Dj Dr fox arrested
Discussion
98elise said:
The important bit is consent.
Oh for goodness sake. Bit of heavy petting, a quick feel & she says "no". You stop & 20+ years later you're dragged through the papers & your life is over.I'm sure the victim in the DLT titty squeeze case barely slept a wink in the last few decades.
Compensation/blame culture at its finest
zygalski said:
98elise said:
The important bit is consent.
Oh for goodness sake. Bit of heavy petting, a quick feel & she says "no". You stop & 20+ years later you're dragged through the papers & your life is over.I'm sure the victim in the DLT titty squeeze case barely slept a wink in the last few decades.
Compensation/blame culture at its finest
98elise said:
zygalski said:
98elise said:
The important bit is consent.
Oh for goodness sake. Bit of heavy petting, a quick feel & she says "no". You stop & 20+ years later you're dragged through the papers & your life is over.I'm sure the victim in the DLT titty squeeze case barely slept a wink in the last few decades.
Compensation/blame culture at its finest
deadslow said:
98elise said:
zygalski said:
98elise said:
The important bit is consent.
Oh for goodness sake. Bit of heavy petting, a quick feel & she says "no". You stop & 20+ years later you're dragged through the papers & your life is over.I'm sure the victim in the DLT titty squeeze case barely slept a wink in the last few decades.
Compensation/blame culture at its finest
a) I don't admire sex offenders, though if DLT is one I suppose I am too & so are about 50% of the male population
b) I don't agree with capital punishment, whether for keying a car or squeezing a booby
c) Everyone knows these minor "sex offender" cases are only going through court because of institutional failure & guilt over Savile. Anyone who is or ever has been even vaguely "a name" must be worried about even minor indiscretions.
zygalski said:
c) Everyone knows these minor "sex offender" cases are only going through court because of institutional failure & guilt over Savile. Anyone who is or ever has been even vaguely "a name" must be worried about even minor indiscretions.
Do they? Or is it because the victims are coming forward now they realise the previously-protected can longer get away with it. "Sex offender" doesn't require quotations as they are by definition sex offenders.
La Liga said:
o they? Or is it because the victims are coming forward now they realise the previously-protected can longer get away with it.
"Sex offender" doesn't require quotations as they are by definition sex offenders.
Well my point is that if DLT is a sex offender then so are most single blokes who have a couple of drinks & go to a nightclub. The kind of offense that he committed happens hundreds of times every night up & down the country. Have to say - I fell kinda sorry for him. "Sex offender" doesn't require quotations as they are by definition sex offenders.
The term loses any sense of shock & dare I say most of its meaning when you apply it to a trivial case such as that of DLT.
Rovinghawk said:
Every single bloke over about 15 years old has tried it on with a girl to see how far he can get. At some point the girl will say he's gone too far.
Based on that, either
a) We're all sex offenders
b) A certain latitude should be allowed for 'everyday life'
Thankyou.Based on that, either
a) We're all sex offenders
b) A certain latitude should be allowed for 'everyday life'
Another sane person.
zygalski said:
La Liga said:
o they? Or is it because the victims are coming forward now they realise the previously-protected can longer get away with it.
"Sex offender" doesn't require quotations as they are by definition sex offenders.
Well my point is that if DLT is a sex offender then so are most single blokes who have a couple of drinks & go to a nightclub. The kind of offense that he committed happens hundreds of times every night up & down the country. Have to say - I fell kinda sorry for him. "Sex offender" doesn't require quotations as they are by definition sex offenders.
The term loses any sense of shock & dare I say most of its meaning when you apply it to a trivial case such as that of DLT.
zygalski said:
Rovinghawk said:
Every single bloke over about 15 years old has tried it on with a girl to see how far he can get. At some point the girl will say he's gone too far.
Based on that, either
a) We're all sex offenders
b) A certain latitude should be allowed for 'everyday life'
Thankyou.Based on that, either
a) We're all sex offenders
b) A certain latitude should be allowed for 'everyday life'
Another sane person.
TTwiggy said:
Why this constant reference to pubs and clubs? DLT was at a place of work when he committed the offence. Would it be ok to pop down to Tesco and cop a feel of the till operator's boobs?
That seems the big difference to me, this isn't a teenager trying it on it is a grown man groping women at work.What I want to know is what can I do about suing all the fat slags that groped my arse when I used to go out for a night.
