gaaboard.com

Non GAA Discussion => General discussion => Topic started by: Boycey on September 13, 2017, 02:01:49 PM

Title: George Hook
Post by: Boycey on September 13, 2017, 02:01:49 PM
I'm surprised this hasn't reared its head, or maybe it has and I've missed it if so apologies...

Opinions? I'm not a fan of his at the best of times and obviously what he said was crass but really this have gone too far its trial by social media at this stage?
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Rudi on September 13, 2017, 02:34:05 PM
This one will probably end Hook. A poor choice of words but the over reaction by various groups and of course the leftie bandwagon is beyond belief.  Freedom of speech me hole. He also apologised so what more can he do? Now w**k%rs like Fintan O Tool jump on his grave. Mary Coughlan walks off a show. I read her book she describes a scene where she is so off her tits her young child has to hold her breast into her infants mouth to breast feed. Yet she feels the need to slaughter Hook over a poor choice of words. Stop the world I want to get off.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: seafoid on September 13, 2017, 02:40:29 PM
These bandwagons have lives of their own. Eric Bristow got done. There is no escape
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Esmarelda on September 13, 2017, 02:53:03 PM
I agree he shouldn't be trialled by social media. He should just get the boot.

Wrong choice of words? If he's going to deal with such a sensitive subject then he should prepare himself accordingly. Don't use the word "blame" George. Anyone who cares will have heard that victims or rape find it hard to come forward because they will have to have the horrible details of their attack revealed in court with the defendant's legal team likely to try to attribute blame.

He and Newtalk have deliberately gone down the route of "angry, old shock jock" with his show. The intro piece to it is enough to make you turn off. It was only a matter of time until he blurted something out that got him in trouble.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: mouview on September 13, 2017, 03:05:06 PM
Having just read the gist of the controversy, he does have a valid point, namely people get into trouble through making poor choices. He doesn't excuse the perpetrator of the crime or condone that sort of behaviour. As you said, the leftie bandwagon need to get a grip somewhat.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Esmarelda on September 13, 2017, 03:16:39 PM
Having just read the gist of the controversy, he does have a valid point, namely people get into trouble through making poor choices. He doesn't excuse the perpetrator of the crime or condone that sort of behaviour. As you said, the leftie bandwagon need to get a grip somewhat.
Disgraceful comments. But sure you only read the gist of it so it's ok. Here's what "the leftie bandwagon" are getting upset about. Have a good read of it there if you have time.

Speaking about a case in the UK this week in which a Commonwealth Games swimmer was accused of raping a 19-year-old woman, Hook said yesterday:

"She was passed around, went the story. And apparently she went to bed with one guy and he goes out and another guy comes in. She doesn’t want to have relations with the second guy but he forced himself upon her. Awful.

But when you then look deeper into the story you have to ask certain questions. Why does a girl who just meets a fella in a bar go back to a hotel room? She’s only just barely met him. She has no idea of his health conditions, she has no idea who he is, she has no idea what dangers he might pose.

But modern day social activity means that she goes back with him. Then is surprised when somebody else comes into the room and rapes her. Should she be raped? Course she shouldn’t. Is she entitled to say no? Absolutely. Is the guy who came in a sc**bag? Certainly. Should he go to jail? Of Course. All of those things.

But is there no blame now to the person who puts themselves in danger?

There is personal responsibility because it’s your daughter and it’s my daughter. And what determines the daughter who goes out, gets drunk, passes out and is with strangers in her room and the daughter that goes out, stays halfway sober and comes home, I don’t know. I wish I knew. I wish I knew what the secret of parenting is.

But there is a point of responsibility. The real issues nowadays and increasingly is the question of the personal responsibility that young girls are taking for their own safety."
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: general_lee on September 13, 2017, 03:28:50 PM
Having just read the gist of the controversy, he does have a valid point, namely people get into trouble through making poor choices. He doesn't excuse the perpetrator of the crime or condone that sort of behaviour. As you said, the leftie bandwagon need to get a grip somewhat.
Yeah, lefties need to embrace victim-blaming  ::)
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Tubberman on September 13, 2017, 03:38:30 PM
Having just read the gist of the controversy, he does have a valid point, namely people get into trouble through making poor choices. He doesn't excuse the perpetrator of the crime or condone that sort of behaviour. As you said, the leftie bandwagon need to get a grip somewhat.
Yeah, lefties need to embrace victim-blaming  ::)

Hold on - all girls/women (and indeed men) are told not to walk home alone late at night, especially in quiet or unlit areas as they would be putting themselves at risk of attack. If that person is attacked, is the person who gave the warning guilty of victim blaming?
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Esmarelda on September 13, 2017, 03:46:32 PM
Having just read the gist of the controversy, he does have a valid point, namely people get into trouble through making poor choices. He doesn't excuse the perpetrator of the crime or condone that sort of behaviour. As you said, the leftie bandwagon need to get a grip somewhat.
Yeah, lefties need to embrace victim-blaming  ::)

Hold on - all girls/women (and indeed men) are told not to walk home alone late at night, especially in quiet or unlit areas as they would be putting themselves at risk of attack. If that person is attacked, is the person who gave the warning guilty of victim blaming?
I made this exact point to someone the other day. Of course they're not. Anyone who has a daughter or sister or female friend but advise caution in certain situations.

However, Hook says the following - "Why does a girl who just meets a fella in a bar go back to a hotel room?" Why wouldn't she? Is she to assume that all men might rape her? How long before it's safe to assume he won't? If a man goes back to a hotel room with a woman should he be careful that she doesn't stab him or drug and rob him? Sure they could cut out his kidney and sell it too.

In the alleged incident, the man she went back with isn't the accused. He left the room (allegedly) and someone else came in and raped her. Hook's response to this is "............Then is surprised when somebody else comes into the room and rapes her." This line in particular is beyond belief. What, she's supposed to expect the fella that she went back with would leave the room allowing a second fella to enter and rape her?

Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: mouview on September 13, 2017, 04:17:30 PM
Having just read the gist of the controversy, he does have a valid point, namely people get into trouble through making poor choices. He doesn't excuse the perpetrator of the crime or condone that sort of behaviour. As you said, the leftie bandwagon need to get a grip somewhat.
Disgraceful comments. But sure you only read the gist of it so it's ok. Here's what "the leftie bandwagon" are getting upset about. Have a good read of it there if you have time.


I did read it Esmeralda, and please don't mistake my comments for condoning rape or the defendant, or pointing the finger of blame solely at the victim. I repeat, Hook's point seems to be valid -  to avoid trouble, avoid situations where trouble can arise if possible.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: magpie seanie on September 13, 2017, 04:23:11 PM
I'm actually shocked anyone is standing up for Hook here. Some of the attitudes are worrying and mirror that attitudes on the thread about the confederate flag.  He should have been sacked immediately. Totally with Esmarelda on this.

For all you people who bemoan "lefties" - you know what's worse that political correctness? Blaming rape victims. Racism. Sexism. And so on. Perhaps political correctness goes to far at times but I'm pretty sure you don't want to err on the other side. Or you shouldn't. It's not so long ago that bananas were thrown at black soccer players in England and everyone thought it was a good laugh. Political correctness, for all it's ills has helped wipe that out.

What happens on social media is just noise. Hook was 100% wrong here and it wasn't just a spur of the moment slip of the tongue. A person who is raped is not to blame. Doing so provides a level justification for the perpetrator which is simply heinous in my eyes.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: seafoid on September 13, 2017, 04:42:12 PM
Kev Myers was last month. I think it is ridiculous. 
People who do real damage to society are untouched. What George Hook  did wouldnt have been brought before the court in Nuremberg.

Drink culture drives a lot of rapes.
The courts will decide on the basis of comes from a respectable family if it is a middle class man and a working class woman. It is a f**king mess.



The bandwagon moves on to a new victim. Myers lost his income  . Most people will forget what he wrote.

Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: under the bar on September 13, 2017, 04:47:06 PM
Unbelievable that Hook hasn't been sacked. What message does that give to victims / perpetrators or indeed other commentators who will feel they can say whatever is in their small brain with fear of repercussions?
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Stall the Bailer on September 13, 2017, 04:53:01 PM
The blame should always lie 100% with the perpetrator. No grey areas no other excuses.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Hardy on September 13, 2017, 05:00:53 PM
The whole episode is cynical in the extreme. This miserable ould p***k is making a career, cynically supported by Newstalk in pursuit of ratings, out of copying the right-wing American shock-jocks. As somebody mentioned, there is now a formulaic three-minute rant at the start or every show where he selects the latest anti-immigrant, anti-progressive, anti-science or general right wing cause celebre and works himself into a pseudo-frenzy in a blatant attempt to get the text and twitter machines hopping.

Then, when he oversteps the mark, his employers give him a scripted apology to read out while they rub their hands with satisfaction that the formula is working.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: T Fearon on September 13, 2017, 05:10:56 PM
Surely everyone has a right to have an opinion.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Eamonnca1 on September 13, 2017, 05:24:24 PM
The "that's my opinion and I'm entitled to it" defence doesn't exempt you from the consequences of your words.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Eamonnca1 on September 13, 2017, 05:27:40 PM
Having just read the gist of the controversy, he does have a valid point, namely people get into trouble through making poor choices.
No he does not.

Quote
He doesn't excuse the perpetrator of the crime or condone that sort of behaviour.

Yes he does.

Quote
As you said, the leftie bandwagon need to get a grip somewhat.

"Oh poor little me, the leftists are picking on me!"

Boo f***ing hoo. Funny how the right coined the term "snowflakes" to denigrate what they think are over-sensitive leftists, but as soon as anyone says anything bad about the right they turn into the most delicate little snowflakes of all time.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Eamonnca1 on September 13, 2017, 05:30:36 PM
I'm actually shocked anyone is standing up for Hook here. Some of the attitudes are worrying and mirror that attitudes on the thread about the confederate flag.  He should have been sacked immediately. Totally with Esmarelda on this.

For all you people who bemoan "lefties" - you know what's worse that political correctness? Blaming rape victims. Racism. Sexism. And so on. Perhaps political correctness goes to far at times but I'm pretty sure you don't want to err on the other side. Or you shouldn't. It's not so long ago that bananas were thrown at black soccer players in England and everyone thought it was a good laugh. Political correctness, for all it's ills has helped wipe that out.

