Coppice gates cordoned off

[DtheP47]

Originally Posted by Accyexplorer

The idea of censoring someone's humour, even on subjects (like this) which may well make folk uncomfortable is not the answer (imo).
Freedom of expression is a part of who we are.Jim's comment (assuming he meant he didn't commit the assault ) may of been a little distasteful.
Folk with that sort of (dark) humour should be allowed to express it just like those who find it unpleasant should be allowed to say how they feel about it.

Now I don't know if Jim was referring to the gates being closed or the serious assault up there.
Think he's hunkered down in YO34 4HT and may tell us in due course.
Humour in a lot of cases is used to deflect from the seriousness of the situation oh yes.
Without a post from Jim who knows what his motives or focus was.

[DtheP47]

Posted a link in the over 18 section (it does contain a few "f" words) to a blog where a banker's lunch gets spoiled by Mr Brand.
Feedom of expression in spades AccyX
Witty, dark, blasphemous, sarcastic and denigrating women but worth a read.

[Eric]

Originally Posted by DtheP47

Witty, dark, blasphemous, sarcastic and denigrating women

Wow ... all the good stuff, eh Pity I'm not allowed in there to read it

[maxthecollie]

Once you reach 18 yr old you may be allowed in, Eric.

[Eric]

Originally Posted by maxthecollie

Once you reach 18 yr old you may be allowed in, Eric.

For me, a true sisyphean task

[Gordon Booth]

Originally Posted by Restless

Jim isn't an everyday accywebber so to come on and make a random comment in such a thread... nah.

Jim's attempt at humour may have been best not attempted but you seem to be suggesting that as he isn't an 'everyday accywebber' he has less right to make a comment, however out of place, than an 'everyday accywebber'.
Surely not so?

Originally Posted by Eric

Wow ... all the good stuff, eh Pity I'm not allowed in there to read it

Can't have you getting too exited at your age- bad for you.
You won't have had the doubtful pleasure of seeing the obnoxious Mr. Brand. You've missed nothing- he's most unpleasant. More so because he uses being obnoxious, offensive and rude to get notoriety and publicity.

[Eric]

On a more serious note: Evidently, a young woman was assaulted on the Coppice. Sadly, the majority of such crimes go unreported; and this is partly the fault of law enforcement agencies whose attitudes are still mired in the middle ages ... or at least the nineteenth century. There are certain truths surrounding this assault that do not easily lead to a humorous interpretation. Most of them concern the fact that, on the day she was assaulted, millions of women on this insane planet of ours were also victims of violence. Many more millions, perhaps as many as a couple of billion, are denied their rights, political and human, by governments and religion. That many women are now political leaders, CEOs of major corporations, doctors, lawyers, writers, thinkers ... you name it, merely masks the fact that for most women, "feminism" never happened, nor does it seem likely that it will happen soon. Attempts at "top-down" solutions to the problems ... and if you don't think such things selling women into sexual slavery are problems, you have a problem ... will never work. You cannot legislate what people think ... or, for that matter, what people consider humorous. Change has to come from the bottom ... which will be us. And we don't need harsher laws; we need to create a climate in which women feel comfortable .... maybe that ain't the right word, but I believe you know what I mean ... going to the authorities knowing that their cases will be taken seriously.

[Restless]

Originally Posted by Accyexplorer

The idea of censoring someone's humour, even on subjects (like this) which may well make folk uncomfortable is not the answer (imo).
Freedom of expression is a part of who we are.Jim's comment (assuming he meant he didn't commit the assault ) may of been a little distasteful.
Folk with that sort of (dark) humour should be allowed to express it just like those who find it unpleasant should be allowed to say how they feel about it.

Whatever. You being that guy that stirs the pot / devils advocate. I wasn't surprised you recognise his humour.

Originally Posted by Gordon Booth

Jim's attempt at humour may have been best not attempted but you seem to be suggesting that as he isn't an 'everyday accywebber' he has less right to make a comment, however out of place, than an 'everyday accywebber'.
Surely not so?
.