Even when I said no and made them aware that I was not interested they would keep pinching my backside or groping my crutch.
I was deeply traumatised by all this as a young lad. It would stop me getting on the dance floor and I felt pinned into the bar area.
Even worse I'll bet they've not go the price of a can of 8 Ace between them.
Even when I said no and made them aware that I was not interested they would keep pinching my backside or groping my crutch.
I was deeply traumatised by all this as a young lad. It would stop me getting on the dance floor and I felt pinned into the bar area.
Even worse I'll bet they've not go the price of a can of 8 Ace between them.
zygalski said:
Well my point is that if DLT is a sex offender then so are most single blokes who have a couple of drinks & go to a nightclub. The kind of offense that he committed happens hundreds of times every night up & down the country. Have to say - I fell kinda sorry for him.
The term loses any sense of shock & dare I say most of its meaning when you apply it to a trivial case such as that of DLT.
I don't think most people amount 13 sexual assault allegations, which are probable to be more likely than not true. The term loses any sense of shock & dare I say most of its meaning when you apply it to a trivial case such as that of DLT.
TTwiggy said:
Why this constant reference to pubs and clubs? DLT was at a place of work when he committed the offence. Would it be ok to pop down to Tesco and cop a feel of the till operator's boobs?
Yep, shift the context completely away from the actual one to one people can "relate" to, to make a point. Rovinghawk said:
Every single bloke over about 15 years old has tried it on with a girl to see how far he can get. At some point the girl will say he's gone too far.
Based on that, either
a) We're all sex offenders
b) A certain latitude should be allowed for 'everyday life'
Yes, but the difference between the sex offender and the normal bloke is that the normal bloke stops when asked, rather than escalating further. Escalating further only happens if the first move is not rebuffed surely.Based on that, either
a) We're all sex offenders
b) A certain latitude should be allowed for 'everyday life'
On what planet is "she wouldn't let me stroke her thigh, but I guess she'd be ok with me whipping my nob out and slapping her in the face with it" a reasonable train of thought?
Personally I don't have much trouble telling the difference between trying it on, and committing a sexual assault. Not sure why this seems to be a contentious issue. Maybe the rape culture feminists are right after all.
Edit: Just to add - where any of these historical allegations against celebrities have stuck, they've been found guilty by a jury, not the establishment. That's people like you and me, hearing the facts, then deciding that what happened was not "trying it on" but either a straight up sexual assault or a gross abuse of power, age, intimidation etc. I'm not sure there are any cases where someone has been convicted on the basis of someone squeezing their date's bum on the way out of the restaurant.
Edited by BMWBen on Wednesday 1st October 18:34
BMWBen said:
Rovinghawk said:
Every single bloke over about 15 years old has tried it on with a girl to see how far he can get. At some point the girl will say he's gone too far.
Based on that, either
a) We're all sex offenders
b) A certain latitude should be allowed for 'everyday life'
Yes, but the difference between the sex offender and the normal bloke is that the normal bloke stops when asked, rather than escalating further. Escalating further only happens if the first move is not rebuffed surely.Based on that, either
a) We're all sex offenders
b) A certain latitude should be allowed for 'everyday life'
On what planet is "she wouldn't let me stroke her thigh, but I guess she'd be ok with me whipping my nob out and slapping her in the face with it" a reasonable train of thought?
Personally I don't have much trouble telling the difference between trying it on, and committing a sexual assault. Not sure why this seems to be a contentious issue. Maybe the rape culture feminists are right after all.
Edit: Just to add - where any of these historical allegations against celebrities have stuck, they've been found guilty by a jury, not the establishment. That's people like you and me, hearing the facts, then deciding that what happened was not "trying it on" but either a straight up sexual assault or a gross abuse of power, age, intimidation etc. I'm not sure there are any cases where someone has been convicted on the basis of someone squeezing their date's bum on the way out of the restaurant.
Edited by BMWBen on Wednesday 1st October 18:34
9mm said:
If it's so clear, help me out. When is it acceptable for a bloke to make the first move and touch a female intimately?
Well, within minutes of meeting on the first date it's customary to whip out your cock, grab her by the head and shove it in her mouth. Right there in the restaurant even.Try it out and report back.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff