shut down debate.”

Cheers for opening up the "bait" angle of this thread Hobbit Feet, it has provoked and enhanced this debate further You are a true democractic soul who gives meaning and depth to the very concept of freedom of speech...

Yep... the OP is baiting again and getting results.
jenzie
07-11-2015
they're banned from LONDON???
rather extreme ..... umm .....
jzee
07-11-2015
The sad thing about all the above bickering is this women may well have been victim of an assault but very few have dared to discuss that possibility.
skp20040
07-11-2015
Originally Posted by jzee:
“The sad thing about all the above bickering is this women may well have been victim of an assault but very few have dared to discuss that possibility.”

Do you mean her husband forced her to give him oral sex and masturbate him in a shopping centre whilst the kids ran around and she seemed perfectly happy having started by kissing him and moving on to oral sex , all seen on CCTV ?
sorcha_healy27
07-11-2015
Originally Posted by James Frederick:
“I think they got off to lightly and should be locked up I think the same for any public sex acts or nudity.”

Yes exactly. I think the same. Im just wondering why the focus was on the op
bspace
07-11-2015
Originally Posted by BanglaRoad:
“The agenda of the OP is becoming fairly desperate.”

Let he who is without agenda cast the first stone
Thomas Crewes
07-11-2015
Originally Posted by jzee:
“The sad thing about all the above bickering is this women may well have been victim of an assault but very few have dared to discuss that possibility.”

There's not a lick of evidence to suggest that. Tends to limit the discussion, although one or two haven't let that stop them, yourself included.

eta: pun not intended but I'll leave it anyway
Hobbit Feet
07-11-2015
Originally Posted by Mesostim:
“Cheers for opening up the "bait" angle of this thread Hobbit Feet, it has provoked and enhanced this debate further You are a true democractic soul who gives meaning and depth to the very concept of freedom of speech...

Yep... the OP is baiting again and getting results.”

Ummm not sure what I've done to rattle your cage - I responded to the OP making comments about 'bait' and pointed out that it cuts both ways, I certainly didn't raise it.
jesaya
07-11-2015
I thought it odd that Express readers need a map to show them where Newport is.... then I read the comments and realised they couldn't find their own **** with both hands and a pack of hunting dogs.
Domestos
07-11-2015
Originally Posted by Thomas Crewes:
“There's not a lick of evidence to suggest that. Tends to limit the discussion, although one or two haven't let that stop them, yourself included.

eta: pun not intended but I'll leave it anyway”

I would, you seem quite pleased with it.

I agree, there appears to have been no coercion whatsoever.
Red November
07-11-2015
Originally Posted by jenzie:
“they're banned from LONDON???
rather extreme ..... umm .....”

Being banned from London seems a bit of an odd one.

I wonder how that would be enforced, particularly if the wife was fully burkared up?
jzee
07-11-2015
Originally Posted by skp20040:
“Do you mean her husband forced her to give him oral sex and masturbate him in a shopping centre whilst the kids ran around and she seemed perfectly happy having started by kissing him and moving on to oral sex , all seen on CCTV ?”

Of course it can still be coerced, if you think coercion would be obvious on CCTV then you don't understand how abusive relationships work.
Mesostim
07-11-2015
Originally Posted by Hobbit Feet:
“Ummm not sure what I've done to rattle your cage - I responded to the OP making comments about 'bait' and pointed out that it cuts both ways, I certainly didn't raise it.”

No I was sincerly joining in with your right to point out the OP is baiting and you have every right to discuss it... as oposed to accusing you of trying to shut down debate, which you haven't done Totally with you
jediknight2k1
07-11-2015
Originally Posted by Mesostim:
“No I was sincerly joining in with your right to point out the OP is baiting and you have every right to discuss it... as oposed to accusing you of trying to shut down debate, which you haven't done Totally with you ”

Baiting is against the forums rules and often results in e-mail from a DS moderator.

There's plenty of other random threads, like sex on the beach, arrested for having wine, some random girl leaving Instagram.

Your reply is off=topic
<<
<
4 of 11
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map