Parramatta Eels 2017

[gerg]

Yes. With fervour.

Yes I am suggesting 1000 women ARENT throwing themselves at men with money and that this IS NOT in fact, part of the reason why athletes hold these attitudes.

That’s...
To be blunt, putrid posting

You're not living in the real world if you believe that.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

Na, I live in the real world where generally speaking peoples attitudes and behaviour towards things like women, violence and authority are developed LOOOOONG before they are known for their sporting talent, hell there is a case to be made the path starts well before they’re even old enough to know what sport is.

To blame women for the attitudes of adult men is absolutely ridiculous.

But you yourself have stated that many many players in professional sport come from disadvantaged socio-economic situations. So the likelihood of them having decent attitudes towards women is low from the outset.

Correct. That is entirely my point, this is for the very most part is the reason these people have the attitudes they do about women, violence and authority
Often they come from environments where respecting women, diversity, respecting authority and not solving issues with violence are not values promoted in their household

Again, developmentally, once those behaviours have been learnt, they are hard to overcome. It’s a cycle. Hence all the focus on “breaking the cycle”.

Which is why I’m telling you excusing players like Hayne and their behaviour by victim blaming and shaming is straight up Bull, and is a reason why 2/3rds of assaults go unreported. Women don’t have any faith that people will believe them, that they won’t be blamed and shamed in the process, and this means that have very little hope of achieving justice... the stats back this up. It’s not up for debate, this is not women over reacting, the stats on this couldn’t be more damning
it is cold hard facts.

And this thread and many others on other sites and throughout social media suggest rape culture is still very much alive and well, and whilst it is, those stats won’t change and women will continue to suffer at alarming rates and overwhelming in silence.

From what I’ve seen and read, it appears at BEST Hayne seems to have take advantage of an extremely intoxicated girl who was in no state to give informed consent. At worst.... well a lot worse

Hayne is not the victim here. End of story.

So how about Tiger Woods? Pretty good upbringing from most reports.

And I see you are no longer disputing that 1000s of women throw themselves at athletes? Or are we still shifting the goalposts?



Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

[gerg]

It’s not how our judicial system works, as I’ve said previously it’s a fine line between supporting the victims (which we must do) and innocent until proven guilty and I don’t society would advocate changing that to guilty before proven innocent.

Absolutely. The majority of posters ITT have Hayne as guilty despite the police investigation being canned because of a lack of evidence and the alleged victim is the only side of the story that has been heard.

As I've stated repeatedly I am trying to be objective and everybody is throwing round suggestions that what I have been 'spitballing' is "embarrassing", almost in an attempt to shutdown the conversation. Are we not allowed to discuss different possibilities/scenarios or opinions in our society anymore?

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

[Manbush]

It was pretty much the same in here with the Brett Stewart incident.

[Green eyed Mick]

It’s not how our judicial system works, as I’ve said previously it’s a fine line between supporting the victims (which we must do) and innocent until proven guilty and I don’t society would advocate changing that to guilty before proven innocent.

Our judicial system doesn't work. It consistently fails to deliver justice for sexual assault victims.

[Manbush]

It’s not how our judicial system works, as I’ve said previously it’s a fine line between supporting the victims (which we must do) and innocent until proven guilty and I don’t society would advocate changing that to guilty before proven innocent.

Our judicial system doesn't work. It consistently fails to deliver justice for sexual assault victims.

Agree it consistently lets victims down but how should it work, guilty before proven innocent, lower the burden of proof? As it is people innocent of crimes still get found guilty how much would that increase if we made it either guilty before proven innocent or lowered the burden of proof?

[Green eyed Mick]

It’s not how our judicial system works, as I’ve said previously it’s a fine line between supporting the victims (which we must do) and innocent until proven guilty and I don’t society would advocate changing that to guilty before proven innocent.

Our judicial system doesn't work. It consistently fails to deliver justice for sexual assault victims.

Agree it consistently lets victims down but how should it work, guilty before proven innocent, lower the burden of proof? As it is people innocent of crimes still get found guilty how much would that increase if we made it either guilty before proven innocent or lowered the burden of proof?

Stop victim blaming and shaming and change the legal system.

Jurisdictions have separate courts to deal with drug offences and separate courts for young offenders, I don't think it's unreasonable to consider special courts to deal with sexual assaults.

