Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

500dan

women as victims

Recommended Posts

Just read this article https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/oct/20/policeman-and-former-england-athlete-jailed-for-secretly-filming-sex

Can't really see what he's done to deserve 3 years, the article talks about him cheating on his girlfriend as though it's now an imprisonable crime. 

There seem to be a spate of similar 'offences' where man isn't very nice to woman so the courts get involved because of course women need protecting and are permanent victims. Are women so weak? If a woman had filmed herself having consensual sex with men and never shared the videos with anyone would she also have been put in prison?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He was found guilty of 11 counts of voyeurism. Voyeurism became a criminal offence with the passing of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 and carries a maximum sentence of 2 years in prison:

http://www.sexual-offence-solicitors.co.uk/types-of-sexual-offences/voyeurism/

He broke the law, he was found guilty by a jury of his peers, now he will serve the sentence. I don't really see what the problem is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Dorkins said:

He was found guilty of 11 counts of voyeurism. Voyeurism became a criminal offence with the passing of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 and carries a maximum sentence of 2 years in prison:

http://www.sexual-offence-solicitors.co.uk/types-of-sexual-offences/voyeurism/

He broke the law, he was found guilty by a jury of his peers, now he will serve the sentence. I don't really see what the problem is.

I see what the problem is: misogyny. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know he was found guilty of a criminal offence. What I'm saying is that criminal law doesn't apply to men and women in remotely the same way.

I don't think it's misogyny to point it out, I actually think being treated as permanent victims does women a huge disservice in enabling them not to take responsibility for themselves. Once you're relying on the state to protect you in every aspect of your life you're ******ed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

17 hours ago, 500dan said:

Just read this article https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/oct/20/policeman-and-former-england-athlete-jailed-for-secretly-filming-sex

Can't really see what he's done to deserve 3 years, the article talks about him cheating on his girlfriend as though it's now an imprisonable crime. 

There seem to be a spate of similar 'offences' where man isn't very nice to woman so the courts get involved because of course women need protecting and are permanent victims. Are women so weak? If a woman had filmed herself having consensual sex with men and never shared the videos with anyone would she also have been put in prison?

 

 

You are an idiot. Here is the proof:

 

16 hours ago, Bossybabe said:

I see what the problem is: misogyny. 

 

And here is the answer:

First sex doll-only brothel opens in Germany following success of Austrian outlet as bizarre trend spreads across Europe

Standard brothels are probably also safe, but don't risk it. Sex and real women should be kept as far apart as possible. You should also film yourself at all times as proof of innocence. Obviously doing the latter and engaging in sex with real women is just daft.

:ph34r:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, 500dan said:

I know he was found guilty of a criminal offence. What I'm saying is that criminal law doesn't apply to men and women in remotely the same way.

The article you linked to doesn't show women getting away with criminal offences, it shows a man being correctly prosecuted for a crime he did commit.

Do you have an article showing women not being prosecuted for criminal offences they did commit?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, 500dan said:

If a woman had filmed herself having consensual sex with men and never shared the videos with anyone would she also have been put in prison?

That would depend on whether she'd checked with the person she was having sex with if it was OK to film.

Filming consensual sex secretly is still really really all shades of wrong.

You can see that can't you ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Dorkins said:

He was found guilty of 11 counts of voyeurism. Voyeurism became a criminal offence with the passing of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 and carries a maximum sentence of 2 years in prison:

http://www.sexual-offence-solicitors.co.uk/types-of-sexual-offences/voyeurism/

He broke the law, he was found guilty by a jury of his peers, now he will serve the sentence. I don't really see what the problem is.

Odd.  Is it voyeurism to want to look at yourself having sex?  I appreciate that he's looking at the girl having sex with him, but it isn't what I'd describe as voyeurism.

And is his crime on the more extreme end of this law?  I know there are 11 offences, but think about the intention of the law. 

  • Consider, say, a hotel owner that put in cameras and recorded their customers, and then put the recordings up on the internet.  Sure, I'd agree that he/she should have a custodial sentence.  Surely several years.  Perhaps the offence is up with GBH or something. 
  • Next, what about some lad that recorded a conquest, then she split up with him and he sent the recording to all his mates in college.  The victims know about this and are traumatised.  Sure, we're talking about a very serious offence, but perhaps not as bad as i.  Or maybe it is -- is it like 'rape is rape'?
  • Now, we've got this guy recording himself having sex, not getting consent, but also not showing anyone else. 