What happens on social media is just noise. Hook was 100% wrong here and it wasn't just a spur of the moment slip of the tongue. A person who is raped is not to blame. Doing so provides a level justification for the perpetrator which is simply heinous in my eyes.

Hear hear. What is it with the right and their hatred of women, minorities, atheists, and anyone who doesn't look like them? They make me sick.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Eamonnca1 on September 13, 2017, 05:32:26 PM
Kev Myers was last month. I think it is ridiculous. 
People who do real damage to society are untouched. What George Hook  did wouldnt have been brought before the court in Nuremberg.

Drink culture drives a lot of rapes.
The courts will decide on the basis of comes from a respectable family if it is a middle class man and a working class woman. It is a f**king mess.



The bandwagon moves on to a new victim. Myers lost his income  . Most people will forget what he wrote.

That's a contemptible statement and you should be thoroughly ashamed of yourself. Myers got what was coming to him and Hook should get the same. Nothing "ridiculous" about it.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Eamonnca1 on September 13, 2017, 05:34:13 PM
The whole episode is cynical in the extreme. This miserable ould p***k is making a career, cynically supported by Newstalk in pursuit of ratings, out of copying the right-wing American shock-jocks. As somebody mentioned, there is now a formulaic three-minute rant at the start or every show where he selects the latest anti-immigrant, anti-progressive, anti-science or general right wing cause celebre and works himself into a pseudo-frenzy in a blatant attempt to get the text and twitter machines hopping.

Then, when he oversteps the mark, his employers give him a scripted apology to read out while they rub their hands with satisfaction that the formula is working.
Indeed. Meanwhile the poisonous ideology leaks out into society and before you know it you get neo-Nazis openly marching in the street and extremists elected into office. Some people don't seem to realise how dangerous some ideas are.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Tubberman on September 13, 2017, 06:50:03 PM
Having just read the gist of the controversy, he does have a valid point, namely people get into trouble through making poor choices. He doesn't excuse the perpetrator of the crime or condone that sort of behaviour. As you said, the leftie bandwagon need to get a grip somewhat.
Yeah, lefties need to embrace victim-blaming  ::)

Hold on - all girls/women (and indeed men) are told not to walk home alone late at night, especially in quiet or unlit areas as they would be putting themselves at risk of attack. If that person is attacked, is the person who gave the warning guilty of victim blaming?
I made this exact point to someone the other day. Of course they're not. Anyone who has a daughter or sister or female friend but advise caution in certain situations.

However, Hook says the following - "Why does a girl who just meets a fella in a bar go back to a hotel room?" Why wouldn't she? Is she to assume that all men might rape her? How long before it's safe to assume he won't? If a man goes back to a hotel room with a woman should he be careful that she doesn't stab him or drug and rob him? Sure they could cut out his kidney and sell it too.

In the alleged incident, the man she went back with isn't the accused. He left the room (allegedly) and someone else came in and raped her. Hook's response to this is "............Then is surprised when somebody else comes into the room and rapes her." This line in particular is beyond belief. What, she's supposed to expect the fella that she went back with would leave the room allowing a second fella to enter and rape her?



OK I can see your point! I hadn't read the transcript, just got the jist of it over the weekend.
I can see why those comments in particular would be offensive and indefensible, but I still think some are taking far too much glee out of the whole episode.
I genuinely think there is a large proportion of people who are permanently outraged about something
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: thebigfella on September 13, 2017, 08:02:14 PM
Anyone using the trail by social media line needs to get a grip. There has been plenty hung out to dry by the traditional media and their agendas with no right to reply.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Eamonnca1 on September 13, 2017, 10:34:00 PM


OK I can see your point! I hadn't read the transcript, just got the jist of it over the weekend.
I can see why those comments in particular would be offensive and indefensible, but I still think some are taking far too much glee out of the whole episode.
I genuinely think there is a large proportion of people who are permanently outraged about something

There can never be "too much glee" about the downfall of a cretin like Hook.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: macdanger2 on September 13, 2017, 10:36:10 PM
The blame should always lie 100% with the perpetrator. No grey areas no other excuses.

Agree 100%
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: sid waddell on September 13, 2017, 10:46:02 PM
Hook should be sacked - no ifs or buts. He has form when it comes to abhorrent comments about rape.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Esmarelda on September 13, 2017, 10:53:11 PM
Having just read the gist of the controversy, he does have a valid point, namely people get into trouble through making poor choices. He doesn't excuse the perpetrator of the crime or condone that sort of behaviour. As you said, the leftie bandwagon need to get a grip somewhat.
Yeah, lefties need to embrace victim-blaming  ::)

Hold on - all girls/women (and indeed men) are told not to walk home alone late at night, especially in quiet or unlit areas as they would be putting themselves at risk of attack. If that person is attacked, is the person who gave the warning guilty of victim blaming?
I made this exact point to someone the other day. Of course they're not. Anyone who has a daughter or sister or female friend but advise caution in certain situations.

However, Hook says the following - "Why does a girl who just meets a fella in a bar go back to a hotel room?" Why wouldn't she? Is she to assume that all men might rape her? How long before it's safe to assume he won't? If a man goes back to a hotel room with a woman should he be careful that she doesn't stab him or drug and rob him? Sure they could cut out his kidney and sell it too.

In the alleged incident, the man she went back with isn't the accused. He left the room (allegedly) and someone else came in and raped her. Hook's response to this is "............Then is surprised when somebody else comes into the room and rapes her." This line in particular is beyond belief. What, she's supposed to expect the fella that she went back with would leave the room allowing a second fella to enter and rape her?



OK I can see your point! I hadn't read the transcript, just got the jist of it over the weekend.
I can see why those comments in particular would be offensive and indefensible, but I still think some are taking far too much glee out of the whole episode.
I genuinely think there is a large proportion of people who are permanently outraged about something
Maybe they are but that's irrelevant to the main point. If Hook was a largely inoffensive individual up to this point then his comments would still be outrageous. As it happens he hasn't been and it's entirely predictable.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: sid waddell on September 13, 2017, 11:04:06 PM

I genuinely think there is a large proportion of people who are permanently outraged about something
If I was asked to name somebody who is permanently outraged about something, Hook would be one of the first people I'd think of, although the many reactionary right-wing posters on this forum would be pretty high up the list too.

Perpetual imaginary victims in their own minds, as opposed to real, actual victims, like, say, rape victims.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Eamonnca1 on September 13, 2017, 11:07:16 PM

If I was asked to name somebody who is permanently outraged about something, Hook would be one of the first people I'd think of, although the many reactionary right-wing posters on this forum would be pretty high up the list too.

Perpetual imaginary victims in their own minds, as opposed to real, actual victims, like, say, rape victims.

Exactly. Hypocritical snowflakes the lot of them.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: sid waddell on September 13, 2017, 11:24:59 PM
Surely everyone has a right to have an opinion.
They do. And Hook getting the sack, as he should, would in no way affect his right to have an opinion.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: foxcommander on September 13, 2017, 11:42:53 PM
The whole episode is cynical in the extreme. This miserable ould p***k is making a career, cynically supported by Newstalk in pursuit of ratings, out of copying the right-wing American shock-jocks. As somebody mentioned, there is now a formulaic three-minute rant at the start or every show where he selects the latest anti-immigrant, anti-progressive, anti-science or general right wing cause celebre and works himself into a pseudo-frenzy in a blatant attempt to get the text and twitter machines hopping.

Then, when he oversteps the mark, his employers give him a scripted apology to read out while they rub their hands with satisfaction that the formula is working.
Indeed. Meanwhile the poisonous ideology leaks out into society and before you know it you get neo-Nazis openly marching in the street and extremists elected into office. Some people don't seem to realise how dangerous some ideas are.

Ed Murray - Seattle.
There you go lefties!!

Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Syferus on September 13, 2017, 11:45:19 PM
The whole episode is cynical in the extreme. This miserable ould p***k is making a career, cynically supported by Newstalk in pursuit of ratings, out of copying the right-wing American shock-jocks. As somebody mentioned, there is now a formulaic three-minute rant at the start or every show where he selects the latest anti-immigrant, anti-progressive, anti-science or general right wing cause celebre and works himself into a pseudo-frenzy in a blatant attempt to get the text and twitter machines hopping.

Then, when he oversteps the mark, his employers give him a scripted apology to read out while they rub their hands with satisfaction that the formula is working.
Indeed. Meanwhile the poisonous ideology leaks out into society and before you know it you get neo-Nazis openly marching in the street and extremists elected into office. Some people don't seem to realise how dangerous some ideas are.

Ed Murray - Seattle.
There you go lefties!!

You remembered your login for your alt account I see.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Mayo4Sam on September 14, 2017, 12:35:55 AM
This one will probably end Hook. A poor choice of words but the over reaction by various groups and of course the leftie bandwagon is beyond belief.  Freedom of speech me hole. He also apologised so what more can he do? Now w**k%rs like Fintan O Tool jump on his grave. Mary Coughlan walks off a show. I read her book she describes a scene where she is so off her tits her young child has to hold her breast into her infants mouth to breast feed. Yet she feels the need to slaughter Hook over a poor choice of words. Stop the world I want to get off.

What would you or George Hook or anyone else say if it was a lad who got hammered, went back to a house party and then got raped by a man? Would it still be a case that he should have stayed sober enough. We've all ended up passed out at a random house party.

It's always the rapist fault, without fail
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: seafoid on September 14, 2017, 12:40:07 AM
Richard Keys
Andy Gray
Eric Bristow
Kevin Myers
George Hook

are the ones I can remember. None of them did anything illegal.
The problem with lynch mobs is the counterreaction.
In the US the alt right and 4 Chan feed off feminist/minority lynch mobs.
Zionist Jews love leveraging the Christian minority to shut down debate on Israel for example. It isn't very strategic imo.
You cannot say x Jew is an ass hole or y Jew is greedy . That would be antisemitic. You can say it about Derry people or anyone else.
 Sacking Myers wont stop Ísrael collapsing.
Sacking Hook will not change the experience of being raped in Ireland. It won't change the ubiquity of violent porn or misogyny, the reality of class  in the justice system or the politics of cheap alcohol.

Who benefits from all the energy?