[Manbush]

Agree victim blaming and shaming is wrong and shouldn’t exist, as I’ve said though it’s a fine line with supporting the victim and automatically assuming guilt because of an accusation.

Special courts are good but how would that change things unless you changed the burden of proof?

[Green eyed Mick]

There are a heap of ways special courts would improve things without having to shift the burden of proof. Special courts acknowledge the special circumstances of the victims and the perpetrator. That's a first step. How it works should be left up to the experts in the field.

I am sure some of the people who just got done with the royal commission could make a few suggestions on how to better deal with victims of sexual assault.

[Manbush]

Just saw this article which mentions a few good ways special courts would help, I’ll happily stand corrected after seeing the suggestions within.


https://www.google.com.au/amp/www.indep ... html%3famp

[gangrenous]

I was mostly pushing back against the idea that being wanted is a factor in their attitudes toward women, that's a copout, a flat out cop out. And it's page 1 of the victim blaming play book.

I agree with almost all of what you said, but I don’t think this sentence is being realistic. When most of the women you come in contact with in social circles want to sleep with you, particularly if it started from your teens, I can see how that contributes to attitudes where the sport star subconsciously assumes every woman wants them and implicitly consents. Particularly those from the poor backgrounds.

I’m not saying that’s the fault of women. I’m not saying that’s ok. I’m not saying that in any way absolves sports stars. Obviously the stats you’ve quoted are disgusting and something needs to change. All I am saying is that I disagree that this wouldn’t be “a factor”.

[dubby]

It’s not how our judicial system works, as I’ve said previously it’s a fine line between supporting the victims (which we must do) and innocent until proven guilty and I don’t society would advocate changing that to guilty before proven innocent.

Absolutely. The majority of posters ITT have Hayne as guilty despite the police investigation being canned because of a lack of evidence and the alleged victim is the only side of the story that has been heard.

As I've stated repeatedly I am trying to be objective and everybody is throwing round suggestions that what I have been 'spitballing' is "embarrassing", almost in an attempt to shutdown the conversation. Are we not allowed to discuss different possibilities/scenarios or opinions in our society anymore?

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

I understand your point and agree with you.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

[T_R]

I don't think that the majority of posters have him as guilty.

As I said, he's admitted intercourse took place and it appears that there are witnesses able to establish that the claimant was too drunk to offer informed consent.

Probably not enough for a criminal conviction there, but prima facie from the court documents (have you read them?) and in a balance of probability situation, I would far prefer to be representing her rather than him.

[Manbush]

TR can you point me to the “too drunk to give consent”, when I’ve looked it referred to being incapacitated, ie passed out or asleep, unable to give verbal consent, happy to be proven wrong but from what I’ve seen of Californian law if you can still say yes then no matter how drunk you are seems irrelevant.

[T_R]

Manbush, I really dont want to go down into your rabbit hole. Read the court documents. They were framed to establish this.

Sent from my [device_name] using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk

[dubby]

I don't think that the majority of posters have him as guilty.

As I said, he's admitted intercourse took place and it appears that there are witnesses able to establish that the claimant was too drunk to offer informed consent.

Probably not enough for a criminal conviction there, but prima facie from the court documents (have you read them?) and in a balance of probability situation, I would far prefer to be representing her rather than him.

Haven't read the court documents.

Don't know all the facts in this case.

But, if she's certainly within her legal rights to seek justice/compensation if she did not offer consent.

It sickens me that somebody would have sex with a person not able to provide consent. You just can't do that.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

[FuiFui BradBrad]

Side note - This SNL sketch really brought the point home for me.




Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk

[gerg]

If you’re offended or upset by me presenting the stats of this in a way that is not able to be ignored, then I offer no apology what so ever. Your putrid posting refers to outdated attitudes to claims of sexual abuse

It’s here for all to see. Your immediate reaction was to dismiss the woman’s claim, to excuse Hayne’s behaviour because women throw themselves at him and that’s why he has got into this situation, you’ve tacitly accused the victim of money grabbing. That’s victim blaming culture... then low and behold you read the report and suddenly it’s “it doesn’t look good for Hayne” haha
IMFS! This is the problem! This is exactly the problem. The natural reaction from men is to assume the worst of the victim! Haha.

That’s the WHOLE bloody point! And you’re far from alone so I don’t mean to single you out, but this thread is IT, in a nutshell.