Hmm.  What would you give crime #1.  10 years?  5 years would be similar to a GBH, about 10 years for attempted murder (technically this might even be as low as a few years, depending on circumstances).  Now, I'd accept that it might easily be that bad -- the multiple victims might be deeply traumatised, and it could be a life-changing thing for them; at least potentially requiring psychological help (I know some might shrug it off, but as the perpetrator he's not to know that).

What about #2?  It's just a stupid boy.  But the girl has attempted suicide.  A few years?  Or perhaps suspended?  There is the option under this law for this to be merely a fine...  Perhaps he was just doing what all the kids do, only he was unlucky enough to do it to a girl whose parents found out.  Should you make an example out of him, to discourage the others?

Now #3.  He's not shared it.  It is a crime, but the victims didn't know about it, nor their friends.  He's guilty and should be punished... But 3 years?  Not far off a GBH?  

I think that is the problem with the way that this has been sentenced -- It might be considered harsh given that he's not shared the videos or gone out of his way to shame the women.  Is it really worth nearly a GBH?

Sentencing is arguably a difficult thing.  I'd have thought 3 years would have been too little if he'd shared the videos.  I consider it too much given that he didn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, dgul said:

Now #3.  He's not shared it.  It is a crime, but the victims didn't know about it, nor their friends.  He's guilty and should be punished... But 3 years?  Not far off a GBH?  

This is factually incorrect. One of the victims did know about it. She caught him doing the secret filming and went to the police.

He hasn't been given 3 years for one offence, he's been given it for 11 offences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dorkins said:

This is factually incorrect. One of the victims did know about it. She caught him doing the secret filming and went to the police.

He hasn't been given 3 years for one offence, he's been given it for 11 offences.

I think the point dgul is trying to make is "No comment".

At least, that's my advice.

And it's advice I'm desperately trying to stick to myself, as there is no currently acceptable way to explore the issues raised here.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way I look at it is, if you are going to film then ask the woman if thats ok with her. You don`t do it covertly. That`s weird.

 

I filmed, many years ago, and the woman concerned said ok. She never asked later for the film to be destroyed, although I did destroy it eventually, because I thought if it got into someone elses hands it could embarrass me, let alone her....but I never showed it to anyone else. That would be weird too, in my book., but then I don`t post rubbish on youtube to get attention. I know many people do.

Three years for this offence.? thats weird also.

Lots of things are weird...we live in weird times. Maybe we always did but now with the internet we notice more....

OH by the way, she had a lovely body :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dorkins said:

This is factually incorrect. One of the victims did know about it. She caught him doing the secret filming and went to the police.

He hasn't been given 3 years for one offence, he's been given it for 11 offences.

Okay. 

But do you think the 3 years is about right / proportionate for the crime?  I've stated I think it is a bit long.  Perhaps you think it is too short?  You're right that it is for 11 offences, but these type of offences can attract just a fine / community order -- a 2 year jail sentence is just the maximum -- so the law accepts that the crime is relative to the intent and the harm done (and maybe other factors).   I've suggested that the maximum levels of sentence might be associated with more aggressive forms of voyeurism, like professional people recording others and then circulating the recordings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, GinAndPlatonic said:

The way I look at it is, if you are going to film then ask the woman if thats ok with her. You don`t do it covertly. That`s weird.

 

Well,  I would not do it, but I would not have sex with somebody I didn't know well.

But who has time for that? Presumably people do all this internet dating stuff to make things more efficient. I'd assume some of that drive for efficiency would demand one achieves physical compatibility in a timely manner also, no? Which means, I guess, having sex much earlier in a relationship. (Do excuse me if I'm coming across as a little old fashioned. It's merely that I am.) I can imagine feeling under pressure by the nature of the process. Which would place one in a vulnerable situation (false accusations). So, quite understandably, a man might want to record his encounters, as proof all sex was consensual.

However, I can imagine, just like me, a woman feeling pressured to progress more quickly to the bedroom. So sh@gging early in a relationship would be okay for me, though not ideal.  But I can't imagine any woman I'd want to be with wishing to be videoed doing so, at least, not that early in a relationship (all a bit too porn star for my liking thanks).

So the only way to be both safe and not put off suitable women would be to video them in secret.

