Elon Musk bought Twitter.

[dpedin]

I think we are talking at slight cross purposes here.

The village I grew up in I'm quite sure (by the law of averages) there were some deviants or predators lurking. However, there could never have been actual gangs operating in plain sight doing this type of stuff. Nevermind the men or the police, the women of the village, curious, strong willed and naturally protective would have chased them out.

For these guys to be doing this stuff to the scale and extent they did (and still are, since this stuff is ongoing) speaks to the fact that it is on some level tolerated. It like everything else is a product of culture.

So, you see with the case of the Syrian refugees who raped the girl in Newcastle, the ringleader was already in court in 2016 for a sexual assault case. That brush with the law did not seem to deter him since he subsequently raped another girl then was involved in BLM rioting in 2020.

All of this activity is enabled by people, either by their inaction, their indifference or their unwillingness to have tough conversations. The state just fails at it's basic duty to keep people safe and then adds insult to injury with sentences that serve neither as a punishment or as a future deterrent.

People need to be held accountable for this state of affairs, it is not normal.

Giselle Pelicot might disagree about your assumptions about your village? Nice, many professional, working and middle class men from all parts of society thought it ok to rape an older women whilst she was asleep. If they are capable of that then what else could/have they done - rape a sleeping 15 year old then claim they thought she was 16, 18? They walk amongst us! Midsummer Murders should have taught you something about nice middle class quiet villages.

The reality is that CSA and sex abuse more generally is predominately a male issue regardless of race or class. It has always been thus and will continue to be so. From buggery in posh private boarding schools (training grounds for pervert MPs and CoE ministers), sexual and physical abuse by priest and nuns in catholic homes for poor boys/girls, sexual abuse in private schools (ask R5 Nicky Campbell) to the Met police raping and killing women on the streets of London it is a huge issue for our society and I for one find it ironic that we are all in a tizzy about Muskieboy, father to 12 kids with 3 different women, tweeting crap about CSA whilst working for Trump who, is a convicted sex abuser!

This isn't a race issue - in England & Wales in 2022 88% of all CSA offenders were white British, 7% asian, 3% black, 2% other. Asians make up 9% of the population so their offending rate was below what was expected. White British make up 83% of the populations so they are over represented (Centre of Expertise on CSA Report 2022-2023). Yes the data is difficult and patchy but the overall picture is fairly clear. In terms of CSA gangs the Gov own report in 2020, requested by Savid Javid stated the majority of child sexual abuse gangs are made up of white men under the age of 30.The report, which covers England, Scotland and Wales and summarised a range of studies on the issue of group-based child sexual exploitation (CSE), also known as grooming gangs, said there was not enough evidence to conclude that child sexual abuse gangs were disproportionately made up of Asian offenders.

As for the great USA as at June 2024, in the states that have set a marriage age by statute, 6 allow marriage between an adult and a girl/boy who is under 16 years old. Sounds like CSA to me and Muskie has a bit of work to do in his own back yard first?

The difficult thing to acknowledge about all this CSA and grooming gangs is that it isn't some dark skinned, illegal immigrant who is causing all the problems, it is essentially baked into our own white, christian, British society. The offenders are probably someone you and I know and possibly even count as a friend or workmate who is a perpetrator of CSA, probably in their own wider family or with someone youngster close to them. It has always been thus, as the Who called him your Wicked Uncle Ernie. You probably have a mate who seems to have lots of hard porn, who goes off to the Far East for his holidays every year with his mates, always boast about his sexual exploits over a drunken weekend night out or who thinks nothing of some 'harmless' visit to a local strip club. Ever wonder what else they get up to?

It is just too easy to blame some 'other' people in society preferably those of a different colour, race or religion for these heinous crimes rather than accept it is folk who are white, British and christian who make up the vast majority of perpetrators. The EDL seems to have a rather high % of sexual abuse offenders for example. Rather than looking at the facts and figures it is just easier to jump on an unfounded tweet from a jacked up megalomania which supports our own prejudices and biases, or even worse knowingly use it to pursue a political agenda whilst paying lip service for the victims! It is a very, very uncomfortable topic for individuals and our society to discuss and explore, so much easier to explain it away by blaming someone who doesn't look like us. I often wonder about those who shout most and loudest about CSA and asian grooming gangs and wonder why they ignore the evidence, reminds me of a mate at primary school who was always the first to dob us mates in it with the teacher whilst denying he had anything to do with it, despite being the ringleader!

The statistics you are quoting from are misleading - a significant amount of their dataset is sexting and similar actions between two people who are both below the age of consent, and lumps in possession of indecent images with grooming gangs etc. The two offences I’ve listed (and don’t get me wrong particularly for the latter throw the book at them) give you the white proportions you’re quoting from. When it comes to mass grooming and rape the offences become disproportionately Pakistani and Bangladeshi.

In your own words you’ve bundled a hell of a lot of things together - going to a strip club or paying for sex off an adult in Thailand is not comparable to the mass rape of children in Oldham for example (again to be clear I find both vile, when I was travelling as a teenager I landed in Bangkok and hated what I saw so much I used a fair chunk of my dwindling cash to fly out early).

As for gangs themselves, there are of course white Brits involved in that sort of thing. But we know that for example the gang in Cornwall was prosecuted and received broadly appropriate sentences (again though for CSA I’d be pushing for life sentences). In the end covering up CSA has cost the Archbishop of Canterbury his job. The injustice of the Pakistani gangs comes from the cover ups, the obfuscation and the absolutely pitiful sentences handed down as and when someone actually got to court, not to mention that a lot of people involved in covering it up retain reasonably senior jobs in public life.

I disagree that I have misled with the data, everything I have quoted was clearly labelled and I assumed the majority on here can understand that. I also provided the source of the data for you and others to look at. The CSA data provides a wider context within which group based CSA takes place
and is a measure of the wider CSA problem we have in the UK. I agree that the data about 'grooming gangs' is difficult which is why I referred earlier to the Gov 'Group Base CSA Report' of 2020, prefaced by Priti Patel which states:

'Based on the existing evidence, and our understanding of the flaws in the existing data, it seems most likely that the ethnicity of group-based CSE offenders is in line with CSA more generally and with the general population, with the majority of offenders being White.'

This is why I provided the wider CSA data and the % of the population info and the statement above seems to contradict your position about them being predominately Pakistani and Bangladeshi.

The other reason for looking at the wider CSA data is it is well documented that rapists, including those involved in group CSA, have a history of other CSA crimes and build up to rape and murder. The case of Wayne Cousins, although not involved in group CSA, is a good example - history of exposing himself including when at work, allegation of CSA, possession of indecent images including bestiality, sexual assaults on nights out in London, owned pornographic videos and was given the nickname of 'The Rapist' by his Met colleagues! Everyone turned a blind eye, didnt speak up or joked about their colleague and his behaviors. How many of us have done the same?

Unfortunately some of those who are convicted of a 'lesser' CSA will become the perpetrators of rape and murder so it is important to see the wider picture and to treat all CSA as important. The point I was trying to make about the folk we know, is like with Couzins in the Met, we all too often turn the other cheek or treat misogyny as a joke with folk we know rather than challenging it and seeing it for what it is. It becomes normalized and accepted. Who would have thought there was a mass rape of an elderly woman over a number of years in a quiet French village of c6,000 population by a gang of white, French men is an extreme example but a real one.

As for sentencing, I will let others address that suffice to say that the sentencing guidelines, determined by the Sentencing Council, will determine the sentences handed down to those convicted - see https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/se ... g-council/

[inactionman]

On a more lighthearted note, there's talk that the space Karen wants to buy Liverpool football club.

I'm torn, it could be hilarious, but ultimately it's a dickhead with too much money fucking around with things that matter to average people.