It is all bullshit
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Esmarelda on September 14, 2017, 09:51:57 AM
Richard Keys
Andy Gray
Eric Bristow
Kevin Myers
George Hook

are the ones I can remember. None of them did anything illegal.
The problem with lynch mobs is the counterreaction.
In the US the alt right and 4 Chan feed off feminist/minority lynch mobs.
Zionist Jews love leveraging the Christian minority to shut down debate on Israel for example. It isn't very strategic imo.
You cannot say x Jew is an ass hole or y Jew is greedy . That would be antisemitic. You can say it about Derry people or anyone else.
 Sacking Myers wont stop Ísrael collapsing.
Sacking Hook will not change the experience of being raped in Ireland. It won't change the ubiquity of violent porn or misogyny, the reality of class  in the justice system or the politics of cheap alcohol.

Who benefits from all the energy?

It is all bullshit
I assume your last line is referring to all the other lines above it.

Who said anybody did anything illegal? Nobody. What's the relevance of saying that none of them did anything illegal? There is none.

What's your contention? You should only lose your job if you do something illegal? Are you happy, like Fearon, for Hook to exercise his right to his opinion on the airwaves with no limitations?

I hope George gets the boot and goes home and expresses his opinion to the mirror or whoever is willing to listen to him until his dying day.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: sid waddell on September 14, 2017, 10:04:37 AM
Eh, I'm pretty sure sexual harrassment, which is what Keys and Gray did, is illegal.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Rudi on September 14, 2017, 10:13:00 AM
This one will probably end Hook. A poor choice of words but the over reaction by various groups and of course the leftie bandwagon is beyond belief.  Freedom of speech me hole. He also apologised so what more can he do? Now w**k%rs like Fintan O Tool jump on his grave. Mary Coughlan walks off a show. I read her book she describes a scene where she is so off her tits her young child has to hold her breast into her infants mouth to breast feed. Yet she feels the need to slaughter Hook over a poor choice of words. Stop the world I want to get off.

What would you or George Hook or anyone else say if it was a lad who got hammered, went back to a house party and then got raped by a man? Would it still be a case that he should have stayed sober enough. We've all ended up passed out at a random house party.

It's always the rapist fault, without fail

I would say the same. And I have woken up on a toilet seat a few times.
In an ideal world when I'm having a few drinks and go for a smoke, I should be able to leave my pint, wallet and phone on the bar table and it should be there when I come back. However that would be naive. In the town I grew up, I was always told not to walk down certain parts on my own after a certain time.
George Hook is not very likable and his comments were out of line, he said sorry, yellow card, now move on.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: sid waddell on September 14, 2017, 10:17:40 AM

George Hook is not very likable and his comments were out of line, he said sorry, yellow card, now move on.
The below was the yellow card offence.

But what Hook said last Friday should be a straight red anyway.

http://www.thejournal.ie/george-hook-comments-niamh-nic-domhnaill-2218672-Jul2015/

What about this. Hypothetically… you go into a relationship with somebody, be it marriage or be it you’re living with someone. So now you’re sharing a bed with somebody, yes, and obviously sexual congress takes place on a regular basis because you’re living with someone. Is there not an implied consent therefore that you consent to sexual congress?

That's an implication that there can be no such thing as rape within either marriage or a co-habiting relationship.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: seafoid on September 14, 2017, 10:35:25 AM
Richard Keys
Andy Gray
Eric Bristow
Kevin Myers
George Hook

are the ones I can remember. None of them did anything illegal.
The problem with lynch mobs is the counterreaction.
In the US the alt right and 4 Chan feed off feminist/minority lynch mobs.
Zionist Jews love leveraging the Christian minority to shut down debate on Israel for example. It isn't very strategic imo.
You cannot say x Jew is an ass hole or y Jew is greedy . That would be antisemitic. You can say it about Derry people or anyone else.
 Sacking Myers wont stop Ísrael collapsing.
Sacking Hook will not change the experience of being raped in Ireland. It won't change the ubiquity of violent porn or misogyny, the reality of class  in the justice system or the politics of cheap alcohol.

Who benefits from all the energy?

It is all bullshit
I assume your last line is referring to all the other lines above it.

Who said anybody did anything illegal? Nobody. What's the relevance of saying that none of them did anything illegal? There is none.

What's your contention? You should only lose your job if you do something illegal? Are you happy, like Fearon, for Hook to exercise his right to his opinion on the airwaves with no limitations?

I hope George gets the boot and goes home and expresses his opinion to the mirror or whoever is willing to listen to him until his dying day.
Fearon is different

Hook and Myers apologised.
Losing your job because there is a lynch mob is wrong

the whole thing is polarising.

In a non polarised society there are agreed ways of dealing with people who may cause offence. there are courts but there are also understandings. 

Manufactured outrages which lead to lynch mobs and their justice have no place in a stable society.

Polarisation is a feature of societies going through economic meltdown. All means to attract and distract.  Don't look at the Euro architecture over there. Don't look at where your pension is invested.

If you really care about rape vote for someone who will address the structural issues that drive it.

Hook is a clown. He is not a Nazi.
The Nazis are all laughing at ye .


Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: seafoid on September 14, 2017, 10:36:39 AM

George Hook is not very likable and his comments were out of line, he said sorry, yellow card, now move on.
The below was the yellow card offence.

But what Hook said last Friday should be a straight red anyway.

http://www.thejournal.ie/george-hook-comments-niamh-nic-domhnaill-2218672-Jul2015/

What about this. Hypothetically… you go into a relationship with somebody, be it marriage or be it you’re living with someone. So now you’re sharing a bed with somebody, yes, and obviously sexual congress takes place on a regular basis because you’re living with someone. Is there not an implied consent therefore that you consent to sexual congress?

That's an implication that there can be no such thing as rape within either marriage or a co-habiting relationship.

Also Sid, Hook is no excuse for what you wrote about Mrs Keady
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: sid waddell on September 14, 2017, 10:39:14 AM

George Hook is not very likable and his comments were out of line, he said sorry, yellow card, now move on.
The below was the yellow card offence.

But what Hook said last Friday should be a straight red anyway.

http://www.thejournal.ie/george-hook-comments-niamh-nic-domhnaill-2218672-Jul2015/

What about this. Hypothetically… you go into a relationship with somebody, be it marriage or be it you’re living with someone. So now you’re sharing a bed with somebody, yes, and obviously sexual congress takes place on a regular basis because you’re living with someone. Is there not an implied consent therefore that you consent to sexual congress?

That's an implication that there can be no such thing as rape within either marriage or a co-habiting relationship.

Also Sid, Hook is no excuse for what you wrote about Mrs Keady
FFS.  ::)
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Rudi on September 14, 2017, 10:48:32 AM

George Hook is not very likable and his comments were out of line, he said sorry, yellow card, now move on.
The below was the yellow card offence.

But what Hook said last Friday should be a straight red anyway.

http://www.thejournal.ie/george-hook-comments-niamh-nic-domhnaill-2218672-Jul2015/

What about this. Hypothetically… you go into a relationship with somebody, be it marriage or be it you’re living with someone. So now you’re sharing a bed with somebody, yes, and obviously sexual congress takes place on a regular basis because you’re living with someone. Is there not an implied consent therefore that you consent to sexual congress?

That's an implication that there can be no such thing as rape within either marriage or a co-habiting relationship.

I agree. I have often put my hand on the mrs rudi arse only to be told "not tonight". It ends there, its down to a half sally in seconds.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Esmarelda on September 14, 2017, 10:55:36 AM
Seafoid, are you suggesting that the likes of Hook and Myers apologising is from the heart and not as a means to getting away with what they said? Do you honestly think that either have different views to those they expressed?

The rest of your argument just regresses to the "PC Brigade Brigade" debate. Someone is outraged by something and someone like you sneers at the outrage. Sure I'll just throw another layer on it. I'm part of the PC Brigade Brigade Brigade and on we go.

If you think that Hook deserves to keep his job fine. Let's not complicate it by telling us how this always happens in certain economic or social conditions. It happens because Newstalk employed Hook and encourage his controversy for the sake of controversy. They've tried a similar approach with Paul Williams and, to a lesser extent, Ivan Yates. It's embarrassing.

Oh, and as for the apology, how many times is it that he can apologise and move on before he goes too far in your book? Maybe it's impossible to go too far? Here's a little more light reading for you to scoff at https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/sep/12/rape-culture-real-irish-shock-jock-george-hook-womens-voices-heard
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: sid waddell on September 14, 2017, 10:58:39 AM
Richard Keys
Andy Gray
Eric Bristow
Kevin Myers
George Hook

are the ones I can remember. None of them did anything illegal.
The problem with lynch mobs is the counterreaction.
In the US the alt right and 4 Chan feed off feminist/minority lynch mobs.
Zionist Jews love leveraging the Christian minority to shut down debate on Israel for example. It isn't very strategic imo.
You cannot say x Jew is an ass hole or y Jew is greedy . That would be antisemitic. You can say it about Derry people or anyone else.
 Sacking Myers wont stop Ísrael collapsing.
Sacking Hook will not change the experience of being raped in Ireland. It won't change the ubiquity of violent porn or misogyny, the reality of class  in the justice system or the politics of cheap alcohol.

Who benefits from all the energy?

It is all bullshit
I assume your last line is referring to all the other lines above it.

Who said anybody did anything illegal? Nobody. What's the relevance of saying that none of them did anything illegal? There is none.

What's your contention? You should only lose your job if you do something illegal? Are you happy, like Fearon, for Hook to exercise his right to his opinion on the airwaves with no limitations?

I hope George gets the boot and goes home and expresses his opinion to the mirror or whoever is willing to listen to him until his dying day.
Fearon is different

Hook and Myers apologised.
Losing your job because there is a lynch mob is wrong

the whole thing is polarising.

In a non polarised society there are agreed ways of dealing with people who may cause offence. there are courts but there are also understandings. 

Manufactured outrages which lead to lynch mobs and their justice have no place in a stable society.

Polarisation is a feature of societies going through economic meltdown. All means to attract and distract.  Don't look at the Euro architecture over there. Don't look at where your pension is invested.

If you really care about rape vote for someone who will address the structural issues that drive it.

Hook is a clown. He is not a Nazi.
The Nazis are all laughing at ye .
That you have to use the term "lynch mob" is a sure sign of a beaten argument.