And seeing as that is weird, I could not entertain that kind of dating. So I don't.

 

3 hours ago, GinAndPlatonic said:

 

Lots of things are weird...

 

You are of course entirely wrong. Only men are weird.

50 Things Women Think About When Masturbating

After having read that lot, I for once in my life know what I want for Christmas

maxresdefault.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking more widely when I started this, that article just happened to be the latest one I saw and thought wtf is going on? I do think there is a wider issue where women are treated as helpless and encouraged to see themselves as victims. I'd hate to have a daughter growing up in this society.

I can't think of anything more likely to keep women as a whole down and unhappy, and I don't really understand why so many women are so keen to play the victim and seem unable to even pretend to be adults responsible for their own decisions including who they willingly have sex with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I see in all this is women victims being blamed for the crimes of men, who should learn to control themselves sexually. How many women rape men?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, dgul said:

Okay. 

But do you think the 3 years is about right / proportionate for the crime?  I've stated I think it is a bit long.  Perhaps you think it is too short?  You're right that it is for 11 offences, but these type of offences can attract just a fine / community order -- a 2 year jail sentence is just the maximum -- so the law accepts that the crime is relative to the intent and the harm done (and maybe other factors).   I've suggested that the maximum levels of sentence might be associated with more aggressive forms of voyeurism, like professional people recording others and then circulating the recordings.

If you read the judge's comments, I think one of the other factors that came into the level of sentencing was the level of manipulation and deceit he used to set up these situations. All of the women thought they were in an exclusive relationship with him (in fact he had a long term partner) but it appears he was intentionally going on dating sites and building up trust with each woman with the intention all along of making an illegal recording.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sledgehead said:

So the only way to be both safe and not put off suitable women would be to video them in secret.

Er, right. Except that this safety plan involves committing a criminal offence that carries a custodial sentence every time you do it. So as soon as you were defending yourself against a false rape charge you'd be immediately confessing to voyeurism. Plus there's the risk of getting caught making the video as happened in the case described in the OP. He's now in prison and on the sex offenders register. Secretly recording every sexual encounter doesn't seem like a particularly risk averse strategy.

In the case in the OP he didn't tell the court he was making the recordings to protect himself against false rape charges, he said the women consented to being recorded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Bossybabe said:

What I see in all this is women victims being blamed for the crimes of men, who should learn to control themselves sexually. How many women rape men?  

And what I see in that sentence is an attempt to brand me as a rapist because I am a man. For someone who calls out misogyny without the need to explain themselves, you do a nice line in misandry.

Why do you think that is okay?

Let's first assume that your accusation - that men are uniquely responsible for rape - is correct.

In what world does that make every man responsible? How does an argument based on a statistic prove anything? That is a logical fallacy and I'd expect you to recognize it.

Would you accept responsibility for Filipino Mums selling their kids for sex, simply because you are a woman? Why should I accept responsibility for Harvey Weinstein or the antics of the guy at the centre of this thread?

And don't think I haven't tried to take responsibility, in my more naive years. Not in some meaningless, virtue-signaling way I'm now expected to (like expecting Cameron to apologize for the Empire). But rather in the role of chaperone. Where did that get me? Accused again and again by drunk and sober women alike of cliterference. Like the time when, at her pestering insistence, I accompanied a woman on vacation to another continent, only to be told to go my own way, simply because she'd been in the company of a stranger she fancied for all of two hours.

Now I'm not stupid enough to believe all women are like that one. Please do me the same courtesy when conflating the term "rapist" with "men".

Now to your question: "How many women rape men?" Why do you suppose men in general should know the answer to that? Why don't you google it like I just did?

The Understudied Female Sexual Predator

Incidentally, that woman who dragged me half way around the world only to send me off on my tod, well, she got back home pregnant. Scans revealed the poor thing had Down's syndrome. She aborted the baby. The next year she found another sap of a chaperone. And she left him in another continent for the same reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Dorkins said:

Er, right. Except that this safety plan involves committing a criminal offence that carries a custodial sentence every time you do it. So as soon as you were defending yourself against a false rape charge you'd be immediately confessing to voyeurism. Plus there's the risk of getting caught making the video as happened in the case described in the OP. He's now in prison and on the sex offenders register. Secretly recording every sexual encounter doesn't seem like a particularly risk averse strategy.