[Tichtheid]

The point I was trying to make about the folk we know, is like with Couzins in the Met, we all too often turn the other cheek or treat misogyny as a joke with folk we know rather than challenging it and seeing it for what it is. It becomes normalized and accepted. Who would have thought there was a mass rape of an elderly woman over a number of years in a quiet French village of c6,000 population by a gang of white, French men is an extreme example but a real one.

I read this the other day on FB;

𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐖𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐀 𝐖𝐨𝐦𝐚𝐧 𝐃𝐨 𝐓𝐨 𝐀𝐧 𝐔𝐧𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐜𝐢𝐨𝐮𝐬 𝐌𝐚𝐧 𝐈𝐟 𝐒𝐡𝐞 𝐓𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐍𝐨-𝐎𝐧𝐞 𝐖𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐅𝐢𝐧𝐝 𝐎𝐮𝐭?
𝐀𝐍𝐍𝐀 𝐖𝐇𝐀𝐑𝐓𝐎𝐍
𝐃𝐄𝐂 𝟏𝟗, 𝟐𝟎𝟐𝟒

I’ve been thinking about this a lot over the course of the trial of Dominique Pelicot and his fellow accused: what would a woman do to an unconscious man if she thought no-one would find out?
Because we know now what men would do. And not just some men. Many men. So many men in fact, they had a nickname for them during the trial, Monsieur Tout Le Monde - Mr Everyman. Because the men who joined Pelicot in the dock were bakers, they were journalists, they were prison officers, they were accountants, they were young, they were old, they were single, they were married, they were fathers to daughters. But they all had one thing in common, a desire to dominate, to defile, to control, to penetrate, to humiliate. A love of rape.
Some of them knew Gisele Pelicot, some of them made small talk with her in the street, in the boulangerie, all the time knowing what she didn’t, that they had raped her as she lay unconscious in her bed and her husband had filmed them.
And so I asked myself, what would a woman do to an unconscious man if she thought no-one would find out?
There was another case in the UK last week, the case of Natalie Shotter, a 37-year-old mother of three who had a rare night out with her friends, drank too much and walked home alone, collapsing on a park bench where a man found her, where a man watched and waited and then raped her until her body gave out and she had a heart attack and died.
That’s what another man did when he thought no-one would find out.
That woman wasn’t safe walking home, Gisele Pelicot wasn’t safe in her own home.

I’ve thought also of the performance art of Marina Abramovic during this trial, the one she did in Naples in the 1970s where she lay out a table with 69 objects on it and invited those who attended her exhibition to do what they wanted to her, as she stood naked – vulnerable – in front of them.
The table of 69 objects recreated at the Royal Academy this year
I stood in front of that reconstructed table and those 69 objects when I attended her show at the Royal Academy earlier this year, it had an impact on me that I wasn’t expecting, to see knives, a gun, a bullet, an axe, a saw, alongside objects which can give pleasure: a feather, a rose, a hairbrush, a drink. Guess which ones the men picked up to use on her? They cut her, they defiled her, they did what they would with her while she stood there in front of them. Even in a gallery (nice men who go to galleries) they saw her as a piece of meat, not a human, just as those men had who stood in the dock in Avignon these last couple of months.
Marina Abramovic’s hair went grey overnight at the shock of what men did to her
Those men, Messieurs Tout Le Monde, didn’t think they were rapists, they would agree I am sure, that the man who raped and killed Natalie Shotter is, but not them. And here is where one very specific problem lies, the issue of consent, because most men do not understand it. They see rapists as ‘other’, they don’t know that stealthing (where you remove a condom without a woman’s knowledge) is rape, they don’t know that having sex with your sleeping wife is rape, and apparently these men didn’t know that if you go to a particular area of the internet and find a site which has another particular area called ‘without her knowledge’ then it is what it says on the tin, it is seeking out someone who has not consented to sex and so that made them all rapists. No ifs, no buts.
And France had a moment to teach the men of this world about rape, the justice system could explain consent to all those at home who have been following this trial, it could have explained that if you have sex with a woman who is unable to give consent every time then you are a rapist. But it seems to me that even the French justice system does not understand consent and so how could it send this message to others? Because rape in France carries a sentence of 15 years, and yet the judge sentenced these men to between three and thirteen years. Some of them walked free from court today having served time on remand, others will serve only a couple of years of their sentence.

A rapist is a rapist is a rapist. What difference is there between that opportunist killer in the park and those men who sought out a website to penetrate a woman, to insert themselves inside her body, without consent? You could argue she has more right to believe she is safe inside her own home than passed out in a public park. You could argue that makes the rape more of an aggravated assault, but clearly the judge did not think so, and those light sentences tell us one thing, that somewhere, in the deep, dark recesses of that judge’s mind, he also believes that Dominique Pelicot had a right to give consent for his wife, so these men were, in some ways, victims of him too and should not be punished in the same way as he has been. (Remember before the mid-nineties it was legal to rape your wife here in the UK. The law changes, but minds don’t.)
What would a woman do to an unconscious man if she thought no-one would find out?
There’s another issue that we need to talk about, and that is sexual health. One of the rapists asked Pelicot if his wife was free of diseases because he was allowing men to penetrate her without any protection. Her health has suffered as a result, she made many trips to the doctor and, I believe, was diagnosed with numerous STDs. Men don’t care about STDs, they care about getting women pregnant, of getting ‘caught’ or ‘trapped’ by women because that would have ramifications for them, but they don’t care about compromising their health – although that particular rapist did, maybe because if he went home to his wife and gave her something she would put a stop to his late night raping.

But STDs have long term and devastating impacts on female health, HPV which can cause genital warts has been linked to cervical cancer, it is an STD that men don’t worry about, yet it could kill us. Chlamydia can cause infertility in women, yet mostly it shows no symptoms, certainly not for men who carry it and pass it on to us. Herpes will lay dormant in your system forever, there is no cure, for some women it is deeply debilitating, today I saw a headline linking it to Alzheimers. HIV used to kill people, now – thankfully – people live with it, but their health is compromised as a result.
Gisele Pelicot had no opportunity to protect her own health, but this concern would be way down the list of priorities for men because they don’t suffer like women do and so they don’t need to understand it.
Last week another case in the UK of a man who did what he wanted to a female when he thought no-one would find out, the father of 10-year-old Sara Sharif. I don’t want to list here the abuse he wreaked on her tiny body, but this man’s history was littered with allegations from his former partner about his abuse of her, those allegations were heard in court, they were heard by Cafcass (the court appointed advisory service) and yet because we don’t take seriously violence against women, this child was put into her father’s care and he killed her, slowly and painfully.
I listened to the radio the next day, a discussion between the presenter and some expert about how they could have possibly known what he was doing behind closed doors, they came up with nothing. But they did know, they knew he had harmed another female in his life, but the suffering of women and children is not taken seriously, and if it had been that little girl, and many kids like her, would still be alive because the fact he likes to harm his wife says something about his psychology.

Dominique Pelicot had a history of being abused as a child, as many of these people do, as many perpetrators of all types of crime do, not just violent crimes. If, for just one generation, we took seriously violence against women and children, do you know what an impact that would have on society? If you believed women just for once, instead of believing the clichés men say about them to cover up their crimes.
Taking violence seriously against women would have meant each of those rapists receiving a fifteen year sentence. It would have been a message to all the men in the world, an education in consent, an opportunity to acknowledge that more men than we like to think are Messieurs Tout Le Monde.

As for Gisele Pelicot, she is a heroine to me and all women I speak to. There are no words to express our admiration for her. She is all of us, and she insisted on that trial being public because she wanted other women who have been raped to know, if she had the strength to go through that trial, given all that happened to her, so could they.
‘I’ve decided not to be ashamed, I’ve done nothing wrong,’ she said, ‘they are the ones who must be ashamed.’
In many ways this was an open and shut case, the jury sat through hours of footage showing Gisele unconscious, silent, as those men did what they wanted to her limp body. If she had been awake, if she had spoken, if she had put one foot ‘wrong’ then they would have diverted all attention away from the men and onto her behaviour, as is so often the case. It is easier to find fault in women than hold a man accountable for his crimes. So, for them, she was a ‘perfect victim’. That’s how they like us: silent, passive, unresponsive.
Well she is not anymore.