Every defence I've seen of Hook has used the same techniques -

i) Establish imagined victimhood on the part of the actual bully. This is the primary tool the reactionary right-wing uses to try and drum up sympathy.

ii) Invoke bogus claims of "clamping down on free speech" or "thought control".

iii) Focussing on the irrelevant window dressing in the rest of Hook's comments rather than the actual lines which are cut and dried examples both of victim blaming. Hook says, in different words which mean the exact same thing, that the victim was "asking for it".

iv) Throw in a few catch all right-wing cliches - the usual nonsense - "PC brigade gone mad", "SJWs", "telling it like it is".

The people who defend Hook are the very people who most object when it is genuinely "told like it is".

Neither Hook nor Myers, and you can throw in the likes of Ian O'Doherty and John Waters and that non-entity of a troll John McGuirk, are victims in any form of the word.

They are professional contrarian bullies who use their pulpits to bully and stereotype actual victims, and their words cause real harm. 

Professional contrarians like that generally push it too far in the end and say something completely indefensible.

Hook went on a rant about "personal responsibility". Yet he exercises no personal responsibility.

And for Hook, the only "personal responsibility" he cares about is that of the victim. Not the perpetrator.

Newstalk has become a cesspit of misogynism and reactionary right-wing culture. And that's entirely by choice.





Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: JoG2 on September 14, 2017, 11:07:48 AM
Richard Keys
Andy Gray
Eric Bristow
Kevin Myers
George Hook

are the ones I can remember. None of them did anything illegal.
The problem with lynch mobs is the counterreaction.
In the US the alt right and 4 Chan feed off feminist/minority lynch mobs.
Zionist Jews love leveraging the Christian minority to shut down debate on Israel for example. It isn't very strategic imo.
You cannot say x Jew is an ass hole or y Jew is greedy . That would be antisemitic. You can say it about Derry people or anyone else.
 Sacking Myers wont stop Ísrael collapsing.
Sacking Hook will not change the experience of being raped in Ireland. It won't change the ubiquity of violent porn or misogyny, the reality of class  in the justice system or the politics of cheap alcohol.

Who benefits from all the energy?

It is all bullshit
I assume your last line is referring to all the other lines above it.

Who said anybody did anything illegal? Nobody. What's the relevance of saying that none of them did anything illegal? There is none.

What's your contention? You should only lose your job if you do something illegal? Are you happy, like Fearon, for Hook to exercise his right to his opinion on the airwaves with no limitations?

I hope George gets the boot and goes home and expresses his opinion to the mirror or whoever is willing to listen to him until his dying day.
Fearon is different

Hook and Myers apologised.
Losing your job because there is a lynch mob is wrong

the whole thing is polarising.

In a non polarised society there are agreed ways of dealing with people who may cause offence. there are courts but there are also understandings. 

Manufactured outrages which lead to lynch mobs and their justice have no place in a stable society.

Polarisation is a feature of societies going through economic meltdown. All means to attract and distract.  Don't look at the Euro architecture over there. Don't look at where your pension is invested.

If you really care about rape vote for someone who will address the structural issues that drive it.

Hook is a clown. He is not a Nazi.
The Nazis are all laughing at ye .
That you have to use the term "lynch mob" is a sure sign of a beaten argument.

Every defence I've seen of Hook has used the same techniques -

i) Establish imagined victimhood on the part of the actual bully. This is the primary tool the reactionary right-wing uses to try and drum up sympathy.

ii) Invoke bogus claims of "clamping down on free speech" or "thought control".

iii) Focussing on the irrelevant window dressing in the rest of Hook's comments rather than the actual lines which are cut and dried examples both of victim blaming. Hook says, in different words which mean the exact same thing, that the victim was "asking for it".

iv) Throw in a few catch all right-wing cliches - the usual nonsense - "PC brigade gone mad", "SJWs", "telling it like it is".

The people who defend Hook are the very people who most object when it is genuinely "told like it is".

Neither Hook nor Myers, and you can throw in the likes of Ian O'Doherty and John Waters and that non-entity of a troll John McGuirk, are victims in any form of the word.

They are professional contrarian bullies who use their pulpits to bully and stereotype actual victims, and their words cause real harm. 

Professional contrarians like that generally push it too far in the end and say something completely indefensible.

Hook went on a rant about "personal responsibility". Yet he exercises no personal responsibility.

And for Hook, the only "personal responsibility" he cares about is that of the victim. Not the perpetrator.

Newstalk has become a cesspit of misogynism and reactionary right-wing culture. And that's entirely by choice.

there must be a saying for this kind of craic, a 'chancerism' maybe? When one person in an online argument rolls out the 'when you resort / use {fill in blank} is a sign you've lost the argument (with me as it happens which is handy)  ;D
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: seafoid on September 14, 2017, 12:34:39 PM
Richard Keys
Andy Gray
Eric Bristow
Kevin Myers
George Hook

are the ones I can remember. None of them did anything illegal.
The problem with lynch mobs is the counterreaction.
In the US the alt right and 4 Chan feed off feminist/minority lynch mobs.
Zionist Jews love leveraging the Christian minority to shut down debate on Israel for example. It isn't very strategic imo.
You cannot say x Jew is an ass hole or y Jew is greedy . That would be antisemitic. You can say it about Derry people or anyone else.
 Sacking Myers wont stop Ísrael collapsing.
Sacking Hook will not change the experience of being raped in Ireland. It won't change the ubiquity of violent porn or misogyny, the reality of class  in the justice system or the politics of cheap alcohol.

Who benefits from all the energy?

It is all bullshit
I assume your last line is referring to all the other lines above it.

Who said anybody did anything illegal? Nobody. What's the relevance of saying that none of them did anything illegal? There is none.

What's your contention? You should only lose your job if you do something illegal? Are you happy, like Fearon, for Hook to exercise his right to his opinion on the airwaves with no limitations?

I hope George gets the boot and goes home and expresses his opinion to the mirror or whoever is willing to listen to him until his dying day.
Fearon is different

Hook and Myers apologised.
Losing your job because there is a lynch mob is wrong

the whole thing is polarising.

In a non polarised society there are agreed ways of dealing with people who may cause offence. there are courts but there are also understandings. 

Manufactured outrages which lead to lynch mobs and their justice have no place in a stable society.

Polarisation is a feature of societies going through economic meltdown. All means to attract and distract.  Don't look at the Euro architecture over there. Don't look at where your pension is invested.

If you really care about rape vote for someone who will address the structural issues that drive it.

Hook is a clown. He is not a Nazi.
The Nazis are all laughing at ye .
That you have to use the term "lynch mob" is a sure sign of a beaten argument.

Every defence I've seen of Hook has used the same techniques -

i) Establish imagined victimhood on the part of the actual bully. This is the primary tool the reactionary right-wing uses to try and drum up sympathy.

ii) Invoke bogus claims of "clamping down on free speech" or "thought control".

iii) Focussing on the irrelevant window dressing in the rest of Hook's comments rather than the actual lines which are cut and dried examples both of victim blaming. Hook says, in different words which mean the exact same thing, that the victim was "asking for it".

iv) Throw in a few catch all right-wing cliches - the usual nonsense - "PC brigade gone mad", "SJWs", "telling it like it is".

The people who defend Hook are the very people who most object when it is genuinely "told like it is".

Neither Hook nor Myers, and you can throw in the likes of Ian O'Doherty and John Waters and that non-entity of a troll John McGuirk, are victims in any form of the word.

They are professional contrarian bullies who use their pulpits to bully and stereotype actual victims, and their words cause real harm. 

Professional contrarians like that generally push it too far in the end and say something completely indefensible.

Hook went on a rant about "personal responsibility". Yet he exercises no personal responsibility.

And for Hook, the only "personal responsibility" he cares about is that of the victim. Not the perpetrator.

Newstalk has become a cesspit of misogynism and reactionary right-wing culture. And that's entirely by choice.
You can't win an argument when the society is polarised, Sid. Tsk tsk
There are echo chambers. Nobody in one echo chamber listens to the other.
Maybe that is what is the problem is.

It all part of the same system, the act and the response.
That is how plutocracy works

haters keep hating
f**king these models

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kh2FRFhS7QY
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: easytiger95 on September 14, 2017, 01:21:17 PM
Speaking as a human (and a cyclist) Hooky would be no loss from the airwaves. Neither would Newstalk, with the exception of Tom Dunne.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: AZOffaly on September 14, 2017, 01:24:54 PM
Speaking as a human (and a cyclist) Hooky would be no loss from the airwaves. Neither would Newstalk, with the exception of Tom Dunne.
Ah Newstalk's sport is very good.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Itchy on September 14, 2017, 01:28:16 PM
I dont like Hook very much. However, I think there is a lynch mob after him. What he said was stupid and I am pretty sure that no one thinks a rape victim should carry any burden of blame. I think what he was trying  to say was that you can put yourself in harms way with certain behaviour and you can likewise minimise the risk to yourself  with other behaviours. EG if you fly to a war zone and get shot, you are not to blame for being murdered but you could have better protected yourself by not flying to a warzone. I think that is a reasonable enough opinion to have. There seems to be a bunch of very angry people hell bent of taking Hook down and while I wont shed any tears for him I dont think it is a fair punishment for the "crime".
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: sid waddell on September 14, 2017, 01:45:11 PM
I think what he was trying  to say was that you can put yourself in harms way with certain behaviour and you can likewise minimise the risk to yourself  with other behaviours.

https://twitter.com/PatrickFreyne1/status/907540309944434688

Have I this straight, misogynists? Assuming men might rape insults all men, but if women DON'T assume they might be raped, they're to blame

that sounds like the type of no-win situation that would suggest we have a rape culture
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Declan on September 14, 2017, 01:46:38 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51-hepLP8J4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51-hepLP8J4)

I think this sums it up
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: mouview on September 14, 2017, 02:03:22 PM
I dont like Hook very much. However, I think there is a lynch mob after him. What he said was stupid and I am pretty sure that no one thinks a rape victim should carry any burden of blame. I think what he was trying  to say was that you can put yourself in harms way with certain behaviour and you can likewise minimise the risk to yourself  with other behaviours. EG if you fly to a war zone and get shot, you are not to blame for being murdered but you could have better protected yourself by not flying to a warzone. I think that is a reasonable enough opinion to have. There seems to be a bunch of very angry people hell bent of taking Hook down and while I wont shed any tears for him I dont think it is a fair punishment for the "crime".