Sigh

No it means that not being regular its hard to get a feel for him as a person and what he is like. If you had posted it would be more disappointing

[Less]

Originally Posted by Eric

On a more serious note: Evidently, a young woman was assaulted on the Coppice. Sadly, the majority of such crimes go unreported; and this is partly the fault of law enforcement agencies whose attitudes are still mired in the middle ages ... or at least the nineteenth century. There are certain truths surrounding this assault that do not easily lead to a humorous interpretation. Most of them concern the fact that, on the day she was assaulted, millions of women on this insane planet of ours were also victims of violence. Many more millions, perhaps as many as a couple of billion, are denied their rights, political and human, by governments and religion. That many women are now political leaders, CEOs of major corporations, doctors, lawyers, writers, thinkers ... you name it, merely masks the fact that for most women, "feminism" never happened, nor does it seem likely that it will happen soon. Attempts at "top-down" solutions to the problems ... and if you don't think such things selling women into sexual slavery are problems, you have a problem ... will never work. You cannot legislate what people think ... or, for that matter, what people consider humorous. Change has to come from the bottom ... which will be us. And we don't need harsher laws; we need to create a climate in which women feel comfortable .... maybe that ain't the right word, but I believe you know what I mean ... going to the authorities knowing that their cases will be taken seriously.

Please can we not go back to the 50's and earlier?
I can remember my mother and two aunts discussing a young lass that had been raped, their conclusion with hardly any thought was:-

"Well she must have been asking for it, Out at 7.30 P.M. on her own, what else can she expect?".

Yes, back then the women strangely seemed to blame the woman not the rapist!

Any woman/girl should be able to walk anywhere at any-time without the threat of molestation, but unfortunately it isn't going to happen, some strange folk patrol the whole of the world.

[Gordon Booth]

Originally Posted by Restless

Sigh
No it means that not being regular its hard to get a feel for him as a person and what he is like. If you had posted it would be more disappointing

That's the trouble with posts and even emails.
You never get a feel for the real person, you both show the person you want to be seen.
You can't beat face to face talking.
I'm sure many folk on here would never say to someone's face the things they say to each other in posts and what you really mean can get missed in typed words.
I hate using smilies but sometimes they help add feeling to a post.

[Eric]

Originally Posted by Less

"Well she must have been asking for it, Out at 7.30 P.M. on her own, what else can she expect?".

Yes, back then the women strangely seemed to blame the woman not the rapist!

I remember an episode of "Coronation Street" in which Ena and Minnie were gossiping about Elsie Tanner. It went something like this. Ena stated that people who were evicted could keep their bed and tools of their trade. For Elsie, according to Ena, they were the same thing.

Those, let's say "Sharplesian" attitudes ... A new word, eh That doesn't happen every day ... are still with us, fortunately not to the same degree. When 16 year old Rinelle Harper was raped and beaten, then left for dead on the banks of the Assiniboine River, I kinda doubt that she requested it. The fact that a woman dresses her best for a Saturday nite out does not mean she wants to be beaten and raped. She may be looking for a significant overnight relationship or, more commonly, just a fun nite with her friends; but she has the right to give or withold her consent as she sees fit.

Outdated, twisted conventional wisdoms are still accepted by many; and people are suffering because of them. In some cases it leads to someone's death. Here's one: "Young, black males on the street at night are probably armed and dangerous, and usually violent criminals." That one kinda takes your breath away, doesn't it.

[Shurm]

Does anyone know anything about the attacker ??

[DtheP47]

Originally Posted by Shurm

Does anyone know anything about the attacker ??

I'd rather be knowing the poor victim is alright.

[Shurm]

Yes good point, does anyone know anything ??

[DtheP47]

Originally Posted by Less

Please can we not go back to the 50's and earlier?
I can remember my mother and two aunts discussing a young lass that had been raped, their conclusion with hardly any thought was:-

"Well she must have been asking for it, Out at 7.30 P.M. on her own, what else can she expect?".

Yes, back then the women strangely seemed to blame the woman not the rapist!

Any woman/girl should be able to walk anywhere at any-time without the threat of molestation, but unfortunately it isn't going to happen, some strange folk patrol the whole of the world.

You don't have to go that far back Less, a google search on "judge says girl was asking for it" shows those prejudices are still with us and it's not just the judiciary for sure.