Do any of us women feel safer knowing that 50 men in Avignon were jailed today? No, we feel more unsafe than ever. Because we know these Messieurs Tout Le Monde, they are the men who joke with us at the bakeries, too. But what would they do to us if they thought no-one would ever know?

And so back to the question I asked at the top of this page, what would a woman do to an unconscious man if she thought no-one would find out?
I don’t think Mesdames Tout Le Monde would harm him, we don’t carry the same weapons they do. I think she would take his shoes off, let him sleep in his socks. I think she would lay a blanket over him, perhaps put a glass of water beside his bed.
Then she would turn out the light and leave him to sleep.

[inactionman]

The point I was trying to make about the folk we know, is like with Couzins in the Met, we all too often turn the other cheek or treat misogyny as a joke with folk we know rather than challenging it and seeing it for what it is. It becomes normalized and accepted. Who would have thought there was a mass rape of an elderly woman over a number of years in a quiet French village of c6,000 population by a gang of white, French men is an extreme example but a real one.

I read this the other day on FB;

𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐖𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐀 𝐖𝐨𝐦𝐚𝐧 𝐃𝐨 𝐓𝐨 𝐀𝐧 𝐔𝐧𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐜𝐢𝐨𝐮𝐬 𝐌𝐚𝐧 𝐈𝐟 𝐒𝐡𝐞 𝐓𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐍𝐨-𝐎𝐧𝐞 𝐖𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐅𝐢𝐧𝐝 𝐎𝐮𝐭?
𝐀𝐍𝐍𝐀 𝐖𝐇𝐀𝐑𝐓𝐎𝐍
𝐃𝐄𝐂 𝟏𝟗, 𝟐𝟎𝟐𝟒

I’ve been thinking about this a lot over the course of the trial of Dominique Pelicot and his fellow accused: what would a woman do to an unconscious man if she thought no-one would find out?
Because we know now what men would do. And not just some men. Many men. So many men in fact, they had a nickname for them during the trial, Monsieur Tout Le Monde - Mr Everyman. Because the men who joined Pelicot in the dock were bakers, they were journalists, they were prison officers, they were accountants, they were young, they were old, they were single, they were married, they were fathers to daughters. But they all had one thing in common, a desire to dominate, to defile, to control, to penetrate, to humiliate. A love of rape.
Some of them knew Gisele Pelicot, some of them made small talk with her in the street, in the boulangerie, all the time knowing what she didn’t, that they had raped her as she lay unconscious in her bed and her husband had filmed them.
And so I asked myself, what would a woman do to an unconscious man if she thought no-one would find out?
There was another case in the UK last week, the case of Natalie Shotter, a 37-year-old mother of three who had a rare night out with her friends, drank too much and walked home alone, collapsing on a park bench where a man found her, where a man watched and waited and then raped her until her body gave out and she had a heart attack and died.
That’s what another man did when he thought no-one would find out.
That woman wasn’t safe walking home, Gisele Pelicot wasn’t safe in her own home.

I’ve thought also of the performance art of Marina Abramovic during this trial, the one she did in Naples in the 1970s where she lay out a table with 69 objects on it and invited those who attended her exhibition to do what they wanted to her, as she stood naked – vulnerable – in front of them.
The table of 69 objects recreated at the Royal Academy this year
I stood in front of that reconstructed table and those 69 objects when I attended her show at the Royal Academy earlier this year, it had an impact on me that I wasn’t expecting, to see knives, a gun, a bullet, an axe, a saw, alongside objects which can give pleasure: a feather, a rose, a hairbrush, a drink. Guess which ones the men picked up to use on her? They cut her, they defiled her, they did what they would with her while she stood there in front of them. Even in a gallery (nice men who go to galleries) they saw her as a piece of meat, not a human, just as those men had who stood in the dock in Avignon these last couple of months.
Marina Abramovic’s hair went grey overnight at the shock of what men did to her
Those men, Messieurs Tout Le Monde, didn’t think they were rapists, they would agree I am sure, that the man who raped and killed Natalie Shotter is, but not them. And here is where one very specific problem lies, the issue of consent, because most men do not understand it. They see rapists as ‘other’, they don’t know that stealthing (where you remove a condom without a woman’s knowledge) is rape, they don’t know that having sex with your sleeping wife is rape, and apparently these men didn’t know that if you go to a particular area of the internet and find a site which has another particular area called ‘without her knowledge’ then it is what it says on the tin, it is seeking out someone who has not consented to sex and so that made them all rapists. No ifs, no buts.
And France had a moment to teach the men of this world about rape, the justice system could explain consent to all those at home who have been following this trial, it could have explained that if you have sex with a woman who is unable to give consent every time then you are a rapist. But it seems to me that even the French justice system does not understand consent and so how could it send this message to others? Because rape in France carries a sentence of 15 years, and yet the judge sentenced these men to between three and thirteen years. Some of them walked free from court today having served time on remand, others will serve only a couple of years of their sentence.

A rapist is a rapist is a rapist. What difference is there between that opportunist killer in the park and those men who sought out a website to penetrate a woman, to insert themselves inside her body, without consent? You could argue she has more right to believe she is safe inside her own home than passed out in a public park. You could argue that makes the rape more of an aggravated assault, but clearly the judge did not think so, and those light sentences tell us one thing, that somewhere, in the deep, dark recesses of that judge’s mind, he also believes that Dominique Pelicot had a right to give consent for his wife, so these men were, in some ways, victims of him too and should not be punished in the same way as he has been. (Remember before the mid-nineties it was legal to rape your wife here in the UK. The law changes, but minds don’t.)
What would a woman do to an unconscious man if she thought no-one would find out?
There’s another issue that we need to talk about, and that is sexual health. One of the rapists asked Pelicot if his wife was free of diseases because he was allowing men to penetrate her without any protection. Her health has suffered as a result, she made many trips to the doctor and, I believe, was diagnosed with numerous STDs. Men don’t care about STDs, they care about getting women pregnant, of getting ‘caught’ or ‘trapped’ by women because that would have ramifications for them, but they don’t care about compromising their health – although that particular rapist did, maybe because if he went home to his wife and gave her something she would put a stop to his late night raping.

But STDs have long term and devastating impacts on female health, HPV which can cause genital warts has been linked to cervical cancer, it is an STD that men don’t worry about, yet it could kill us. Chlamydia can cause infertility in women, yet mostly it shows no symptoms, certainly not for men who carry it and pass it on to us. Herpes will lay dormant in your system forever, there is no cure, for some women it is deeply debilitating, today I saw a headline linking it to Alzheimers. HIV used to kill people, now – thankfully – people live with it, but their health is compromised as a result.
Gisele Pelicot had no opportunity to protect her own health, but this concern would be way down the list of priorities for men because they don’t suffer like women do and so they don’t need to understand it.
Last week another case in the UK of a man who did what he wanted to a female when he thought no-one would find out, the father of 10-year-old Sara Sharif. I don’t want to list here the abuse he wreaked on her tiny body, but this man’s history was littered with allegations from his former partner about his abuse of her, those allegations were heard in court, they were heard by Cafcass (the court appointed advisory service) and yet because we don’t take seriously violence against women, this child was put into her father’s care and he killed her, slowly and painfully.
I listened to the radio the next day, a discussion between the presenter and some expert about how they could have possibly known what he was doing behind closed doors, they came up with nothing. But they did know, they knew he had harmed another female in his life, but the suffering of women and children is not taken seriously, and if it had been that little girl, and many kids like her, would still be alive because the fact he likes to harm his wife says something about his psychology.