I imagine if this was my daughter. How angry, how upset, how depressed I’d be with the idea that the default reaction to this from idiots on a message board was that my daughter was on some money grabbing scheme or that because these athletes get more attention than most, that somehow she was responsible for some piece sexually assaulting her.

Your point is you are uncomfortable with the idea that these statistics are relevant to you daughters. Sorry mate, but they are.
As they are to mine. It’s imperative you put yourself in the victims shoes, or in this case her fathers shoes and wonder what you think of a man who’s posted what you have about his little girl and the the defence of a man, who at the very least took advantage of her. And at worst, raped her.

This is absolutely an issue that will plague our daughters, as it has their mums and Aunties.
Which is very sad. And upsetting. But burying your head and pretending they are immune to this isn’t going to help.

It’s uncomfortable but necessary to personalise this stuff as Dad’s and think about how we want to shape the world and culture we send them out into.

I make absolutely no apologies for trying to make you think of it in terms of your own daughters, it’s how I always think about this.

We all have to think about in those terms because statistically speaking, that’s what this is.

Like you say it is all here for people to see. You continue to selectively quote what I have said, almost to the point of misrepresenting or even attempting to defame me.
Then on top of that you have brought my children into a discussion about rape. I don't care if you want to draw your children into the discussion - that is your choice. You did not seek my permission to drag mine into this discussion. And drawing parallels between my children and the young lady under discussion is B.S. the young lady is 25 y/o and has chosen to take civil action against Hayne, therefore throwing the case into the public domain where it can be discussed. My children are 1 and 4 y/o and they or I don't want them involved in this discussion. I don't give a **** about your reason for doing it. Take your moralistic attitude wherever you want but don't include my children in it.

I allowed you leeway on the matter because I thought you may concede that your crass effort was not in the same ballpark as what you claim as my 'putrid posting' but I should have known better with you. As such I am telling you to withdraw your comments about my children and if you are unable to rein in your ego and do it I'd like Greeneyed or T_R to do it.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

[dubby]

Greg, if you'd like to, you can report a post for mods and admins to investigate further and potentially moderate as required.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

[Botman]

I haven’t made any disparaging remarks about your children
I haven’t crossed any ethical or moralistic lines. Certainly I have not broken any forum guidelines

And I have simply said, and continue to unapologetically state facts. Your girls as much as mine are going to face the issue of sexual assault in their lives
Be it as friend, colleague, acquaintance or as a victim

If that make you feel uncomfortable as a father. Good. It should. It should make every single one of us uncomfortable.

Uncomfortable enough to consider what we can do individually to rectify it. If you’re too fragile to deal with this matter in a real world sense, if are unable to cope with the idea that this issue will play a role in your child’s life, then you should not engage in the discussions. I won’t apologise

There isn’t a whole lot I can do individually, but what I can do Is change my behaviour and attitude, to challenge attitudes that continue this culture of victim blaming.
I can teach my young boys to be better than us, to show my young girls that they can stand up for themselves without fear of recrimination or blame, which is what you’ve subjected this girl too in this thread.

That starts with us. With people like you and I. The onus is on us to makes sure we start moving in the right direction

Again at no point have I said anything remotely disparaging or lewd or crude about your girls. You have simply taken offence to idea that the issue of sexual assault is going to impact your girls lives. The only parallels draw here were that the situation this girls finds herself in and the recrimination she is suffering now at yours and others hands, is a situation roughly 1/3 girls will go through... and between us we have 3 girls.
I don’t like those odds. And clearly nor do you.

You’re welcome to be offended by that, and you’re welcome to bury your head in the sand and pretend it’s not so because it’s easier than confronting that ugly reality, but it is a reality and I won’t apologise for make you aware of it and making you aware of how the attitude you and others have displayed in this thread help perpetuate that culture.

If the moderators wish to spare your feelings, they are free to do so, but they should do so by stating clearly what guidelines were crossed or whether they are just appeasing you and your offence, publicly.

What I’ve done here is no different to what people do all the time with stadium prices, entertaining players, public health matters, economic politics, social politics

“How do you explain to your children why you voted no/yes on marriage equality”

“How do you afford to take your kids to a game these days, at $40 a ticket?”

“Sure Papalii is the better player, but do you kids run around in the park pretending to be him or Austin/Rapana?”

Children are brought into the topics all the time. Mostly because what we do effects them most, now and into the future. Of all the issues to exclude them from, this would be one of the last we should do it from.

[dubby]

I've read this conversation.

I've not detected any breach of forum guidelines.

