Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
I WAS 14 years old when I bought my first thong.
It was a hideous neon pink number sporting a plastic-y Hello Kitty on the front and a string of fairy floss for a back that would instantly be uncomfortably engulfed by my bum.
I bought this out of sight of my cautious mother in a desperate attempt to embrace the new chapter of life that puberty was forcing upon me: womanhood.
So I slipped into what I would later learn was a pair of pants two sizes too small for my frame and wore them to my Judo class under my gear, where I sparred with boys who were none the wiser.
I owned my first thong before I had received my first kiss and years before I would lose my virginity. It was a child’s comical attempt at making sense of what it was to be a woman.
Had a man taken it upon himself to rape me at that time it may very well have been served up on a misogynistic, barbaric silver platter as evidence that I was asking for it.
Recently in Co Cork a 27-year-old man was found unanimously not guilty of raping a 17-year-old girl in a laneway.
During the trial the barrister asked that the jury to take into account the victim’s underwear, a lace front thong, citing that this choice of underpants may be offered up as proof as this victim’s interest in sex.
A rally in protest of this world-class example of rape culture is being organised in Cork today.
When I first went public about my assault in TheJournal.ie earlier this year I received such an outpouring of support that I was able to find the strength to finally report it.
I don’t remember what underwear I was wearing the night of my assault, but I knew the moment I made contact with the Gardaí that I may very well be asked just that.
The clothing I was wearing the night I was brutally raped, was a very small and silly barmaid uniform, assigned by the company I worked for, hosting pub crawls in Temple Bar.
That uniform and my burgeoning career as a model, both contributed to the two-year pause between my assault and my official report.
It did not matter how many times my therapist or loved ones reminded me that what I chose to wear on my body or do for a career did not justify my rape.
All it took was the knowledge that men and women – like this barrister – existed out there, for me to lower my head and try to live out the rest of my life bearing that pain in silence.
Rape culture is a malignancy in our society, oftentimes getting its roots in deep to impressionable young minds before they learn that the stork does not in fact deliver babes to doorsteps in the night.
When I think about the protests against this particular case and countless others like it worldwide I am torn between hope and despair. Hope, for there are members of the public out there brave enough and angry enough to raise their voices when the voiceless feel they will never speak again.Despair, because this case and this mind-set is not unique and continues to thrive on a global scale.
But I, as a woman almost a decade this girl’s senior, sit back and read about this case I think about how I’ve the privilege of having inhabited this Earth for nine years longer than she.
I have spent those years of womanhood learning to shroud my skin in Kevlar to survive the raining bullets of assertions, by men I do not know, that my body must be the temple of a vestal virgin, lest my undergarments lead them to sin.
My voice was briefly lost thanks in part to a man who valued his own pleasure above my consent, but also by the knowledge and fear of men and women like this barrister and the internalised misogyny that runs rampant in purity culture.
This spring I was able to find my voice again, and now I will scream until my throat runs bloody in hopes that I can help drown out such bubbling and archaic cognitive dissonance.
My first thong, long-lost to some forgotten box in the attic of my childhood home, was at the time an uncomfortable yet welcome breath of fresh air, a change in pace from the world of hand-me-down Disney shirts and too-short charity shop trousers.
It was also procured and worn by a child trying to find her way, who loved Digimon more than boys and would not find the confidence or interest in sex until her early twenties.
As a grown woman now I will at times wear lacy thongs or goofy cartoon pants or sometimes none at all.
The style and cut and fabrics of the undergarments I choose to sequester myself in are absolutely no one’s business, but we regrettably have built societies full of acrid individuals who feel that a person’s underclothes can bypass consent.
Morgan Barbour is a London-based activist, circus artist, movement director, and writer. morganbarbour.com.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Just to point out that it was a female barrister who held the underwear up in court.
@Ken Hickey: and? Did she say it was a male barrister? Women can encourage rape culture too.
@Nicole Williams: and also rape
@Nicole Williams: You’d never think it if you look at social media comments. So fair play to you
@Ken Hickey: naturally she is going to do her darnedest to get her client off irrespective of her own gender.
@Bruce van der Gutschmitzer: just like describing the textile/cloth of the underwear. what it’s made out of or it’s appearance is irrelevant and disgusting to suggest otherwise. I’d say there are plenty of women that wear lace underwear on a Monday morning not trying to impress anyone only themselves.
@Ken Hickey: does it matter what gendre the barrister was ???