Dominique Pelicot had a history of being abused as a child, as many of these people do, as many perpetrators of all types of crime do, not just violent crimes. If, for just one generation, we took seriously violence against women and children, do you know what an impact that would have on society? If you believed women just for once, instead of believing the clichés men say about them to cover up their crimes.
Taking violence seriously against women would have meant each of those rapists receiving a fifteen year sentence. It would have been a message to all the men in the world, an education in consent, an opportunity to acknowledge that more men than we like to think are Messieurs Tout Le Monde.

As for Gisele Pelicot, she is a heroine to me and all women I speak to. There are no words to express our admiration for her. She is all of us, and she insisted on that trial being public because she wanted other women who have been raped to know, if she had the strength to go through that trial, given all that happened to her, so could they.
‘I’ve decided not to be ashamed, I’ve done nothing wrong,’ she said, ‘they are the ones who must be ashamed.’
In many ways this was an open and shut case, the jury sat through hours of footage showing Gisele unconscious, silent, as those men did what they wanted to her limp body. If she had been awake, if she had spoken, if she had put one foot ‘wrong’ then they would have diverted all attention away from the men and onto her behaviour, as is so often the case. It is easier to find fault in women than hold a man accountable for his crimes. So, for them, she was a ‘perfect victim’. That’s how they like us: silent, passive, unresponsive.
Well she is not anymore.

Do any of us women feel safer knowing that 50 men in Avignon were jailed today? No, we feel more unsafe than ever. Because we know these Messieurs Tout Le Monde, they are the men who joke with us at the bakeries, too. But what would they do to us if they thought no-one would ever know?

And so back to the question I asked at the top of this page, what would a woman do to an unconscious man if she thought no-one would find out?
I don’t think Mesdames Tout Le Monde would harm him, we don’t carry the same weapons they do. I think she would take his shoes off, let him sleep in his socks. I think she would lay a blanket over him, perhaps put a glass of water beside his bed.
Then she would turn out the light and leave him to sleep.

I'd like to think most men would too, to be honest.

[laurent]

She has been an amazing person throughout this ordeal.

I have seen a lot of women comment on this (in asocial networks) however I feel completely disqualified on offering anything as this is pretty much the illustration of ALL MEN...

Dreadful stuff as opposed to absolute stoicism and determination.

PS the attorney for Dominique Pelicot has also been very classy.
There was a few news item on her and she appear to have done her job without the usual crass we can see in some rape trials (other attorneys not so much in the same trial).

[Calculon]

[
. Who would have thought there was a mass rape of an elderly woman over a number of years in a quiet French village of c6,000 population by a gang of white, French men is an extreme example but a real one.

They weren't all white

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c785nm5g5y1o

[Calculon]

The point I was trying to make about the folk we know, is like with Couzins in the Met, we all too often turn the other cheek or treat misogyny as a joke with folk we know rather than challenging it and seeing it for what it is. It becomes normalized and accepted. Who would have thought there was a mass rape of an elderly woman over a number of years in a quiet French village of c6,000 population by a gang of white, French men is an extreme example but a real one.

I read this the other day on FB;

𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐖𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐀 𝐖𝐨𝐦𝐚𝐧 𝐃𝐨 𝐓𝐨 𝐀𝐧 𝐔𝐧𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐜𝐢𝐨𝐮𝐬 𝐌𝐚𝐧 𝐈𝐟 𝐒𝐡𝐞 𝐓𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐍𝐨-𝐎𝐧𝐞 𝐖𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐅𝐢𝐧𝐝 𝐎𝐮𝐭?
𝐀𝐍𝐍𝐀 𝐖𝐇𝐀𝐑𝐓𝐎𝐍
𝐃𝐄𝐂 𝟏𝟗, 𝟐𝟎𝟐𝟒

I’ve been thinking about this a lot over the course of the trial of Dominique Pelicot and his fellow accused: what would a woman do to an unconscious man if she thought no-one would find out?
Because we know now what men would do. And not just some men. Many men. So many men in fact, they had a nickname for them during the trial, Monsieur Tout Le Monde - Mr Everyman. Because the men who joined Pelicot in the dock were bakers, they were journalists, they were prison officers, they were accountants, they were young, they were old, they were single, they were married, they were fathers to daughters. But they all had one thing in common, a desire to dominate, to defile, to control, to penetrate, to humiliate. A love of rape.
Some of them knew Gisele Pelicot, some of them made small talk with her in the street, in the boulangerie, all the time knowing what she didn’t, that they had raped her as she lay unconscious in her bed and her husband had filmed them.
And so I asked myself, what would a woman do to an unconscious man if she thought no-one would find out?
There was another case in the UK last week, the case of Natalie Shotter, a 37-year-old mother of three who had a rare night out with her friends, drank too much and walked home alone, collapsing on a park bench where a man found her, where a man watched and waited and then raped her until her body gave out and she had a heart attack and died.
That’s what another man did when he thought no-one would find out.
That woman wasn’t safe walking home, Gisele Pelicot wasn’t safe in her own home.

I’ve thought also of the performance art of Marina Abramovic during this trial, the one she did in Naples in the 1970s where she lay out a table with 69 objects on it and invited those who attended her exhibition to do what they wanted to her, as she stood naked – vulnerable – in front of them.
The table of 69 objects recreated at the Royal Academy this year
I stood in front of that reconstructed table and those 69 objects when I attended her show at the Royal Academy earlier this year, it had an impact on me that I wasn’t expecting, to see knives, a gun, a bullet, an axe, a saw, alongside objects which can give pleasure: a feather, a rose, a hairbrush, a drink. Guess which ones the men picked up to use on her? They cut her, they defiled her, they did what they would with her while she stood there in front of them. Even in a gallery (nice men who go to galleries) they saw her as a piece of meat, not a human, just as those men had who stood in the dock in Avignon these last couple of months.
Marina Abramovic’s hair went grey overnight at the shock of what men did to her
Those men, Messieurs Tout Le Monde, didn’t think they were rapists, they would agree I am sure, that the man who raped and killed Natalie Shotter is, but not them. And here is where one very specific problem lies, the issue of consent, because most men do not understand it. They see rapists as ‘other’, they don’t know that stealthing (where you remove a condom without a woman’s knowledge) is rape, they don’t know that having sex with your sleeping wife is rape, and apparently these men didn’t know that if you go to a particular area of the internet and find a site which has another particular area called ‘without her knowledge’ then it is what it says on the tin, it is seeking out someone who has not consented to sex and so that made them all rapists. No ifs, no buts.
And France had a moment to teach the men of this world about rape, the justice system could explain consent to all those at home who have been following this trial, it could have explained that if you have sex with a woman who is unable to give consent every time then you are a rapist. But it seems to me that even the French justice system does not understand consent and so how could it send this message to others? Because rape in France carries a sentence of 15 years, and yet the judge sentenced these men to between three and thirteen years. Some of them walked free from court today having served time on remand, others will serve only a couple of years of their sentence.

A rapist is a rapist is a rapist. What difference is there between that opportunist killer in the park and those men who sought out a website to penetrate a woman, to insert themselves inside her body, without consent? You could argue she has more right to believe she is safe inside her own home than passed out in a public park. You could argue that makes the rape more of an aggravated assault, but clearly the judge did not think so, and those light sentences tell us one thing, that somewhere, in the deep, dark recesses of that judge’s mind, he also believes that Dominique Pelicot had a right to give consent for his wife, so these men were, in some ways, victims of him too and should not be punished in the same way as he has been. (Remember before the mid-nineties it was legal to rape your wife here in the UK. The law changes, but minds don’t.)
What would a woman do to an unconscious man if she thought no-one would find out?
There’s another issue that we need to talk about, and that is sexual health. One of the rapists asked Pelicot if his wife was free of diseases because he was allowing men to penetrate her without any protection. Her health has suffered as a result, she made many trips to the doctor and, I believe, was diagnosed with numerous STDs. Men don’t care about STDs, they care about getting women pregnant, of getting ‘caught’ or ‘trapped’ by women because that would have ramifications for them, but they don’t care about compromising their health – although that particular rapist did, maybe because if he went home to his wife and gave her something she would put a stop to his late night raping.