Sums it up as well as I could.
Would anyone advise a female friend or relative, particularly one so young, to act thus?
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: mouview on September 14, 2017, 02:04:52 PM
I think what he was trying  to say was that you can put yourself in harms way with certain behaviour and you can likewise minimise the risk to yourself  with other behaviours.

https://twitter.com/PatrickFreyne1/status/907540309944434688

Have I this straight, misogynists? Assuming men might rape insults all men, but if women DON'T assume they might be raped, they're to blame

that sounds like the type of no-win situation that would suggest we have a rape culture

Sid, as Seafoid suggested, your recent comments leave you in no position to talk about misogyny.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: seafoid on September 14, 2017, 02:07:11 PM
Women can be raped under any circumstances. This young lady went home with someone, had consensual sex with him and was then gang raped.
George Hook doesn't know what it is like out there.
She probably wouldn't be able to analyse rugby on TV either though

http://www.sundayworld.com/news/courts/its-your-birthday-surprise-men-told-woman-before-gang-rape
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: sid waddell on September 14, 2017, 02:14:25 PM

Sid, as Seafoid suggested, your recent comments leave you in no position to talk about misogyny.
Really.

Some people are very touchy.

I guess different people pick different things to get touchy about. Sort of a NIMBY attitude to what they think should be allowable and what shouldn't.

And missing the wood for the trees.





Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: sid waddell on September 14, 2017, 02:17:16 PM
I dont like Hook very much. However, I think there is a lynch mob after him. What he said was stupid and I am pretty sure that no one thinks a rape victim should carry any burden of blame. I think what he was trying  to say was that you can put yourself in harms way with certain behaviour and you can likewise minimise the risk to yourself  with other behaviours. EG if you fly to a war zone and get shot, you are not to blame for being murdered but you could have better protected yourself by not flying to a warzone. I think that is a reasonable enough opinion to have. There seems to be a bunch of very angry people hell bent of taking Hook down and while I wont shed any tears for him I dont think it is a fair punishment for the "crime".

Sums it up as well as I could.
Would anyone advise a female friend or relative, particularly one so young, to act thus?
So, you're saying the woman should have assumed she would be raped in that situation?
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: JoG2 on September 14, 2017, 02:33:59 PM
I dont like Hook very much. However, I think there is a lynch mob after him. What he said was stupid and I am pretty sure that no one thinks a rape victim should carry any burden of blame. I think what he was trying  to say was that you can put yourself in harms way with certain behaviour and you can likewise minimise the risk to yourself  with other behaviours. EG if you fly to a war zone and get shot, you are not to blame for being murdered but you could have better protected yourself by not flying to a warzone. I think that is a reasonable enough opinion to have. There seems to be a bunch of very angry people hell bent of taking Hook down and while I wont shed any tears for him I dont think it is a fair punishment for the "crime".

Sums it up as well as I could.
Would anyone advise a female friend or relative, particularly one so young, to act thus?
So, you're saying the woman should have assumed she would be raped in that situation?

Ive a teenage daughter who is starting to head out, I do and will absolutely continue to advise her on how to stay safe the best I can etc...

You're an absolute melter.... Have a walk or something non internet related , it'll do you the world of good

Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Rudi on September 14, 2017, 02:34:29 PM
I dont like Hook very much. However, I think there is a lynch mob after him. What he said was stupid and I am pretty sure that no one thinks a rape victim should carry any burden of blame. I think what he was trying  to say was that you can put yourself in harms way with certain behaviour and you can likewise minimise the risk to yourself  with other behaviours. EG if you fly to a war zone and get shot, you are not to blame for being murdered but you could have better protected yourself by not flying to a warzone. I think that is a reasonable enough opinion to have. There seems to be a bunch of very angry people hell bent of taking Hook down and while I wont shed any tears for him I dont think it is a fair punishment for the "crime".

Sums it up as well as I could.
Would anyone advise a female friend or relative, particularly one so young, to act thus?
So, you're saying the woman should have assumed she would be raped in that situation?

No where in the fu@k did he say that
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Hardy on September 14, 2017, 02:37:58 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51-hepLP8J4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51-hepLP8J4)

I think this sums it up


Excellent.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Esmarelda on September 14, 2017, 02:40:05 PM
I dont like Hook very much. However, I think there is a lynch mob after him. What he said was stupid and I am pretty sure that no one thinks a rape victim should carry any burden of blame. I think what he was trying  to say was that you can put yourself in harms way with certain behaviour and you can likewise minimise the risk to yourself  with other behaviours. EG if you fly to a war zone and get shot, you are not to blame for being murdered but you could have better protected yourself by not flying to a warzone. I think that is a reasonable enough opinion to have. There seems to be a bunch of very angry people hell bent of taking Hook down and while I wont shed any tears for him I dont think it is a fair punishment for the "crime".
Except he questioned if they should. That's the point.

Of course you can advise people not to put themselves in danger. Is a girl going back to a man's hotel room putting herself in danger? I would say it shouldn't be and it isn't something she should need to be warned against.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: sid waddell on September 14, 2017, 02:43:49 PM
I dont like Hook very much. However, I think there is a lynch mob after him. What he said was stupid and I am pretty sure that no one thinks a rape victim should carry any burden of blame. I think what he was trying  to say was that you can put yourself in harms way with certain behaviour and you can likewise minimise the risk to yourself  with other behaviours. EG if you fly to a war zone and get shot, you are not to blame for being murdered but you could have better protected yourself by not flying to a warzone. I think that is a reasonable enough opinion to have. There seems to be a bunch of very angry people hell bent of taking Hook down and while I wont shed any tears for him I dont think it is a fair punishment for the "crime".

Sums it up as well as I could.
Would anyone advise a female friend or relative, particularly one so young, to act thus?
So, you're saying the woman should have assumed she would be raped in that situation?

No where in the fu@k did he say that
Well, George Hook strongly implied it.

It's just that if one defends comments blaming a rape victim one shouldn't be surprised when other people take it as an implication that one is soft on rape.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Esmarelda on September 14, 2017, 02:47:41 PM
I dont like Hook very much. However, I think there is a lynch mob after him. What he said was stupid and I am pretty sure that no one thinks a rape victim should carry any burden of blame. I think what he was trying  to say was that you can put yourself in harms way with certain behaviour and you can likewise minimise the risk to yourself  with other behaviours. EG if you fly to a war zone and get shot, you are not to blame for being murdered but you could have better protected yourself by not flying to a warzone. I think that is a reasonable enough opinion to have. There seems to be a bunch of very angry people hell bent of taking Hook down and while I wont shed any tears for him I dont think it is a fair punishment for the "crime".

Sums it up as well as I could.
Would anyone advise a female friend or relative, particularly one so young, to act thus?
So, you're saying the woman should have assumed she would be raped in that situation?

Ive a teenage daughter who is starting to head out, I do and will absolutely continue to advise her on how to stay safe the best I can etc...

You're an absolute melter.... Have a walk or something non internet related , it'll do you the world of good
Are some of ye intentionally missing the point? Of course you'll advise her to take care. But what's taking care? Is a one night stand not taking care?

And even if it isn't, even if she sleeps with the first lad she meets, should she shoulder some of the BLAME if she's raped by a second man that enters the room? Should she be SURPRISED if such an attack happens? THIS IS WHAT HOOK SAID.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: seafoid on September 14, 2017, 02:48:21 PM

Sid, as Seafoid suggested, your recent comments leave you in no position to talk about misogyny.
Really.

Some people are very touchy.

I guess different people pick different things to get touchy about. Sort of a NIMBY attitude to what they think should be allowable and what shouldn't.

And missing the wood for the trees.
Use of the word touchy is a giveaway er page 96 cough cough

The main thing is the context.
Scaoil amach an bobailin is not suitable for indiscriminate use

It is best in a place where the meaning is clearly understood. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tziDFQctTh8
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: trileacman on September 14, 2017, 02:51:09 PM
I dont like Hook very much. However, I think there is a lynch mob after him. What he said was stupid and I am pretty sure that no one thinks a rape victim should carry any burden of blame. I think what he was trying  to say was that you can put yourself in harms way with certain behaviour and you can likewise minimise the risk to yourself  with other behaviours. EG if you fly to a war zone and get shot, you are not to blame for being murdered but you could have better protected yourself by not flying to a warzone. I think that is a reasonable enough opinion to have. There seems to be a bunch of very angry people hell bent of taking Hook down and while I wont shed any tears for him I dont think it is a fair punishment for the "crime".

Sums it up as well as I could.
Would anyone advise a female friend or relative, particularly one so young, to act thus?
So, you're saying the woman should have assumed she would be raped in that situation?

No where in the fu@k did he say that
Well, George Hook strongly implied it.

It's just that if one defends comments blaming a rape victim one shouldn't be surprised when other people take it as an implication that one is soft on rape.

"One"? Who the f**k are you? The queen mother?
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: JoG2 on September 14, 2017, 02:51:20 PM
I dont like Hook very much. However, I think there is a lynch mob after him. What he said was stupid and I am pretty sure that no one thinks a rape victim should carry any burden of blame. I think what he was trying  to say was that you can put yourself in harms way with certain behaviour and you can likewise minimise the risk to yourself  with other behaviours. EG if you fly to a war zone and get shot, you are not to blame for being murdered but you could have better protected yourself by not flying to a warzone. I think that is a reasonable enough opinion to have. There seems to be a bunch of very angry people hell bent of taking Hook down and while I wont shed any tears for him I dont think it is a fair punishment for the "crime".

Sums it up as well as I could.
Would anyone advise a female friend or relative, particularly one so young, to act thus?
So, you're saying the woman should have assumed she would be raped in that situation?

Ive a teenage daughter who is starting to head out, I do and will absolutely continue to advise her on how to stay safe the best I can etc...

You're an absolute melter.... Have a walk or something non internet related , it'll do you the world of good
Are some of ye intentionally missing the point? Of course you'll advise her to take care. But what's taking care? Is a one night stand not taking care?

And even if it isn't, even if she sleeps with the first lad she meets, should she shoulder some of the BLAME if she's raped by a second man that enters the room? Should she be SURPRISED if such an attack happens? THIS IS WHAT HOOK SAID.

no harm Esmarelda, but I'm replying to mouview / itchy and then sid's comments. Not near your point so can't miss it
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Esmarelda on September 14, 2017, 03:09:34 PM
I dont like Hook very much. However, I think there is a lynch mob after him. What he said was stupid and I am pretty sure that no one thinks a rape victim should carry any burden of blame. I think what he was trying  to say was that you can put yourself in harms way with certain behaviour and you can likewise minimise the risk to yourself  with other behaviours. EG if you fly to a war zone and get shot, you are not to blame for being murdered but you could have better protected yourself by not flying to a warzone. I think that is a reasonable enough opinion to have. There seems to be a bunch of very angry people hell bent of taking Hook down and while I wont shed any tears for him I dont think it is a fair punishment for the "crime".