@Mary Clancy: Mary he was found not guilty and now you’re here in a public forum claiming otherwise.
You ought to watch that, could land you in libelous bother and the hashtag army may not come to rescue you either
@Ken Hickey: what difference does that make. For god sake
@Michael Eric Devine: michael I’m quite sure that the unnamed man from the trial is not going to come after me for slander. Good grief, get a grip.
@Mary Clancy: no Mary in all likelihood he won’t. Although he could.
By all means go around publically slandering people, some day you’ll do it to the wrong person and find yourself in bother
@Michael Eric Devine: this has gone totally off point, but no, he can’t.
Also, nice try, but I can have opinions you disagree with and manage to not be frightened off by your terrible interpretation of the law.
@Mary Clancy: that’s a very sad outlook on life you have. Even juries made up of both sexes not to be trusted according to you. People like you are an embarrassment. As someone in earlier comment said I hope somebody has a good read of your comments on a certain case
@Mary Clancy: maybe, just maybe because of the way they “dress”, they set themselves up as objects, unwittingly or otherwise.
@Anthony Whelan: do you know how many women are raped and sexually abused in Ireland alone? I have a sad outlook because the reality of very many women and girls in Ireland is sad. I hope people ARE reading my comments, and yours too.
@Ken Hickey: Alarming this thought would even pop into your head. As if you see a challenge on rape culture as a challenge on men. If you really think that way then this is surely not the point you should be making…
@Liam Mernagh: what could a woman wear that result in some men not seeing them as objects? A burka? Niquab? Maybe it’d be easier if women and girls just stayed indoors alone (alone being the key word, because you’re more likely to be raped by someone you know than a stranger) so as not to tempt the men what with their wearing of underwear and clothes and the like?
@Mary Clancy:
Mary you are welcome to an opinion.
A trial occurred of which you have zero idea of the details yet you said in black and white right above here that he did indeed rape her
That’s not an opinion Mary, that’s slander.
@Mary Clancy: I do not condone at all what the barrister did in this trial. It was an irreprehensible thing to do. But this does NOT prove that the man was guilty of rape. There are 12 people on a jury that have to convict this man beyond a reasonable doubt. If you think this barrister holding up this underwear made them unanimously vote not guilty then you are deluded. They all have their own thoughts and they all agreed in the end. This whole “rape culture” is just a new term that just does not exist in Ireland. Of course rape exists but saying there is a rape culture here is insulting to both irish men and women.
@Mary Clancy: so women wearing burkas have never been raped or abused? Your standing on quick sand and sinking quick
@Mary Clancy: I’m sorry now but how naive is that comment. There should be a bit of personnel responsibility also taken into account. If someone goes out on the town almost naked with private’s hanging out of clothes then of course they will be seen differently.
Read this Liam and please stop perpetuating that myth
@Liam Mernagh:
Read this Liam and please stop perpetuating that myth
@Liam Mernagh:
https://www.ohio.edu/womens-center/take-back-night/what-were-you-wearing
Read this Liam and please stop perpetuating that myth
@Sara McS: sorry about reposts – said there was an issue with it, but maybe it’s worth reinforcing the point.
@Nicole Williams: The barrister has a duty of care to use whatever means fair or foul within the constraints of the judicial system to acquit her client.
However there was a trial, then a jury deliberated so I am guessing this is taken out of context to some degree. There almost certainly was other ‘evidence’. I think calling this as ‘encouraging rape culture’ is also a polar viewpoint. In fact I think the whole rape culture term is sensationalist.
This country and indeed many many jurisdictions take the deliberations and decision of a jury to be justice.
A jury is by its design thought to be representative of society at large and yet in this case not one of them decided that statement was sufficient to find the defendant guilty.
@Mary Clancy:
Terrible interpretation of the law are you for real? A jury after a trial just found this man not guilty, the judge did not intervene and call for a mistrial because his barrister over stepped the mark. We have to believe there was evidence and a jury of peers and atrial judge applied the law and acquitted. Your interpretation of law is akin to a lynch mob mentality.
@Mary Clancy: but he was acquitted hopefully based on more than this particular point . Having not been in the court myself to hear the evidence I prefer to trust our jury system rather than convict based on accusation . They did that in Salem in the 1700s and we don’t look too favorably on them these days
@Ken Hickey: Doesn’t make any difference, it’s still wrong.