But STDs have long term and devastating impacts on female health, HPV which can cause genital warts has been linked to cervical cancer, it is an STD that men don’t worry about, yet it could kill us. Chlamydia can cause infertility in women, yet mostly it shows no symptoms, certainly not for men who carry it and pass it on to us. Herpes will lay dormant in your system forever, there is no cure, for some women it is deeply debilitating, today I saw a headline linking it to Alzheimers. HIV used to kill people, now – thankfully – people live with it, but their health is compromised as a result.
Gisele Pelicot had no opportunity to protect her own health, but this concern would be way down the list of priorities for men because they don’t suffer like women do and so they don’t need to understand it.
Last week another case in the UK of a man who did what he wanted to a female when he thought no-one would find out, the father of 10-year-old Sara Sharif. I don’t want to list here the abuse he wreaked on her tiny body, but this man’s history was littered with allegations from his former partner about his abuse of her, those allegations were heard in court, they were heard by Cafcass (the court appointed advisory service) and yet because we don’t take seriously violence against women, this child was put into her father’s care and he killed her, slowly and painfully.
I listened to the radio the next day, a discussion between the presenter and some expert about how they could have possibly known what he was doing behind closed doors, they came up with nothing. But they did know, they knew he had harmed another female in his life, but the suffering of women and children is not taken seriously, and if it had been that little girl, and many kids like her, would still be alive because the fact he likes to harm his wife says something about his psychology.

Dominique Pelicot had a history of being abused as a child, as many of these people do, as many perpetrators of all types of crime do, not just violent crimes. If, for just one generation, we took seriously violence against women and children, do you know what an impact that would have on society? If you believed women just for once, instead of believing the clichés men say about them to cover up their crimes.
Taking violence seriously against women would have meant each of those rapists receiving a fifteen year sentence. It would have been a message to all the men in the world, an education in consent, an opportunity to acknowledge that more men than we like to think are Messieurs Tout Le Monde.

As for Gisele Pelicot, she is a heroine to me and all women I speak to. There are no words to express our admiration for her. She is all of us, and she insisted on that trial being public because she wanted other women who have been raped to know, if she had the strength to go through that trial, given all that happened to her, so could they.
‘I’ve decided not to be ashamed, I’ve done nothing wrong,’ she said, ‘they are the ones who must be ashamed.’
In many ways this was an open and shut case, the jury sat through hours of footage showing Gisele unconscious, silent, as those men did what they wanted to her limp body. If she had been awake, if she had spoken, if she had put one foot ‘wrong’ then they would have diverted all attention away from the men and onto her behaviour, as is so often the case. It is easier to find fault in women than hold a man accountable for his crimes. So, for them, she was a ‘perfect victim’. That’s how they like us: silent, passive, unresponsive.
Well she is not anymore.

Do any of us women feel safer knowing that 50 men in Avignon were jailed today? No, we feel more unsafe than ever. Because we know these Messieurs Tout Le Monde, they are the men who joke with us at the bakeries, too. But what would they do to us if they thought no-one would ever know?

And so back to the question I asked at the top of this page, what would a woman do to an unconscious man if she thought no-one would find out?
I don’t think Mesdames Tout Le Monde would harm him, we don’t carry the same weapons they do. I think she would take his shoes off, let him sleep in his socks. I think she would lay a blanket over him, perhaps put a glass of water beside his bed.
Then she would turn out the light and leave him to sleep.

Not sure it's helpful to portray all men as potential rapist. As to why they didn't all get the maximum sentence

Pretty obvious why this guy:

Joseph Cocco, 69, retired
Cocca was not charged with rape, but denied sexually assaulting the grandmother after meeting Pelicot for a threesome in June 2020.

Video of the encounter shows him touching Gisèle on the buttock as she slept.

He left when he heard her snoring, but failed to call the police. He was found guilty of aggravated sexual assault and sentenced to three years.

Isn't going to get the same sentence as this guy:


Nizar Hamida, 41, unemployed
The qualified hairdresser has eight previous convictions, including for domestic violence and trying to abduct his child with a former partner.

He told the court: “I’m not a rapist. Why would I go and rape a 66-year-old woman?”

He said the October 2020 sexual encounter was his ‘bachelor party’ after marrying a young woman in Tunisia.

He was found guilty of aggravated rape and sentenced to ten years.


Also 31 out of the 49 had previous criminal convictions

[dpedin]

[
. Who would have thought there was a mass rape of an elderly woman over a number of years in a quiet French village of c6,000 population by a gang of white, French men is an extreme example but a real one.

They weren't all white

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c785nm5g5y1o

You're correct apologies!

[Tichtheid]

Not sure it's helpful to portray all men as potential rapist.

Bravo.

To take that as the main take away is the most spectacular example of missing the writer's point

[tabascoboy]

I suspect this was meant to be entirely unironic...

[Tichtheid]

I suspect this was meant to be entirely unironic...

Looks like Eroll's been smacked with the Christopher Walken fish

[inactionman]

Not sure it's helpful to portray all men as potential rapist.

Bravo.

To take that as the main take away is the most spectacular example of missing the writer's point

It's still a point she made: 'Because we know now what men would do'

No, we don't really, not based on this. We know what rapists would do.

To be honest, I'd expect an unconscious woman would be more likely to be robbed than raped, if we're considering crimes.

I'm also not quite sure what is meant by 'I don’t think Mesdames Tout Le Monde would harm him, we don’t carry the same weapons they do.' Weapon?

Anyway, the praise from Gisele Pelicot is completely warranted - globally exposing an utterly atrocious event and getting people to confront behaviours and attitudes, and carrying herself with a dignity I don't think many people could maintain in the circumstance.

[Guy Smiley]

Not sure it's helpful to portray all men as potential rapist.

Bravo.

To take that as the main take away is the most spectacular example of missing the writer's point

It's still a point she made: 'Because we know now what men would do'

No, we don't really, not based on this. We know what rapists would do.

To be honest, I'd expect an unconscious woman would be more likely to be robbed than raped, if we're considering crimes.

I'm also not quite sure what is meant by 'I don’t think Mesdames Tout Le Monde would harm him, we don’t carry the same weapons they do.' Weapon?

Anyway, the praise from Gisele Pelicot is completely warranted - globally exposing an utterly atrocious event and getting people to confront behaviours and attitudes, and carrying herself with a dignity I don't think many people could maintain in the circumstance.

Are we going to get bogged down with the ‘not all men’ thing again?


Try to put yourself in the woman’s place here. We all look the same. We all present the same very real threat. The evidence is right there before us. Everyday men are capable of this atrocity. As men, we have to own that. Sure… not all of us are going to commit rape, but enough of us actually do that it’s a fucking very real problem.

[Tichtheid]

Bravo.

To take that as the main take away is the most spectacular example of missing the writer's point

It's still a point she made: 'Because we know now what men would do'

No, we don't really, not based on this. We know what rapists would do.

To be honest, I'd expect an unconscious woman would be more likely to be robbed than raped, if we're considering crimes.

I'm also not quite sure what is meant by 'I don’t think Mesdames Tout Le Monde would harm him, we don’t carry the same weapons they do.' Weapon?

Anyway, the praise from Gisele Pelicot is completely warranted - globally exposing an utterly atrocious event and getting people to confront behaviours and attitudes, and carrying herself with a dignity I don't think many people could maintain in the circumstance.