Sums it up as well as I could.
Would anyone advise a female friend or relative, particularly one so young, to act thus?
So, you're saying the woman should have assumed she would be raped in that situation?

Ive a teenage daughter who is starting to head out, I do and will absolutely continue to advise her on how to stay safe the best I can etc...

You're an absolute melter.... Have a walk or something non internet related , it'll do you the world of good
Are some of ye intentionally missing the point? Of course you'll advise her to take care. But what's taking care? Is a one night stand not taking care?

And even if it isn't, even if she sleeps with the first lad she meets, should she shoulder some of the BLAME if she's raped by a second man that enters the room? Should she be SURPRISED if such an attack happens? THIS IS WHAT HOOK SAID.

no harm Esmarelda, but I'm replying to mouview / itchy and then sid's comments. Not near your point so can't miss it
What does that mean?
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: JoG2 on September 14, 2017, 03:44:02 PM
I dont like Hook very much. However, I think there is a lynch mob after him. What he said was stupid and I am pretty sure that no one thinks a rape victim should carry any burden of blame. I think what he was trying  to say was that you can put yourself in harms way with certain behaviour and you can likewise minimise the risk to yourself  with other behaviours. EG if you fly to a war zone and get shot, you are not to blame for being murdered but you could have better protected yourself by not flying to a warzone. I think that is a reasonable enough opinion to have. There seems to be a bunch of very angry people hell bent of taking Hook down and while I wont shed any tears for him I dont think it is a fair punishment for the "crime".

Sums it up as well as I could.
Would anyone advise a female friend or relative, particularly one so young, to act thus?
So, you're saying the woman should have assumed she would be raped in that situation?

Ive a teenage daughter who is starting to head out, I do and will absolutely continue to advise her on how to stay safe the best I can etc...

You're an absolute melter.... Have a walk or something non internet related , it'll do you the world of good
Are some of ye intentionally missing the point? Of course you'll advise her to take care. But what's taking care? Is a one night stand not taking care?

And even if it isn't, even if she sleeps with the first lad she meets, should she shoulder some of the BLAME if she's raped by a second man that enters the room? Should she be SURPRISED if such an attack happens? THIS IS WHAT HOOK SAID.

no harm Esmarelda, but I'm replying to mouview / itchy and then sid's comments. Not near your point so can't miss it
What does that mean?

take a breath. Against my better judgement I commented in a thread (to a specific point within the thread) that I normally wouldn't have (ie births, deaths, politics, serious stuff etc etc) as I don't like getting embroiled in the madness.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: sid waddell on September 14, 2017, 03:47:39 PM

"One"? Who the f**k are you? The queen mother?
Well, George Hook does appear to have taken on a sort of Princess Diana quality for those defending him...

Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Esmarelda on September 14, 2017, 03:48:31 PM
I dont like Hook very much. However, I think there is a lynch mob after him. What he said was stupid and I am pretty sure that no one thinks a rape victim should carry any burden of blame. I think what he was trying  to say was that you can put yourself in harms way with certain behaviour and you can likewise minimise the risk to yourself  with other behaviours. EG if you fly to a war zone and get shot, you are not to blame for being murdered but you could have better protected yourself by not flying to a warzone. I think that is a reasonable enough opinion to have. There seems to be a bunch of very angry people hell bent of taking Hook down and while I wont shed any tears for him I dont think it is a fair punishment for the "crime".

Sums it up as well as I could.
Would anyone advise a female friend or relative, particularly one so young, to act thus?
So, you're saying the woman should have assumed she would be raped in that situation?

Ive a teenage daughter who is starting to head out, I do and will absolutely continue to advise her on how to stay safe the best I can etc...

You're an absolute melter.... Have a walk or something non internet related , it'll do you the world of good
Are some of ye intentionally missing the point? Of course you'll advise her to take care. But what's taking care? Is a one night stand not taking care?

And even if it isn't, even if she sleeps with the first lad she meets, should she shoulder some of the BLAME if she's raped by a second man that enters the room? Should she be SURPRISED if such an attack happens? THIS IS WHAT HOOK SAID.

no harm Esmarelda, but I'm replying to mouview / itchy and then sid's comments. Not near your point so can't miss it
What does that mean?

take a breath. Against my better judgement I commented in a thread (to a specific point within the thread) that I normally wouldn't have (ie births, deaths, politics, serious stuff etc etc) as I don't like getting embroiled in the madness.
I'm perfectly calm. I just don't know what "Not near your point so can't miss it" means.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Hound on September 14, 2017, 03:50:23 PM

Neither Hook nor Myers, and you can throw in the likes of Ian O'Doherty and John Waters and that non-entity of a troll John McGuirk, are victims in any form of the word.

They are professional contrarian bullies who use their pulpits to bully and stereotype actual victims, and their words cause real harm. 

Professional contrarians like that generally push it too far in the end and say something completely indefensible.

Would you put John Waters in the same category?

I don't actually know much about him, and only read him very rarely when we wrote for the Irish Times. But Dunphy did a very good interview with him on his podcast, The Stand. I found him interesting and witty, some things I agreed with him on and others I definitely didn't.

I did know about his stance of father's rights in the case of separation/divorce, and I fully agree with him that father's often don't get justice.

Dunphy challenged him on anti gay marriage stance which I wasn't aware of. And he said let's get marriage/divorce rights sorted for men first and then go on to gays. That was lame, and it transpired that he's a strong Catholic, so that was the real reason, but we probably all know people who voted No for religious reasons, so I wouldnt hold that against them. They lost, we move on.   
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: JoG2 on September 14, 2017, 03:57:00 PM
I dont like Hook very much. However, I think there is a lynch mob after him. What he said was stupid and I am pretty sure that no one thinks a rape victim should carry any burden of blame. I think what he was trying  to say was that you can put yourself in harms way with certain behaviour and you can likewise minimise the risk to yourself  with other behaviours. EG if you fly to a war zone and get shot, you are not to blame for being murdered but you could have better protected yourself by not flying to a warzone. I think that is a reasonable enough opinion to have. There seems to be a bunch of very angry people hell bent of taking Hook down and while I wont shed any tears for him I dont think it is a fair punishment for the "crime".

Sums it up as well as I could.
Would anyone advise a female friend or relative, particularly one so young, to act thus?
So, you're saying the woman should have assumed she would be raped in that situation?

Ive a teenage daughter who is starting to head out, I do and will absolutely continue to advise her on how to stay safe the best I can etc...

You're an absolute melter.... Have a walk or something non internet related , it'll do you the world of good
Are some of ye intentionally missing the point? Of course you'll advise her to take care. But what's taking care? Is a one night stand not taking care?

And even if it isn't, even if she sleeps with the first lad she meets, should she shoulder some of the BLAME if she's raped by a second man that enters the room? Should she be SURPRISED if such an attack happens? THIS IS WHAT HOOK SAID.

no harm Esmarelda, but I'm replying to mouview / itchy and then sid's comments. Not near your point so can't miss it
What does that mean?

take a breath. Against my better judgement I commented in a thread (to a specific point within the thread) that I normally wouldn't have (ie births, deaths, politics, serious stuff etc etc) as I don't like getting embroiled in the madness.
I'm perfectly calm. I just don't know what "Not near your point so can't miss it" means.

right, you said ( and i put it in bold above) "missing the point"...as I replied to other posters on their point, I then replied "Not near your point so can't miss it"....anyhow, enjoy your day *thumbs up*
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Itchy on September 14, 2017, 04:12:15 PM
I dont like Hook very much. However, I think there is a lynch mob after him. What he said was stupid and I am pretty sure that no one thinks a rape victim should carry any burden of blame. I think what he was trying  to say was that you can put yourself in harms way with certain behaviour and you can likewise minimise the risk to yourself  with other behaviours. EG if you fly to a war zone and get shot, you are not to blame for being murdered but you could have better protected yourself by not flying to a warzone. I think that is a reasonable enough opinion to have. There seems to be a bunch of very angry people hell bent of taking Hook down and while I wont shed any tears for him I dont think it is a fair punishment for the "crime".
Except he questioned if they should. That's the point.

Of course you can advise people not to put themselves in danger. Is a girl going back to a man's hotel room putting herself in danger? I would say it shouldn't be and it isn't something she should need to be warned against.

I know what he said and I did say in my post it was a stupid thing to say. I might add it was Irresponsible even and deserving of some punishment. However, I do not believe that he meant to it in the way it reads if you follow me. Now what he meant is debatable as its based on opinion and cannot be substantiated and I understand that. I dont think he should be run out of his job, we all say things we didnt mean to say after all.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Esmarelda on September 14, 2017, 04:20:56 PM
I dont like Hook very much. However, I think there is a lynch mob after him. What he said was stupid and I am pretty sure that no one thinks a rape victim should carry any burden of blame. I think what he was trying  to say was that you can put yourself in harms way with certain behaviour and you can likewise minimise the risk to yourself  with other behaviours. EG if you fly to a war zone and get shot, you are not to blame for being murdered but you could have better protected yourself by not flying to a warzone. I think that is a reasonable enough opinion to have. There seems to be a bunch of very angry people hell bent of taking Hook down and while I wont shed any tears for him I dont think it is a fair punishment for the "crime".
Except he questioned if they should. That's the point.

Of course you can advise people not to put themselves in danger. Is a girl going back to a man's hotel room putting herself in danger? I would say it shouldn't be and it isn't something she should need to be warned against.