What I've read is a parlay between two men with different opinions.

However, Greg and other posters are always welcome to report anything they feel may be in breach of forum guidelines, or just downright offensive. Often, it can be just a misunderstanding that the people involved can solve via PM.



Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

[gerg]

I haven’t made any disparaging remarks about your children
I haven’t crossed any ethical or moralistic lines. Certainly I have not broken any forum guidelines

And I have simply said, and continue to unapologetically state facts. Your girls as much as mine are going to face the issue of sexual assault in their lives
Be it as friend, colleague, acquaintance or as a victim

If that make you feel uncomfortable as a father. Good. It should. It should make every single one of us uncomfortable.

Uncomfortable enough to consider what we can do individually to rectify it. If you’re too fragile to deal with this matter in a real world sense, if are unable to cope with the idea that this issue will play a role in your child’s life, then you should not engage in the discussions. I won’t apologise

There isn’t a whole lot I can do individually, but what I can do Is change my behaviour and attitude, to challenge attitudes that continue this culture of victim blaming.
I can teach my young boys to be better than us, to show my young girls that they can stand up for themselves without fear of recrimination or blame, which is what you’ve subjected this girl too in this thread.

That starts with us. With people like you and I. The onus is on us to makes sure we start moving in the right direction

Again at no point have I said anything remotely disparaging or lewd or crude about your girls. You have simply taken offence to idea that the issue of sexual assault is going to impact your girls lives. The only parallels draw here were that the situation this girls finds herself in and the recrimination she is suffering now at yours and others hands, is a situation roughly 1/3 girls will go through... and between us we have 3 girls.
I don’t like those odds. And clearly nor do you.

You’re welcome to be offended by that, and you’re welcome to bury your head in the sand and pretend it’s not so because it’s easier than confronting that ugly reality, but it is a reality and I won’t apologise for make you aware of it and making you aware of how the attitude you and others have displayed in this thread help perpetuate that culture.

If the moderators wish to spare your feelings, they are free to do so, but they should do so by stating clearly what guidelines were crossed or whether they are just appeasing you and your offence, publicly.

What I’ve done here is no different to what people do all the time with stadium prices, entertaining players, public health matters, economic politics, social politics

“How do you explain to your children why you voted no/yes on marriage equality”

“How do you afford to take your kids to a game these days, at $40 a ticket?”

“Sure Papalii is the better player, but do you kids run around in the park pretending to be him or Austin/Rapana?”

Children are brought into the topics all the time. Mostly because what we do effects them most, now and into the future. Of all the issues to exclude them from, this would be one of the last we should do it from.

Reported. You just don't get it.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

[Botman]

Funny, I was thinking the same thing.

You don’t get it, like many men. And that makes me very sad for my little girls future.

[gerg]

Funny, I was thinking the same thing.

You don’t get it, like many men. And that makes me very sad for my little girls future.

No, no. I totally get it and I agree with some of what you are saying but you have no right to bring my children into this discussion. It's pretty simple really.

You can refer to the alleged victim in this discussion as a girl all you want. She is not a minor like my children are. She is an adult.

As to the actual discussion I have repeatedly said that I will reserve my final opinion on this matter until both sides of the story have been heard.

I have stated that I'm suspicious of her motives (re: money). Given the alleged victims choice of legal representation and the section at the end of the court documents relating to payment "with interest" I don't think that it is an unreasonable observation.

I have also stated that women and men need to be better on this issue. If I had my way men would simply stop abusing women and women could do more in terms of putting themselves at risk in certain situations.

You have taken much of what I have said out of context and then brought my children into this discussion unnecessarily, merely to rile me up. You can get your point across respectfully without including a reference to my children. Unfortunately you lack the class to even attempt it. And then you dance around how inappropriate it is. Discussing the cost of taking children to the footy is comparable to discussing the statistics of my children being raped. Are you for real?

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

[T_R]

Payment with interest as a term is entirely standard. I have never seen a document of that kind without that reference. There is absolutelynothing to draw from that.

Might be time to leave kids out of this though, gents. Pigman's point was well made, but it has been made and I think we can move on.

[Botman]

We are going over the same thing here, but a few points

- there is nothing classy about pretending the issue of sexual assault won’t e relevant to your daughters and pretending they are immune to it is to do them a disservice

- I don’t bring children up in this discussion to rile anyone up. I do it as a means to drive home the point that you need to consider this girl as if you knew her. Treat her with the respect you’d want your girls treated with, and I bring them in in reference to the statistics to show, whether you like it or not, whether you are comfortable with it not or not, the FACTS of this issue are clear.