Are we going to get bogged down with the ‘not all men’ thing again?


Try to put yourself in the woman’s place here. We all look the same. We all present the same very real threat. The evidence is right there before us. Everyday men are capable of this atrocity. As men, we have to own that. Sure… not all of us are going to commit rape, but enough of us actually do that it’s a fucking very real problem.

Thank You!

At least someone gets it. The fact is we all look the same and as that terrible case in France shows, women have no way of knowing which of us is or isn't a rapist - she talked to some of her abusers in her day to day life without knowing they had attacked her!

I can walk down the same street that my wife and daughters do and I will have a completely different experience of it.

Men have to start realising this, all men.

[Hellraiser]

The reasoning here is both specious and faulty. Any man (or woman) could be a serial killer, should we all be terrified of everyone we meet on the street because they look the same as normal people?

Replace man with black or Muslim and we immediately get into very murky territory. Not to mention the "they all look the same".

[Guy Smiley]

I can walk down the same street that my wife and daughters do and I will have a completely different experience of it.

Men have to start realising this, all men.

There it is. A couple of friends were telling me a few years back about how lucky I was that I could stroll home from the pub after dark and not fear every shadow, noise or footstep. If you're not prepared to speak up about that threat then you're essentially condoning it and you might as well be a participant from that point.

[Hugo]

Agreed.

Keeping women safe from predatory men is a communal responsibility in which everyone has to pull their weight. You have to create a climate where raping women is difficult and there are as many safeguards in place as possible. For example, you should always vet your daughters male acquaintances, as much as possible make sure she is never unaccompanied and so on and so forth.

Denying a national inquiry into the problem is wrong because it does not allow important information to come to light and thus creates the very climate (wall of silence) which enables sexual assault in the first place. Politicians are not pulling their weight on this and would rather point score than get to the bottom of it.

[sockwithaticket]

The reasoning here is both specious and faulty. Any man (or woman) could be a serial killer, should we all be terrified of everyone we meet on the street because they look the same as normal people?

Replace man with black or Muslim and we immediately get into very murky territory. Not to mention the "they all look the same".

Precisely what I was going to bring up. There's no doubt that it comes from a good place, but the point made about not being able to tell the good men from the bad men and that allowing the permission to generalise doesn't travel well outside of 'men' as a faceless monolith.

You'dbe hard pushed to tell the perpetrators of Islamist terror attacks apart from any other random Muslim on the street, that doesn't give anyone a justification for proclaiming their wariness of all Muslims.

[sockwithaticket]

I can walk down the same street that my wife and daughters do and I will have a completely different experience of it.

Men have to start realising this, all men.

There it is. A couple of friends were telling me a few years back about how lucky I was that I could stroll home from the pub after dark and not fear every shadow, noise or footstep. If you're not prepared to speak up about that threat then you're essentially condoning it and you might as well be a participant from that point.

Men are highly likely to be the victims of stranger violence (yes, primarily perpetrated by other men), they have every reason to be fearfeul of every shadow, noise or footstep after dark.

Last I checked women are much more likely to be victims of someone they know than strangers.

It's a crap point.

[sockwithaticket]

Agreed.

Keeping women safe from predatory men is a communal responsibility in which everyone has to pull their weight. You have to create a climate where raping women is difficult and there are as many safeguards in place as possible. For example, you should always vet your daughters male acquaintances, as much as possible make sure she is never unaccompanied and so on and so forth.

Denying a national inquiry into the problem is wrong because it does not allow important information to come to light and thus creates the very climate (wall of silence) which enables sexual assault in the first place. Politicians are not pulling their weight on this and would rather point score than get to the bottom of it.

There already was one.It came with 20 recommendations the Tories ignored and Labour have only just now made any noises about acting on.

Unless there are some deep flaws in Jay's methodology and conclusions, what purpose would another report serve, delivered several years hence at the cost of tens of millions of pounds, except to publically display that the antics of Musk and his sycophants will be caved to if they show their arses enough?

[Hugo]

Agreed.

Keeping women safe from predatory men is a communal responsibility in which everyone has to pull their weight. You have to create a climate where raping women is difficult and there are as many safeguards in place as possible. For example, you should always vet your daughters male acquaintances, as much as possible make sure she is never unaccompanied and so on and so forth.

Denying a national inquiry into the problem is wrong because it does not allow important information to come to light and thus creates the very climate (wall of silence) which enables sexual assault in the first place. Politicians are not pulling their weight on this and would rather point score than get to the bottom of it.

There already was one.It came with 20 recommendations the Tories ignored and Labour have only just now made any noises about acting on.

Unless there are some deep flaws in Jay's methodology and conclusions, what purpose would another report serve, delivered several years hence at the cost of tens of millions of pounds, except to publically display that the antics of Musk and his sycophants will be caved to if they show their arses enough?

There needs to be accountability for those people who enabled this. This is worse than Hillsborough and worse than Bloody Sunday. State sanctioned mass rape enabled by cowards who were entrusted with keeping communities safe from sexual predators.

The recommendations from the Jay report should be implemented ASAP but there needs to be a parallel investigation into who did what, where and when so that people in authority can be prosecuted.

Edit - actually I'd put it on par with Hillsborough, less fatalities but more victims overall and national in scope.

[Hugo]

The money is not an issue either. The govt just gave Syria £50 million.

[sockwithaticket]

Unfortunately, I think that shows altogether too much faith in these inquiries. People have walked away from Grenfell, the Post Office, infected blood, covid etc. without any particular consequence even when a light was shone upon their venal self interest, culpability, incompetence, unwillingness to co-operate etc. by counsel in hearings.

With the precedent of what these things typically don't achieve, I fail to see the point of the expense of another.

[inactionman]

Agreed.

Keeping women safe from predatory men is a communal responsibility in which everyone has to pull their weight. You have to create a climate where raping women is difficult and there are as many safeguards in place as possible. For example, you should always vet your daughters male acquaintances, as much as possible make sure she is never unaccompanied and so on and so forth.

Denying a national inquiry into the problem is wrong because it does not allow important information to come to light and thus creates the very climate (wall of silence) which enables sexual assault in the first place. Politicians are not pulling their weight on this and would rather point score than get to the bottom of it.

I'd think the first port of call remains creating a culture where objectification of women is called out and made socially unacceptable - it's too often the case that this behaviour is tolerated and even lionised (think of Paddy Jackson and Alex Hepburn). So many problems start from there, and that's where most men are culpable (my younger self included, I'm ashamed to say) and the part that all men have a distinct role to play in addressing.

Saying all men are conceptually capable of horrific crimes isn't exactly nuanced or helpful.

I just found the article clumsy in the places I've highlighted, not least the analogy of my genitalia as a weapon - if I interpreted that correctly. My wife would probably suggest, in my case, only in the sense of chemical warfare.

[Guy Smiley]

Agreed.

Keeping women safe from predatory men is a communal responsibility in which everyone has to pull their weight. You have to create a climate where raping women is difficult and there are as many safeguards in place as possible. For example, you should always vet your daughters male acquaintances, as much as possible make sure she is never unaccompanied and so on and so forth.

Denying a national inquiry into the problem is wrong because it does not allow important information to come to light and thus creates the very climate (wall of silence) which enables sexual assault in the first place. Politicians are not pulling their weight on this and would rather point score than get to the bottom of it.

I'd think the first port of call remains creating a culture where objectification of women is called out and made socially unacceptable - it's too often the case that this behaviour is tolerated and even lionised (think of Paddy Jackson and Alex Hepburn). So many problems start from there, and that's where most men are culpable (my younger self included, I'm ashamed to say) and the part that all men have a distinct role to play in addressing.

Saying all men are conceptually capable of horrific crimes isn't exactly nuanced or helpful.