I know what he said and I did say in my post it was a stupid thing to say. I might add it was Irresponsible even and deserving of some punishment. However, I do not believe that he meant to it in the way it reads if you follow me. Now what he meant is debatable as its based on opinion and cannot be substantiated and I understand that. I dont think he should be run out of his job, we all say things we didnt mean to say after all.
Well even if we were to give him the benefit of the doubt,  you'll see from the link I posted earlier and the general comments about him that he has form. In my opinion, he absolutely meant what he said as he said it. Like I said before, this isn't a heated argument where you blurt something out that you immediately regret. He would have prepared for this piece and, as far as I know, he only apologised the next day after all the criticism that came his way.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Itchy on September 14, 2017, 04:44:21 PM
I dont like Hook very much. However, I think there is a lynch mob after him. What he said was stupid and I am pretty sure that no one thinks a rape victim should carry any burden of blame. I think what he was trying  to say was that you can put yourself in harms way with certain behaviour and you can likewise minimise the risk to yourself  with other behaviours. EG if you fly to a war zone and get shot, you are not to blame for being murdered but you could have better protected yourself by not flying to a warzone. I think that is a reasonable enough opinion to have. There seems to be a bunch of very angry people hell bent of taking Hook down and while I wont shed any tears for him I dont think it is a fair punishment for the "crime".

Sums it up as well as I could.
Would anyone advise a female friend or relative, particularly one so young, to act thus?
So, you're saying the woman should have assumed she would be raped in that situation?

No where in the fu@k did he say that
Well, George Hook strongly implied it.

It's just that if one defends comments blaming a rape victim one shouldn't be surprised when other people take it as an implication that one is soft on rape.

Sid  - just to clarify, I am not "soft" on rape. Anyone who rapes should be doing 15  - 20 years in my opinion.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: trileacman on September 14, 2017, 07:43:49 PM

"One"? Who the f**k are you? The queen mother?
Well, George Hook does appear to have taken on a sort of Princess Diana quality for those defending him...

More shitetalk.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Eamonnca1 on September 14, 2017, 09:24:24 PM

"One"? Who the f**k are you? The queen mother?
Well, George Hook does appear to have taken on a sort of Princess Diana quality for those defending him...

Quality!
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: sid waddell on September 15, 2017, 12:36:52 AM

Neither Hook nor Myers, and you can throw in the likes of Ian O'Doherty and John Waters and that non-entity of a troll John McGuirk, are victims in any form of the word.

They are professional contrarian bullies who use their pulpits to bully and stereotype actual victims, and their words cause real harm. 

Professional contrarians like that generally push it too far in the end and say something completely indefensible.

Would you put John Waters in the same category?

I don't actually know much about him, and only read him very rarely when we wrote for the Irish Times. But Dunphy did a very good interview with him on his podcast, The Stand. I found him interesting and witty, some things I agreed with him on and others I definitely didn't.

I did know about his stance of father's rights in the case of separation/divorce, and I fully agree with him that father's often don't get justice.

Dunphy challenged him on anti gay marriage stance which I wasn't aware of. And he said let's get marriage/divorce rights sorted for men first and then go on to gays. That was lame, and it transpired that he's a strong Catholic, so that was the real reason, but we probably all know people who voted No for religious reasons, so I wouldnt hold that against them. They lost, we move on.
Waters has been a reactionary crank for many years now.

Like Myers but unlike O'Doherty, he certainly has writing ability but disappeared up his own arse long ago.



Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: seafoid on September 15, 2017, 09:32:53 AM
http://www.irishtimes.com/business/media-and-marketing/george-hook-suspended-from-newstalk-after-rape-comments-1.3222180
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: magpie seanie on September 15, 2017, 02:44:06 PM
Newstalk milk all the coverage and then suspend him as if they give a fcuk.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Rudi on September 15, 2017, 03:21:37 PM
http://www.irishtimes.com/business/media-and-marketing/george-hook-suspended-from-newstalk-after-rape-comments-1.3222180

I wish I had time to protest like the ones in the photo. As for a culture of crime against women in this country, its hardly that bad. Varadkar even said it today, excuse me sir are you not from India, a barbaric cesspit of a country, where rape is natural and a huge class society exists. If your not happy here Leo, you can go home you know, apart from appeasing the media he has done feck all.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: ziggysego on September 15, 2017, 03:51:53 PM
http://www.irishtimes.com/business/media-and-marketing/george-hook-suspended-from-newstalk-after-rape-comments-1.3222180

I wish I had time to protest like the ones in the photo. As for a culture of crime against women in this country, its hardly that bad. Varadkar even said it today, excuse me sir are you not from India, a barbaric cesspit of a country, where rape is natural and a huge class society exists. If your not happy here Leo, you can go home you know, apart from appeasing the media he has done feck all.

Leo isn't from India.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: sid waddell on September 15, 2017, 03:54:42 PM
http://www.irishtimes.com/business/media-and-marketing/george-hook-suspended-from-newstalk-after-rape-comments-1.3222180

I wish I had time to protest like the ones in the photo. As for a culture of crime against women in this country, its hardly that bad. Varadkar even said it today, excuse me sir are you not from India, a barbaric cesspit of a country, where rape is natural and a huge class society exists. If your not happy here Leo, you can go home you know, apart from appeasing the media he has done feck all.
If Leo Varadkar is from India, are you not from Africa, in that case?

Are we not all from Africa?

Personally, I thought he was from Castleknock, but then what the hell would I know.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: seafoid on September 15, 2017, 04:07:10 PM
http://www.irishtimes.com/business/media-and-marketing/george-hook-suspended-from-newstalk-after-rape-comments-1.3222180

I wish I had time to protest like the ones in the photo. As for a culture of crime against women in this country, its hardly that bad. Varadkar even said it today, excuse me sir are you not from India, a barbaric cesspit of a country, where rape is natural and a huge class society exists. If your not happy here Leo, you can go home you know, apart from appeasing the media he has done feck all.
If Leo Varadkar is from India, are you not from Africa, in that case?

Are we not all from Africa?

Personally, I thought he was from Castleknock, but then what the hell would I know.
He is from neoliberalia. Only thing that counts.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: J70 on September 15, 2017, 06:29:18 PM
http://www.irishtimes.com/business/media-and-marketing/george-hook-suspended-from-newstalk-after-rape-comments-1.3222180

I wish I had time to protest like the ones in the photo. As for a culture of crime against women in this country, its hardly that bad. Varadkar even said it today, excuse me sir are you not from India, a barbaric cesspit of a country, where rape is natural and a huge class society exists. If your not happy here Leo, you can go home you know, apart from appeasing the media he has done feck all.

Varadkar is just the Dublin-born Taoiseach. Why the f**k would he be commenting on anything that is a high profile talking point in Irish society? :o

Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Syferus on September 15, 2017, 06:35:38 PM
Newstalk milk all the coverage and then suspend him as if they give a fcuk.

I really don't think you have a clue how PR works if you think this was an attempt by Newstalk to get attention.


http://www.irishtimes.com/business/media-and-marketing/george-hook-suspended-from-newstalk-after-rape-comments-1.3222180

I wish I had time to protest like the ones in the photo. As for a culture of crime against women in this country, its hardly that bad. Varadkar even said it today, excuse me sir are you not from India, a barbaric cesspit of a country, where rape is natural and a huge class society exists. If your not happy here Leo, you can go home you know, apart from appeasing the media he has done feck all.

Varadkar is just the Dublin-born Taoiseach. Why the f**k would he be commenting on anything that is a high profile talking point in Irish society? :o

Insanely wrong-headed comment Rudi. Xenophobic at best. Varadkar is Irish, in case you forgot..
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: armaghniac on September 15, 2017, 06:43:20 PM
Varadkar is just the Dublin-born Taoiseach. Why the f**k would he be commenting on anything that is a high profile talking point in Irish society? :o


Dublin isn't Ireland?
Mayo is the real Ireland.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: ziggysego on September 15, 2017, 06:56:43 PM
Varadkar is just the Dublin-born Taoiseach. Why the f**k would he be commenting on anything that is a high profile talking point in Irish society? :o


Dublin isn't Ireland?
Mayo is the real Ireland.

No, Cark is.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Rudi on September 15, 2017, 08:01:23 PM
http://www.irishtimes.com/business/media-and-marketing/george-hook-suspended-from-newstalk-after-rape-comments-1.3222180

I wish I had time to protest like the ones in the photo. As for a culture of crime against women in this country, its hardly that bad. Varadkar even said it today, excuse me sir are you not from India, a barbaric cesspit of a country, where rape is natural and a huge class society exists. If your not happy here Leo, you can go home you know, apart from appeasing the media he has done feck all.

Varadkar is just the Dublin-born Taoiseach. Why the f**k would he be commenting on anything that is a high profile talking point in Irish society? :o

It's a photo opportunity self driven political gain chancerism. Coming from a culture of horrendous treatment of women I find it a bit shite. I don't like the sarky nature of your post not the first time either.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Syferus on September 15, 2017, 09:51:55 PM
http://www.irishtimes.com/business/media-and-marketing/george-hook-suspended-from-newstalk-after-rape-comments-1.3222180

I wish I had time to protest like the ones in the photo. As for a culture of crime against women in this country, its hardly that bad. Varadkar even said it today, excuse me sir are you not from India, a barbaric cesspit of a country, where rape is natural and a huge class society exists. If your not happy here Leo, you can go home you know, apart from appeasing the media he has done feck all.

Varadkar is just the Dublin-born Taoiseach. Why the f**k would he be commenting on anything that is a high profile talking point in Irish society? :o

It's a photo opportunity self driven political gain chancerism. Coming from a culture of horrendous treatment of women I find it a bit shite. I don't like the sarky nature of your post not the first time either.

Doubling down on the xenophobia I see. What part of him being Irish did you miss?
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: foxcommander on September 15, 2017, 10:03:33 PM
http://www.irishtimes.com/business/media-and-marketing/george-hook-suspended-from-newstalk-after-rape-comments-1.3222180

I wish I had time to protest like the ones in the photo. As for a culture of crime against women in this country, its hardly that bad. Varadkar even said it today, excuse me sir are you not from India, a barbaric cesspit of a country, where rape is natural and a huge class society exists. If your not happy here Leo, you can go home you know, apart from appeasing the media he has done feck all.

Varadkar is just the Dublin-born Taoiseach. Why the f**k would he be commenting on anything that is a high profile talking point in Irish society? :o

It's a photo opportunity self driven political gain chancerism. Coming from a culture of horrendous treatment of women I find it a bit shite. I don't like the sarky nature of your post not the first time either.

Doubling down on the xenophobia I see. What part of him being Irish did you miss?