As for your last point. No one compared the things like to like. They were used as examples to highlighted that discussing social and political issues in the context of where things are headed for our children is par for the course
Our politicians live on it

I see absolutely no reason why this shouldn’t be the case with sexual assault and domestic violence, given the cyclonic nature of that behaviour and the culture that allows it to blossom.

If EVER there was an issue where we should put ourselves or our children in those shoes and act accordingly, it’s this one.
I make no apologises for asking you to consider how you’d want this woman to be treated if she were your daughter and I make no apologises for making it clear that statistically this is an issue with will impact 1/3 girls like ours in the future. And that because of people like you consistently victim blaming and shaming, and questioning motives, 2/3rd of those girls won’t report...

If you as a father of daughters can’t emphasise with this situation then I feel for you. I really do.

[FuiFui BradBrad]

Funny, I was thinking the same thing.

You don’t get it, like many men. And that makes me very sad for my little girls future.

No, no. I totally get it and I agree with some of what you are saying but you have no right to bring my children into this discussion. It's pretty simple really.

You can refer to the alleged victim in this discussion as a girl all you want. She is not a minor like my children are. She is an adult.

As to the actual discussion I have repeatedly said that I will reserve my final opinion on this matter until both sides of the story have been heard.

I have stated that I'm suspicious of her motives (re: money). Given the alleged victims choice of legal representation and the section at the end of the court documents relating to payment "with interest" I don't think that it is an unreasonable observation.

I have also stated that women and men need to be better on this issue. If I had my way men would simply stop abusing women and women could do more in terms of putting themselves at risk in certain situations.

You have taken much of what I have said out of context and then brought my children into this discussion unnecessarily, merely to rile me up. You can get your point across respectfully without including a reference to my children. Unfortunately you lack the class to even attempt it. And then you dance around how inappropriate it is. Discussing the cost of taking children to the footy is comparable to discussing the statistics of my children being raped. Are you for real?

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

How can women do more to prevent it? Not wearing the clothes they want, styling their hair the way they want, or telling them they can’t be out on the street when the lights go out?

If you went to a Raiders vs Roosters game, and got attacked because you were a Raiders fan, would you accept it if someone said “Well, you put yourself at risk because you wore a Raiders Jersey, add to that, you were wearing a Viking helmet. Everyone knows those horns are rape handles, and to top it off, you were leaving the stadium by yourself after the game. You had it coming really”

There is one simple way to break the cycle, and it’s a simple message we can deliver to men everywhere

[gerg]

Well let me put it into terms that you may understand, that being the difference between discussing this in a civil manner without including reference to our children.

I could make the point that - it is my vague recollection of statistics that rapists are generally from within the family or known in some way to the victim OR I could direct this directly at you by asking you who in your family is a potential perpetrator in the rape of your daughter or son (because this is not entirely a gender issue, though I do understand that females are at greater risk). Is it your father, uncle or friend or maybe even you? This version is completely crass, rude, confronting and completely unnecessary. But following your theme or thinking it is entirely relevant to the subject matter. My point is that something can be entirely relevant to the conversation but it does not need to be said to convey your point.

Do you understand yet?

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

[gerg]

Funny, I was thinking the same thing.

You don’t get it, like many men. And that makes me very sad for my little girls future.

No, no. I totally get it and I agree with some of what you are saying but you have no right to bring my children into this discussion. It's pretty simple really.

You can refer to the alleged victim in this discussion as a girl all you want. She is not a minor like my children are. She is an adult.

As to the actual discussion I have repeatedly said that I will reserve my final opinion on this matter until both sides of the story have been heard.

I have stated that I'm suspicious of her motives (re: money). Given the alleged victims choice of legal representation and the section at the end of the court documents relating to payment "with interest" I don't think that it is an unreasonable observation.

I have also stated that women and men need to be better on this issue. If I had my way men would simply stop abusing women and women could do more in terms of putting themselves at risk in certain situations.

You have taken much of what I have said out of context and then brought my children into this discussion unnecessarily, merely to rile me up. You can get your point across respectfully without including a reference to my children. Unfortunately you lack the class to even attempt it. And then you dance around how inappropriate it is. Discussing the cost of taking children to the footy is comparable to discussing the statistics of my children being raped. Are you for real?