I just found the article clumsy in the places I've highlighted, not least the analogy of my genitalia as a weapon - if I interpreted that correctly. My wife would probably suggest, in my case, only in the sense of chemical warfare.

Yes, there are problems with the way the article is worded as you say, which is distracting but nothing more than that.

Your first paragraph is spot on and like you, I recall some incidents from my youth which leave me feeling some shame. Ignorance isn't an excuse of course but I had no idea of the harm my words and actions carried... and that's kinda the issue here now, isn't it? We have to call it out, to raise awareness, to support positive action and illustrate what is wrong.

[Sandstorm]

I can walk down the same street that my wife and daughters do and I will have a completely different experience of it.

Men have to start realising this, all men.

There it is. A couple of friends were telling me a few years back about how lucky I was that I could stroll home from the pub after dark and not fear every shadow, noise or footstep. If you're not prepared to speak up about that threat then you're essentially condoning it and you might as well be a participant from that point.

Had the same conversation with my wife a few years ago and I was horrified how afraid women are walking alone anywhere. As a man it never even occurred to me.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

I can walk down the same street that my wife and daughters do and I will have a completely different experience of it.

Men have to start realising this, all men.

There it is. A couple of friends were telling me a few years back about how lucky I was that I could stroll home from the pub after dark and not fear every shadow, noise or footstep. If you're not prepared to speak up about that threat then you're essentially condoning it and you might as well be a participant from that point.

Had the same conversation with my wife a few years ago and I was horrified how afraid women are walking alone anywhere. As a man it never even occurred to me.

I think I was 22 or 23 chatting with some ladies from work in the pub after work and realising from their chat just how common it was they'd all been followed home, mostly more than once. Often it was an ex, but not unusually it was no one they knew. And you've got to think if it's common for ex's to follow someone we've all likely got one or more than one mate who's in essence stalked a woman, maybe women

[fishfoodie]

Check the responses to Saoirse Ronan's comment on Graham Norton a few weeks ago; where she just tried to explain to a bunch of non-rapey males, how women have to think continually about whether the men about them are perhaps rapey males; & because they naturally default to the worst case scenario; they have to act as if every male in their general vicinity is going to rape them; that is what drives their mindset !

[Calculon]

Not sure it's helpful to portray all men as potential rapist.

Bravo.

To take that as the main take away is the most spectacular example of missing the writer's point

Didn't say it was a the main point (what was?) but it was a point she made. It's an emotional article full of inaccuracies with unhelpful generalisation concerning men, and women for that matter. Reinforces my pov that people shouldn't get their news from Facebook cos everything posted from there has been shite

[Tichtheid]

Not sure it's helpful to portray all men as potential rapist.

Bravo.

To take that as the main take away is the most spectacular example of missing the writer's point

Didn't say it was a the main point (what was?) but it was a point she made. It's an emotional article full of inaccuracies with unhelpful generalisation concerning men, and women for that matter. Reinforces my pov that people shouldn't get their news from Facebook cos everything posted from there has been shite

Facebook is just a platform, the writer is a professional journalist and author and more importantly, a woman. It’s probably wise to not get news from a chat show but as Fishfoodie pointed out, sometimes there are interesting nuggets of truth to be found. Here’s yet another woman explaining that incident https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... rton-women


The page I found the essay on FB is that of a professional classical musician who has run in to severe backlash because she has published everyday misogyny in the classical music world, everything from discrimination in appointments in orchestras to sexual assault and grooming of under age girl students of powerful men.
Do not dismiss that as shite.

I didn’t post the article for several days after I read it, I predicted some of the responses seen here, it always happens with this topic.

[yermum]

If you speak to any women in your life , I would be fairly confident that at some point they have experienced a situation where they have felt vulnerable and worried if they were about to be sexually assaulted.

Most will have experienced unwanted touching at best, or sexual assault or worse .

It is a daily reality for women that they have to navigate through from a young age.

I really felt like the culture had changed for the better. But the rise of the incel/ Andrew Tate bro culture seems to be taking us back to a darker place.

[fishfoodie]

If you speak to any women in your life , I would be fairly confident that at some point they have experienced a situation where they have felt vulnerable and worried if they were about to be sexually assaulted.

Most will have experienced unwanted touching at best, or sexual assault or worse .

It is a daily reality for women that they have to navigate through from a young age.

I really felt like the culture had changed for the better. But the rise of the incel/ Andrew Tate bro culture seems to be taking us back to a darker place.

There was a really bloody depressing survey published in Ireland before Christmas, showing that more young men now hold what the quaintly call "traditionalist" views, than men of older generations.

Research into attitudes, influence and well-being among Irish men shows that two in five hold 'traditionalist' views.

Of these ‘traditionalist' men, 70% believe that women’s issues are exaggerated.

They are more likely to be younger men, accounting for 67%, particularly those in their 20s, who exhibit a higher adherence to traditional masculine roles compared to older age groups.

The findings follow a survey of 1,000 adults who were asked about perceptions of manhood in research conducted by Women’s Aid in partnership with Core research.

Of those who expressed traditionalist views, they agreed or were unsure on statements such as "men who don't dominate in relationships aren’t real men" (52%), "a man’s worth is measured by power and control over others" (54%) and "real men shouldn’t have to care about women’s opinions or feelings" (46%).

The trend suggests that younger men may be more influenced by contemporary online figures who promote traditional masculinity, according to Women’s Aid.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2024/1121/14821 ... s-aid-men/

[dpedin]

I used to work in a pub in Edinburgh as a student which got very busy on rugby international days. On these days only us guys went out to collect glasses and tidy up tables etc as the women wouldn't go out as they were fed up being groped, arses pinched and breasts fondled as they squeezed through the crowded bar. They were constantly propositioned and subjected to rude and disgusting comments about their bodies and what the guys would do to them. This was rugby 'supporters' from all nations but the worst were the French who apparently thought this was all ok. Drunken, middle aged English and Welsh guys were almost as bad, the Irish weren't a big problem for some reason and were usually just a laugh with the bar staff. It was even worse after the game as alcohol took its effect, bit of a war zone for the girls The whole episode opened my eyes to just how much abuse women received even when at work. I am not sure it has changed much and I am not sure many guys would call out their mates if they witnesses this happening, easier to laugh nervously and turn a blind eye!

Years later I had a long chat with my daughter about what to expect when she started going on a night out with her mates, we discussed and agreed she would stick together with her mates, never leave a mate behind, always get a black cab home or call for a lift, always let folk know where you were by phjone/text etc, never ever take a pill/tablet offered and never ever leave your drink on the table/bar out of sight. She said it was a bit of a war zone at times but luckily she survived without major incident but there were episodes where some of her mates were less lucky!

[Slick]

My wife was attacked in London a few years ago - guy wouldn't leave her alone then tried to drag her down an alley walking down a busy street - thankfully another male stopped the situation and a taxi driver drove her home FOC. The police to be fair took it very seriously and we went out twice with them in an unmarked car to try and spot the cunt.

It was a an awful incident but I presumed a one off. Then the #metoo stuff started and she posted about her own long list of experiences, from a teacher trying to kiss her to all the "usual" stuff posted above. The #metoo gets derided, but it utterly changed my views, make me dwell on my past behaviour, and makes me actively behave to make women feel comfortable in, for them, difficult situations.

[Tichtheid]

My wife was attacked in London a few years ago - guy wouldn't leave her alone then tried to drag her down an alley walking down a busy street - thankfully another male stopped the situation and a taxi driver drove her home FOC. The police to be fair took it very seriously and we went out twice with them in an unmarked car to try and spot the cunt.

It was a an awful incident but I presumed a one off. Then the #metoo stuff started and she posted about her own long list of experiences, from a teacher trying to kiss her to all the "usual" stuff posted above. The #metoo gets derided, but it utterly changed my views, make me dwell on my past behaviour, and makes me actively behave to make women feel comfortable in, for them, difficult situations.