Being a blueshirt he can hardly be called Irish. West Brit perhaps.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: sid waddell on September 16, 2017, 12:38:40 AM
http://www.irishtimes.com/business/media-and-marketing/george-hook-suspended-from-newstalk-after-rape-comments-1.3222180

I wish I had time to protest like the ones in the photo. As for a culture of crime against women in this country, its hardly that bad. Varadkar even said it today, excuse me sir are you not from India, a barbaric cesspit of a country, where rape is natural and a huge class society exists. If your not happy here Leo, you can go home you know, apart from appeasing the media he has done feck all.

Varadkar is just the Dublin-born Taoiseach. Why the f**k would he be commenting on anything that is a high profile talking point in Irish society? :o

It's a photo opportunity self driven political gain chancerism. Coming from a culture of horrendous treatment of women I find it a bit shite. I don't like the sarky nature of your post not the first time either.

Doubling down on the xenophobia I see. What part of him being Irish did you miss?

Being a blueshirt he can hardly be called Irish. West Brit perhaps.

We're truly lucky to have posters who can make such razor sharp, biting, original quips.

Even if they are an East Alabaman - the part with the burning crosses.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: macdanger2 on September 16, 2017, 12:47:07 AM
http://www.irishtimes.com/business/media-and-marketing/george-hook-suspended-from-newstalk-after-rape-comments-1.3222180

I wish I had time to protest like the ones in the photo. As for a culture of crime against women in this country, its hardly that bad. Varadkar even said it today, excuse me sir are you not from India, a barbaric cesspit of a country, where rape is natural and a huge class society exists. If your not happy here Leo, you can go home you know, apart from appeasing the media he has done feck all.

Way out of order Rudi
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Tubberman on September 16, 2017, 06:41:23 AM
http://www.irishtimes.com/business/media-and-marketing/george-hook-suspended-from-newstalk-after-rape-comments-1.3222180

I wish I had time to protest like the ones in the photo. As for a culture of crime against women in this country, its hardly that bad. Varadkar even said it today, excuse me sir are you not from India, a barbaric cesspit of a country, where rape is natural and a huge class society exists. If your not happy here Leo, you can go home you know, apart from appeasing the media he has done feck all.

You've shown yourself up big time. He's from Castleknock FFS.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Dinny Breen on September 16, 2017, 07:06:14 AM
Newstalk milk all the coverage and then suspend him as if they give a fcuk.

I really don't think you have a clue how PR works if you think this was an attempt by Newstalk to get attention.


http://www.irishtimes.com/business/media-and-marketing/george-hook-suspended-from-newstalk-after-rape-comments-1.3222180

I wish I had time to protest like the ones in the photo. As for a culture of crime against women in this country, its hardly that bad. Varadkar even said it today, excuse me sir are you not from India, a barbaric cesspit of a country, where rape is natural and a huge class society exists. If your not happy here Leo, you can go home you know, apart from appeasing the media he has done feck all.

Varadkar is just the Dublin-born Taoiseach. Why the f**k would he be commenting on anything that is a high profile talking point in Irish society? :o

Insanely wrong-headed comment Rudi. Xenophobic at best. Varadkar is Irish, in case you forgot..

Personally I would call that comment racist.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Milltown Row2 on September 16, 2017, 07:47:34 AM

George Hook is not very likable and his comments were out of line, he said sorry, yellow card, now move on.
The below was the yellow card offence.

But what Hook said last Friday should be a straight red anyway.

http://www.thejournal.ie/george-hook-comments-niamh-nic-domhnaill-2218672-Jul2015/

What about this. Hypothetically… you go into a relationship with somebody, be it marriage or be it you’re living with someone. So now you’re sharing a bed with somebody, yes, and obviously sexual congress takes place on a regular basis because you’re living with someone. Is there not an implied consent therefore that you consent to sexual congress?

That's an implication that there can be no such thing as rape within either marriage or a co-habiting relationship.

I agree. I have often put my hand on the mrs rudi arse only to be told "not tonight". It ends there, its down to a half sally in seconds.

Just get her drunk .....
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: J70 on September 16, 2017, 11:01:03 AM
http://www.irishtimes.com/business/media-and-marketing/george-hook-suspended-from-newstalk-after-rape-comments-1.3222180

I wish I had time to protest like the ones in the photo. As for a culture of crime against women in this country, its hardly that bad. Varadkar even said it today, excuse me sir are you not from India, a barbaric cesspit of a country, where rape is natural and a huge class society exists. If your not happy here Leo, you can go home you know, apart from appeasing the media he has done feck all.

Varadkar is just the Dublin-born Taoiseach. Why the f**k would he be commenting on anything that is a high profile talking point in Irish society? :o

It's a photo opportunity self driven political gain chancerism. Coming from a culture of horrendous treatment of women I find it a bit shite. I don't like the sarky nature of your post not the first time either.

If you think it's just a photo op, then just say that and leave out the irrelevant, xenophobic ad hominem attacks.

Sarcasm is sometimes appropriate (you were fully aware he is Irish-born, while how the hell is he in any way responsible for what goes on in India?). Xenophobia never is.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: J70 on September 16, 2017, 11:05:37 AM
http://www.irishtimes.com/business/media-and-marketing/george-hook-suspended-from-newstalk-after-rape-comments-1.3222180

I wish I had time to protest like the ones in the photo. As for a culture of crime against women in this country, its hardly that bad. Varadkar even said it today, excuse me sir are you not from India, a barbaric cesspit of a country, where rape is natural and a huge class society exists. If your not happy here Leo, you can go home you know, apart from appeasing the media he has done feck all.

Varadkar is just the Dublin-born Taoiseach. Why the f**k would he be commenting on anything that is a high profile talking point in Irish society? :o

It's a photo opportunity self driven political gain chancerism. Coming from a culture of horrendous treatment of women I find it a bit shite. I don't like the sarky nature of your post not the first time either.

Doubling down on the xenophobia I see. What part of him being Irish did you miss?

Being a blueshirt he can hardly be called Irish. West Brit perhaps.

 ;D
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: foxcommander on September 16, 2017, 03:21:40 PM
George Hook was bang on the money. Take responsibility for your own actions and don't put yourself in dangerous situations. It is pathetic how this has been twisted and a man gets demonized for speaking the truth.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: sid waddell on September 16, 2017, 03:30:31 PM
George Hook was bang on the money. Take responsibility for your own actions and don't put yourself in dangerous situations. It is pathetic how this has been twisted and a man gets demonized for speaking the truth.
Whose "responsibility" are you referring to here?

Because it sounds very much like you're referring to the "responsibility" of the victim, not the responsibility of the perpetrator, or the responsibility of Hook himself not to blame a victim on national radio.

How exactly should a victim take "responsibility" for "her own actions"?

What "actions"?

The "actions" of being raped?

Claiming that a rape victim is to blame? Isn't that the ideology of Wahhabism?

Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: foxcommander on September 16, 2017, 03:34:20 PM
George Hook was bang on the money. Take responsibility for your own actions and don't put yourself in dangerous situations. It is pathetic how this has been twisted and a man gets demonized for speaking the truth.
Whose "responsibility" are you referring to here?

Because it sounds very much like you're referring to the "responsibility" of the victim, not the responsibility of the perpetrator, or the responsibility of Hook himself not to blame a victim on national radio.

How exactly should a victim take "responsibility" for "her own actions"?

What "actions"?

The "actions" of being raped?

Claiming that a rape victim is to blame? Isn't that the ideology of Wahhabism?

this is exactly what I mean when I say the story gets twisted.

Re-read the bit about putting yourself in dangerous situations
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: sid waddell on September 16, 2017, 03:48:04 PM
George Hook was bang on the money. Take responsibility for your own actions and don't put yourself in dangerous situations. It is pathetic how this has been twisted and a man gets demonized for speaking the truth.

this is exactly what I mean when I say the story gets twisted.

Re-read the bit about putting yourself in dangerous situations
Whose "responsibility" are you referring to here?

Because it sounds very much like you're referring to the "responsibility" of the victim, not the responsibility of the perpetrator, or the responsibility of Hook himself not to blame a victim on national radio.

How exactly should a victim take "responsibility" for "her own actions"?

What "actions"?

The "actions" of being raped?

Claiming that a rape victim is to blame? Isn't that the ideology of Wahhabism?
I've read the comments and listened to them multiple times so I'm well aware of exactly what was said and the context and tone of them, thanks.

Whose "responsibility" are you talking about?

The victim's, yes?
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: under the bar on September 16, 2017, 04:10:47 PM
George Hook was bang on the money. Take responsibility for your own actions and don't put yourself in dangerous situations. It is pathetic how this has been twisted and a man gets demonized for speaking the truth.

So any girl going back to an hotel room with her date who then ends up getting raped by another man who enters the room has brought it on herself?  If you believe that you are in the same category  of neanderthal knob-jockeys as Hook himself
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: Esmarelda on September 16, 2017, 04:22:04 PM
Everyone hold on. foxcommander is jealous. foxcommander tries to be as controversial as Hook on this board and is trying to get their tuppence in now, a little late.

Hook is bang on the money. The rape victim is partly to blame and she shouldn't be surprised that a second man came into the room and raped her.

Please, please, please let this post be the acknowledgement of how controversial foxcommander's post was and let's move on with genuine debate, much like if Hook gets the boot.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: foxcommander on September 16, 2017, 11:38:17 PM
George Hook was bang on the money. Take responsibility for your own actions and don't put yourself in dangerous situations. It is pathetic how this has been twisted and a man gets demonized for speaking the truth.

So any girl going back to an hotel room with her date who then ends up getting raped by another man who enters the room has brought it on herself?

Then ask yourself if you should go to a hotel room or any other isolated location with someone you didn't even know 3 hours ago.
I am merely pointing out that you run the risk of putting yourself in danger. How do you know what this person is actally like. What if the story turned out that she was murdered by her date. Same rules apply.

Next you lot will be telling kids it's ok to get into that car with strangers.
Title: Re: George Hook
Post by: foxcommander on September 16, 2017, 11:43:45 PM
Everyone hold on. foxcommander is jealous. foxcommander tries to be as controversial as Hook on this board and is trying to get their tuppence in now, a little late.

Hook is bang on the money. The rape victim is partly to blame and she shouldn't be surprised that a second man came into the room and raped her.

Please, please, please let this post be the acknowledgement of how controversial foxcommander's post was and let's move on with genuine debate, much like if Hook gets the boot.

Sorry for the delay - I don't sit on the internet every hour of the day waiting for the latest outrage and pitchfork session.

She had no idea who she was dealing with. That in my book is irresponsible, no matter what way you try spin it.