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

How can women do more to prevent it? Not wearing the clothes they want, styling their hair the way they want, or telling them they can’t be out on the street when the lights go out?

If you went to a Raiders vs Roosters game, and got attacked because you were a Raiders fan, would you accept it if someone said “Well, you put yourself at risk because you wore a Raiders Jersey, add to that, you were wearing a Viking helmet. Everyone knows those horns are rape handles, and to top it off, you were leaving the stadium by yourself after the game. You had it coming really”

There is one simple way to break the cycle, and it’s a simple message we can deliver to men everywhere

It is well documented that 1000s of women throw themselves at athletes. I think it is disrespectful to themselves, their bodies and their gender.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

[FuiFui BradBrad]

And has Nick has said, for the thousands that throw themselves at athletes, you could double the number of those that get unprovoked attacks and not report anything.


Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk

[Botman]

Well let me put it into terms that you may understand, that being the difference between discussing this in a civil manner without including reference to our children.

I could make the point that - it is my vague recollection of statistics that rapists are generally from within the family or known in some way to the victim OR I could direct this directly at you by asking you who in your family is a potential perpetrator in the rape of your daughter or son (because this is not entirely a gender issue, though I do understand that females are at greater risk). Is it your father, uncle or friend or maybe even you? This version is completely crass, rude, confronting and completely unnecessary.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

Is it? I don’t find that line of questioning crass, rude, or unnecessary. It’s definitely confronting, considering the awful things that might happen to your kids is always confronting. But i have no problem with someone posing that to me in the context of a discussion like this.
Why is that an issue?
You’re not saying my child is being raped, you’re saying some kids are and it’s usually by those closest to them, and asking if I’ve considered this.

The answer: yes I have, when I decided to have kids, one aspect, albeit a minor one given I have no been unfortunate enough to suffer any kind of physical or sexual abuse, was “can I trust my x, y, z with my children”

Thankfully for me the answer was overwhelming yes. And I fully accept many would say the same and would be wrong and that maybe I could be wrong. My children depend on me to make sure they are safe and are left in the care of people who keep them safe. So yeah, I’ve thought about this.

Why does it make you angry to think of things in these terms? Why is it so upsetting to you to be asked to put yourself into different shoes and consider things from the victim's (just so im clear, the victim here is NOT Jarryd Hayne) POV and adjust your comments and attitude to be in line with how you'd like comments and attitudes to be if this struck closer to home. And as ive said, the statistics are relevant here because im not asking you do put yourself in the shoes of someone who gets struck by lightning. This is a real common thing. Most of it not rape btw, it may just be some drunk guy groping some girl at a club, rape isnt the only form of sexual assault.

Your immediate react to this was to doubt the claim of the victim, to question her motives and suggest she is chasing money. That's the problem. That your default response to some girl you have no idea about is to say she's lying. I guarantee that wouldnt be your response if this case struck closer to home... so keep that energy, keep that in mind. Treat her the way you want your loved ones treated. And call it out when people don't, because the reason 2/3rds of victims dont report isnt because of their immediate family dont support them, it's because the system and culture doesnt support them, strangers dont support them. Strangers doubt their claims, say they are chasing money etc... keep the same energy with these strangers as you would with your own. Anything else is totally unfair and should be called out.

[gangrenous]

It is well documented that 1000s of women throw themselves at athletes. I think it is disrespectful to themselves, their bodies and their gender.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

Bloody Australia. I can’t get decent broadband where I live, but gergreg has it in the 1950s?!

Seriously though. What’s the problem if a woman wants to have a crack at a sports star exactly?

[gerg]

And has Nick has said, for the thousands that throw themselves at athletes, you could double the number of those that get unprovoked attacks and not report anything.


Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk

I believe that the reasons for 'not reporting' are complicated. As mentioned in my other post I think a lot of it comes down to family being involved.
There is of course the issue of conviction. How does that change btw? In this particular case the alleged victim went to the police and either the police or her legal representation suggested she attempt to get Hayne to admit to non consensual sex. Either he didn't want to incriminate himself or he truly believed the sex was consensual. What law's can be changed to help or change this situation?
As for me immediately thinking this is about money. Well ultimately it is. She sought avenues to prosecute Hayne and when that was unsuccessful she is now seeking compensation. Financial compensation. It may be her only avenue to follow but it is - I repeat it 'now' is about money.
And Gangers I think women who throw themselves at men in the way I have described is a disservice to themselves and just to be clear I feel the same way about men sleeping around in the same manner. Call me old fashioned but I believe in people having old fashioned relationships rather than this current tinder 'hookup' craze.


Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

[gerg]

Well let me put it into terms that you may understand, that being the difference between discussing this in a civil manner without including reference to our children.

I could make the point that - it is my vague recollection of statistics that rapists are generally from within the family or known in some way to the victim OR I could direct this directly at you by asking you who in your family is a potential perpetrator in the rape of your daughter or son (because this is not entirely a gender issue, though I do understand that females are at greater risk). Is it your father, uncle or friend or maybe even you? This version is completely crass, rude, confronting and completely unnecessary.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

Is it? I don’t find that line of questioning crass, rude, or unnecessary. It’s definitely confronting, considering the awful things that might happen to your kids is always confronting. But i have no problem with someone posing that to me in the context of a discussion like this.
Why is that an issue?
You’re not saying my child is being raped, you’re saying some kids are and it’s usually by those closest to them, and asking if I’ve considered this.

The answer: yes I have, when I decided to have kids, one aspect, albeit a minor one given I have no been unfortunate enough to suffer any kind of physical or sexual abuse, was “can I trust my x, y, z with my children”

Thankfully for me the answer was overwhelming yes. And I fully accept many would say the same and would be wrong and that maybe I could be wrong. My children depend on me to make sure they are safe and are left in the care of people who keep them safe. So yeah, I’ve thought about this.

Why does it make you angry to think of things in these terms? Why is it so upsetting to you to be asked to put yourself into different shoes and consider things from the victim's (just so im clear, the victim here is NOT Jarryd Hayne) POV and adjust your comments and attitude to be in line with how you'd like comments and attitudes to be if this struck closer to home. And as ive said, the statistics are relevant here because im not asking you do put yourself in the shoes of someone who gets struck by lightning. This is a real common thing. Most of it not rape btw, it may just be some drunk guy groping some girl at a club, rape isnt the only form of sexual assault.

Your immediate react to this was to doubt the claim of the victim, to question her motives and suggest she is chasing money. That's the problem. That your default response to some girl you have no idea about is to say she's lying. I guarantee that wouldnt be your response if this case struck closer to home... so keep that energy, keep that in mind. Treat her the way you want your loved ones treated. And call it out when people don't, because the reason 2/3rds of victims dont report isnt because of their immediate family dont support them, it's because the system and culture doesnt support them, strangers dont support them. Strangers doubt their claims, say they are chasing money etc... keep the same energy with these strangers as you would with your own. Anything else is totally unfair and should be called out.

It is unnecessary because you can make the exact same point without it.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

[gangrenous]

And Gangers I think women who throw themselves at men in the way I have described is a disservice to themselves and just to be clear I feel the same way about men sleeping around in the same manner. Call me old fashioned but I believe in people having old fashioned relationships rather than this current tinder 'hookup' craze.

Sounds more “old man yelling at cloud” than “justification as to why it denigrates them”.

I’m sure if you saw Dusty Springfield wink at you across the bar in the mid 60s you would have been a disservice to yourself

[Green eyed Mick]

And has Nick has said, for the thousands that throw themselves at athletes, you could double the number of those that get unprovoked attacks and not report anything.


Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk

I believe that the reasons for 'not reporting' are complicated. As mentioned in my other post I think a lot of it comes down to family being involved.
There is of course the issue of conviction. How does that change btw? In this particular case the alleged victim went to the police and either the police or her legal representation suggested she attempt to get Hayne to admit to non consensual sex. Either he didn't want to incriminate himself or he truly believed the sex was consensual. What law's can be changed to help or change this situation?
As for me immediately thinking this is about money. Well ultimately it is. She sought avenues to prosecute Hayne and when that was unsuccessful she is now seeking compensation. Financial compensation. It may be her only avenue to follow but it is - I repeat it 'now' is about money.
And Gangers I think women who throw themselves at men in the way I have described is a disservice to themselves and just to be clear I feel the same way about men sleeping around in the same manner. Call me old fashioned but I believe in people having old fashioned relationships rather than this current tinder 'hookup' craze.


Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

A civil suit is not always about money. For a lot of victims it is about acknowledgement and the chance to confront her attacker. Apologies and acknowledgements often form part of the 'settlement'.