Don't get drunk. Take care of your own safety... then you don't have to feel bad and change your mind in the morning when it all swims into terrible clarity.

Or better yet, don't prey on people when they're not able to take care of their own safety. A far more compassionate and sane argument.

Or to clarify... don't rape anyone.

My argument is sane. Don't get so pissed you can't take care of yourself.

I am totally sympathetic to women who are raped. It's an appalling crime. But sometimes women do make false allegations, sometimes a small fraction of women who report a rape lie, sometimes they can't remember and sometimes they have regrets when they sober up. And sympathy fades when you hear she'd already tried to press charges against some rugby players for the same thing previously.

So... while I'm sympathetic to women (and men for that matter) who are subjected to rape, you do have to take care of your own safety and not put yourself in harms way. I am also sympathetic also to people who get knocked down by cars. But if they're walking up the motorway pissed... not so much.

That's a really odd analogy, if you are drunk on the road you are not deliberately targeted by drivers are you?... You would have to take liability but it would still be an accident.
Nobody is raped by accident.
People do get drunk all the time, it's their choice, just as it's a choice to decide if your partner is consenting or not.... if that is a gray area don't have sex with them.

What if the person who rapes is drunk? Or under the influence of some kind of drug? Is it okay for women to be irresponsible and out of control, but not men? It's okay for women to be drunk enough to be taken advantage of, but men must be exemplary and sober enough always to make the right decision? When people drink their judgement is impaired - both men and women.

And it's a good analogy. It's about deliberately putting yourself in harms way by getting so drunk you can't make good decisions.

I'm sorry but you know in law if your penis works you can't be classed as 'out of control'
Unless you pass out and your penis goes looking for a vagina you know what you're doing.

I agree with you, however it's a pretty dangerous game to play by enticing two strangers into a hotel room stripping naked with both of them and after having sex with the first one in front of the second guy, then telling the second one she is not interested.




.

Let's flip that, it was their room... they 'enticed' her there.

She has the right to say no to one or either of them she was not contractually bound to have sex with them that evening remember, let's not get this twisted.

100% correct. dont lie about it, dont get so drunk you dont even know what youre doing.....even after the event some people are so drunk they cant even remember what happened let alone if they had sex with consent. personal responsibility is key as is telling the truth. anyone who makes totally falsified accusations simply must go to prison. The damage these lies do is immeasurable. of course we all want bad people and criminals punished. but in addition to rapists , killers and violent criminals, perjury and false accusation is also a major criminal offence. Fortunately some false accusers have gone to prison but the radical man hating feminists wouldnt accept such punishment should happen.....


heres a tale for your perusal.....I wonder how many lives , how much tax payers money this false accuser wasted with all the lies

https://toysoldier.wordpress.com/201...inist-support/


Jailed false accuser draws feminist support
Posted on June 27, 2014 by Toysoldier Rhiannon Brooker accused her former boyfriend of rape and assault. Her accusations against Paul Fensome landed the man in jail for 37 days. While imprisoned, someone claimed that he was a pedophile and he had to be placed in protective custody.

However, the evidence showed that Brooker’s accusations were false:

Alibis, evidence from Fensome’s phone and his work shift patterns undermined Brooker’s accounts. Injuries were judged to have been self-inflicted and the police dropped their investigations into Fensome and turned their attention on Brooker.

Brooker initially told police she had made false accusations. But when she was charged with perverting the course of justice she retracted her confession. She was found guilty of 12 offences relating to false allegations of five rapes, six assaults and one false imprisonment.

The judge sentenced Brooker to three and a half years, which prompted outrage from feminists:

The support and campaign group Women Against Rape (WAR) was among more than a dozen organisations and lawyers who wrote to the judge arguing that a harsh sentence would put women off coming forward to report rapes for fear they would not be believed.

They wrote: “The prosecution was not in the public interest. A prison sentence will put even more women off reporting, enabling even more attacks from violent men. The resources spent on prosecuting Ms Brooker should have been put into prosecuting rapists and other violent men

..surely there is no question that he raped her...the same as someone is innocent until proven guilty, once proven guilty then that's what they are in the eyes of the law and there is no questioning of that..?...I mean, whether violent rape or not..rape is rape and a violation of another person and the courts must have been convinced of his guilt as the other guy was found innocent...it's more whether he should be allowed to play football professionally again and that really is up to whether a team are prepared for that to happen..?...

Well if you look at the transcripts from the trial not everyone is convinced he is guilty of rape.

Courts, Judges and Juries are not infallibe and mistakes very occasionally do happen.

So maybe Mr Evans and his family and legal team do think his conviction is unsafe and that certain evidence was not made available to the court or the jury.

Maybe that is why he cannot admit guilt.. Maybe there is more to this story than just the question of whether a convicted rapist should play football again.




.

Oldham currently having a board meeting to decide whether to go through with the signing after 20k people signed a petition against it

My guess is they will not sign him.





.

Correct
He is Toxic

LOL... This is almost Zen level wrong.

meh - I could get a bigger petition to get Cadbury's to start selling chocolate coins again



However now a sponsor is threatening to leave and that talks the talk

I hope he is allowed to resume his career of work. This campaign is mental. The feminazis now want to ensure all MEN who commit a crime are banned from work? If we apply this mental state of affairs then all ex prisoners must never be allowed to work again? wow. how much will that help the economy and the country?

No. :mad:

If he wants a job, let him being a road sweeper.

imho anyone capable of rape is also capable of other violent crimes. Mike Tyson returned to boxing after his rape conviction right? and then he started eating people on live TV... just saying...

:laugh:

Well i hope if he is found innocent in his appeal that this bitch is locked up atleast as long as he was.

He could sign for Rape Rovers in Scotland

And if he is Not

Feck Off to Malta

Reading a good article from the Sunday Times (its a subscription site but the article is posted here: http://members.boardhost.com/lutonou...420398131.html) detailing fully what happened that night (admittedly from a sympathetic to Evans view point) this point is raised:

Honestly I don't believe rape is black and white, I do think there are degrees of rape, and sometimes it is ambiguous particularly when both parties are drunk. The fact it can be unclear is almost self-evident considering that two men slept with the victim, she accused both of rape, one was found innocent and one was found guilty. Both the complainant, the court, and the two accused men thus saw the case differently; the victim thought both had committed rape, the court thought only one man was guilty of it, the two accused thought that neither of them were guilty. How is that black and white?

There is a big problem with sexual harassment in society no doubt and with people often not appreciating the line of consent. I've no doubt either that the whole ordeal has been a nightmare for the woman and that it's bad how some people have ignored her right to anonymity. But those issues should not be repeatedly used a stick to beat Evans with and to make an example of him. The witch hunt is getting out of control.