 

Which ... was ... the ... point ... I ... was ...

:blink:

Hmmm.

So .... what is your point?

If you finished my post, you'd see that my conclusion was the kind of casual dating both sexes are involved in is just not worth the candle. Sex should only occur in the context of a loving and trusting relationship, and if you can't be bothered with that, find another 'hobby'. What did you think that jigsaw pic was all about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Dorkins said:

... but it appears he was intentionally going on dating sites and building up trust ...

:lol::lol::lol:

I like that one. If ever I take to stand-up, can I use it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Dorkins said:

If you read the judge's comments, I think one of the other factors that came into the level of sentencing was the level of manipulation and deceit he used to set up these situations. All of the women thought they were in an exclusive relationship with him (in fact he had a long term partner) but it appears he was intentionally going on dating sites and building up trust with each woman with the intention all along of making an illegal recording.

Incidentally, what statute is that mentioned in?

You keep on insisting that the sentence is correct because a "law was broken". If 'The Law' is all that matters, where is the law on "deceit" in sexual encounters? Anything on boys who claim their Dad's car as theirs, or silly men who "run their own conglomerate" (a window cleaning company and, no less, a drive power-washing company!!), or women who wear so much make-up, it's impossible to recognize them the next morning (or use beauty apps on their profile photos), lie about their age or fail to tell you about the £20k outstanding on their store cards?

No. Of course not. They might be breaking the T&Cs of Match.com, but I don't see anyone doing time for that, so what has it gotta do with anything?

'Course, if you want to talk about what should and shouldn't be on the statutes .... but you don't. And that's wise.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sledgehead said:

'Course, if you want to talk about what should and shouldn't be on the statutes .... but you don't. And that's wise.

I think it's right that it's illegal to secretly film sex. I'd have thought that was fairly obvious from my replies to this thread.

On deceit, the act of hiding the camera is itself deceitful and it comes into the Act because hiding the camera prevents the victim of voyeurism from refusing consent to be filmed.

Quote

(3) A person commits an offence if–

(a) he records another person (B) doing a private act,

(b) he does so with the intention that he or a third person will, for the purpose of obtaining sexual gratification, look at an image of B doing the act, and

(c) he knows that B does not consent to his recording the act with that intention.

The sentencing guidelines are on page 133 of this:

https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/Final_Sexual_Offences_Definitive_Guideline_content_web1.pdf

It's not necessary for a judge to rely solely on the aggravating circumstances defined in statute when sentencing, England and Wales operates a common law legal system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Dorkins said:

 

On deceit, the act of hiding the camera is itself deceitful

Yes, and so is fraud, but pray do tell, why are you telling me this?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sledgehead said:

And what I see in that sentence is an attempt to brand me as a rapist because I am a man. For someone who calls out misogyny without the need to explain themselves, you do a nice line in misandry.

Why do you think that is okay?

Let's first assume that your accusation - that men are uniquely responsible for rape - is correct.

In what world does that make every man responsible? How does an argument based on a statistic prove anything? That is a logical fallacy and I'd expect you to recognize it.

Would you accept responsibility for Filipino Mums selling their kids for sex, simply because you are a woman? Why should I accept responsibility for Harvey Weinstein or the antics of the guy at the centre of this thread?

And don't think I haven't tried to take responsibility, in my more naive years. Not in some meaningless, virtue-signaling way I'm now expected to (like expecting Cameron to apologize for the Empire). But rather in the role of chaperone. Where did that get me? Accused again and again by drunk and sober women alike of cliterference. Like the time when, at her pestering insistence, I accompanied a woman on vacation to another continent, only to be told to go my own way, simply because she'd been in the company of a stranger she fancied for all of two hours.

Now I'm not stupid enough to believe all women are like that one. Please do me the same courtesy when conflating the term "rapist" with "men".

Now to your question: "How many women rape men?" Why do you suppose men in general should know the answer to that? Why don't you google it like I just did?

The Understudied Female Sexual Predator

Incidentally, that woman who dragged me half way around the world only to send me off on my tod, well, she got back home pregnant. Scans revealed the poor thing had Down's syndrome. She aborted the baby. The next year she found another sap of a chaperone. And she left him in another continent for the same reason.

I apologise if you felt impugned. I’m just sick and tired of the quality of the whole debate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 293 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.