That's horrible Slick, I'm sorry to hear that.

The #metoo stuff has been good in raising awareness, but again you hear the responses of "not ALL men"

Guys should just take a second to think about this - if you are alone or especially walking in a group behind a woman, cross the road if possible, or just slow up a little and drop back a bit, don't speak to her unless she speaks first. Call out your mates for objectification or other bad behaviour etc etc

We can all have as much of a laugh without making others feel belittled or afraid.

[Slick]

My wife was attacked in London a few years ago - guy wouldn't leave her alone then tried to drag her down an alley walking down a busy street - thankfully another male stopped the situation and a taxi driver drove her home FOC. The police to be fair took it very seriously and we went out twice with them in an unmarked car to try and spot the cunt.

It was a an awful incident but I presumed a one off. Then the #metoo stuff started and she posted about her own long list of experiences, from a teacher trying to kiss her to all the "usual" stuff posted above. The #metoo gets derided, but it utterly changed my views, make me dwell on my past behaviour, and makes me actively behave to make women feel comfortable in, for them, difficult situations.

That's horrible Slick, I'm sorry to hear that.

The #metoo stuff has been good in raising awareness, but again you hear the responses of "not ALL men"

Guys should just take a second to think about this - if you are alone or especially walking in a group behind a woman, cross the road if possible, or just slow up a little and drop back a bit, don't speak to her unless she speaks first. Call out your mates for objectification or other bad behaviour etc etc

We can all have as much of a laugh without making others feel belittled or afraid.

Yes, that's almost exactly what I meant by changing my behaviour. Not that I'd ever have done anything on purpose in the past, but just the awareness to take extra care.

[Kiwias]

My wife was attacked in London a few years ago - guy wouldn't leave her alone then tried to drag her down an alley walking down a busy street - thankfully another male stopped the situation and a taxi driver drove her home FOC. The police to be fair took it very seriously and we went out twice with them in an unmarked car to try and spot the cunt.

It was a an awful incident but I presumed a one off. Then the #metoo stuff started and she posted about her own long list of experiences, from a teacher trying to kiss her to all the "usual" stuff posted above. The #metoo gets derided, but it utterly changed my views, make me dwell on my past behaviour, and makes me actively behave to make women feel comfortable in, for them, difficult situations.

Jeez, mate, that is rough. Good to hear she escaped with nothing worse than a bad scare. As you said, a look back on my behaviour when younger makes me distinctly uncomfortable.

[inactionman]

Guys should just take a second to think about this - if you are alone or especially walking in a group behind a woman, cross the road if possible, or just slow up a little and drop back a bit, don't speak to her unless she speaks first. Call out your mates for objectification or other bad behaviour etc etc

We can all have as much of a laugh without making others feel belittled or afraid.

That's pretty much it - and to extend upon it, I do think the main issue is calling out the inappropriate, as that's how we influence broader society. We can act in a considerate manner, but we need to hold each other to those standards as well. Especially when young lads are bombarded by media from the likes of Andrew Tate. We need a very fecking loud countervoice to all that.

The #metoo stuff has been good in raising awareness, but again you hear the responses of "not ALL men"

I'm afraid in the case of this article the challenge was warranted. There were some statements that went too far, and it helps no-one if they can't be questioned, and it helps no-one to apply false dichotomies - and I take some significant umbrage if you're lumping me into that camp. Men do not, as a rule, do what Pelicot and his entourage did. What many of us are routinely guilty of is allowing the behaviours that objectify women and open the door to those horrific events.

My wife was attacked in London a few years ago - guy wouldn't leave her alone then tried to drag her down an alley walking down a busy street - thankfully another male stopped the situation and a taxi driver drove her home FOC. The police to be fair took it very seriously and we went out twice with them in an unmarked car to try and spot the cunt.

It was a an awful incident but I presumed a one off. Then the #metoo stuff started and she posted about her own long list of experiences, from a teacher trying to kiss her to all the "usual" stuff posted above. The #metoo gets derided, but it utterly changed my views, make me dwell on my past behaviour, and makes me actively behave to make women feel comfortable in, for them, difficult situations.

Christ. Sorry to hear that, that's dreadful.

The thing that always jars me is how utterly pervasive and continual it is. Awful.

[Tichtheid]

The #metoo stuff has been good in raising awareness, but again you hear the responses of "not ALL men"

I'm afraid in the case of this article the challenge was warranted. There were some statements that went too far, and it helps no-one if they can't be questioned, and it helps no-one to apply false dichotomies - and I take some significant umbrage if you're lumping me into that camp. Men do not, as a rule, do what Pelicot and his entourage did. What many of us are routinely guilty of is allowing the behaviours that objectify women and open the door to those horrific events.

The writer's opening paragraph says this;

"..And not just some men. Many men. So many men in fact, they had a nickname for them during the trial, Monsieur Tout Le Monde - Mr Everyman. Because the men who joined Pelicot in the dock were bakers, they were journalists, they were prison officers, they were accountants, they were young, they were old, they were single, they were married, they were fathers to daughters. But they all had one thing in common, a desire to dominate, to defile, to control, to penetrate, to humiliate. A love of rape.
Some of them knew Gisele Pelicot, some of them made small talk with her in the street, in the boulangerie, all the time knowing what she didn’t, that they had raped her as she lay unconscious in her bed and her husband had filmed them."

She specifically does not say All Men.

For me an important point in that paragraph is that some of them were men who walked around and talked to her in the street or in the bakery - she had no way of knowing that these men had defiled her. That is terrifying. How is she to know who else has been involved but who did not appear on camera? Being a father or husband did not preclude these men from assaulting her - how can she or others know for sure?

The fact that most men are not rapists doesn't make any difference to a woman walking alone along a street and being wolf-whistled at or worse.

This isn't about men and us feeling insulted by the article.

It's about what women put up with Every. Single. Day.

The thing that always jars me is how utterly pervasive and continual it is. Awful.

Yes!

[inactionman]

[

The writer's opening paragraph says this;

"..And not just some men. Many men. So many men in fact, they had a nickname for them during the trial, Monsieur Tout Le Monde - Mr Everyman. Because the men who joined Pelicot in the dock were bakers, they were journalists, they were prison officers, they were accountants, they were young, they were old, they were single, they were married, they were fathers to daughters. But they all had one thing in common, a desire to dominate, to defile, to control, to penetrate, to humiliate. A love of rape.
Some of them knew Gisele Pelicot, some of them made small talk with her in the street, in the boulangerie, all the time knowing what she didn’t, that they had raped her as she lay unconscious in her bed and her husband had filmed them."

She specifically does not say All Men.

Oh come on. Aside from the fact that's utterly irrelevant, it's false. She states, baldly (including the phrase you handily omitted):

I’ve been thinking about this a lot over the course of the trial of Dominique Pelicot and his fellow accused: what would a woman do to an unconscious man if she thought no-one would find out?
Because we know now what men would do. And not just some men. Many men. So many men in fact, they had a nickname for them during the trial, Monsieur Tout Le Monde - Mr Everyman.. Because the men who joined Pelicot in the dock were bakers, they were journalists, they were prison officers, they were accountants, they were young, they were old, they were single, they were married, they were fathers to daughters. But they all had one thing in common, a desire to dominate, to defile, to control, to penetrate, to humiliate. A love of rape.

I'm not insulted. It's just incorrect. They're called everyman because there is nothing at all distinguishing about them. Their acts are exceptional. So we don't know what men - many or otherwise - would do based upon this event.

Yes, it's just her rhetorical device, but it's clumsy and that's all I'm calling the article out on. I'm amazed that's enough to be associated with the buzz phrase 'not all men', with all the negative connotations that brings.