@Mary Clancy: @Mary Clancy: You seem to be assuming that ‘those men’ are guilty. Just because a barrister (male our female) uses a claimants underwear in this way, doesn’t mean that the defendant is guilty. Surely you agree that the defended is entitled to due process, and the claimant’s version of events should not be blindly assumed to be true?
@Nicole Williams: I agree, women need to be educated about rape culture to stop them from propagating these backward attitudes. That barristers behaviour was completely unacceptable.
@Peter Mc: what a mindless comment! So you’re basically saying that if a woman wears sexy clothes then she’s asking for it?? No, even if a woman was completely naked and dancing suggestively that does still not give you or anyone the right to sexually assault her, I really can’t believe people have to be told this, it’s insane. Also, so many people on here have no idea what rape culture actually is, it’s kinda stupid to be claiming that rape culture doesn’t exist only to then give an incorrect definition of what it is, just shows ignorance
@Peter Mc: what a mindless comment! So you’re basically saying that if a woman wears sexy clothes then she’s asking for it?? No, even if a woman was completely naked and dancing suggestively that does still not give you or anyone the right to sexually assault her, I really can’t believe people have to be told this, it’s insane. Also, so many people on here have no idea what rape culture actually is, it’s kinda stupid to be claiming that rape culture doesn’t exist only to then give an incorrect definition of what it is, just shows ignorance
I think it is abhorrent that a persons underwear is and can be used in this fashion. It is sad that we live in an age where it does happen.
But Rape Culture exists in the same way that we have a false rape claim culture!
@John Smith: yeah we have a culture of false rape reports but that should never mean actual legit rape shouldn’t be viewed badly
@John Smith: I read somewhere that hunger and sex come pretty much neck and neck. as urges that must be satisfied. If someone was famished and someone else dangled a tasty morsel under his/her nose, there could be a problem, yet there is nothing wrong per se, about dangling tasty morsels. The barrister was just doing her job but her opposite number and/or the judge should have objected. That means somebody was not doing their job(s) or, attractive women are just wrong.
@Denis McClean: That is one of the most disgusting comments I’ve ever read. Jesus I’m almost impressed with how you’ve attempted to reduce 50% of the worlds population to objects that exist purely to satisfy your hunger?! Comparing women to food? I’m glad to know Denis, that you would be ok with raping a woman who dangled her tasty morsels in front of you. Sure you were starving, it couldn’t be helped. Christ.
@Slevvvy: MMmmmmm. I’m guessing it went over your head Missus.
I am surprised that the Journal is allowing comments which say that a man, who was found ‘not guilty’ by a jury in a court of law, is in fact guilty. Clearly defamatory and libelous.
@Frank McGlynn: The comments have not mentioned the man. He has been fully acquitted and no one, as far as I can see, has made any comments suggesting that the verdict was incorrect. The man’s name has not been published -rightly in my view – therefore there can be no defamation. The debate here is concerned with the relevance and ethicd of displaying someone’s underwear as ‘proof’ of their willingness to engage in sex. Had a man accused of rape been wearing a leopard print budgie smuggler, do you think it would have been relevant or ethical for the prosecution to display it as evidence that he was out to commit a crime?
@Anne Marie Devlin: The comments I was referring to have since been removed. You may not have seen them. They clearly stated that the man raped the woman.
@Anne Marie Devlin: The comments were deleted Anne
@Frank McGlynn: I didn’t see them. Glad to know they were removed
@Anne Marie Devlin: the man is mentioned indirectly all of this post, don’t know how you came to that conclusion. You could argue that we should be setting up controls to support this man and others falsely accused of rape as a result of the trial. But no, this feminist group attachment to a comment that had no difference to the facts of the case is a joke. The jury unanimously agreed on all the facts not presumptions!
@Peter Mc: You aren’t the accused by any chance? You seem to be all over this tread, talking about “false rape claims” and “victims of feminists”.
@Zmeevo Libe: but he was acquitted.. therefore by definition it was a false claim
@Zmeevo Libe: don’t you mean the innocent falsely accused. Get it right!
It doesn’t matter what piece of underwear she was holding up in the court even if it was a thong I believe but it could of been a full under breif or even pajamas whatever the victim was wearing, rape has nothing to do with what clothing a person wears, it’s to do with the sicko who prys on innocent people to do such a henious crime
A female barrister putting her career advancement ahead of any sense of morality or sense of “right and wrong.” Issues that have no bearing on the case should not be presented as pseudo evidence to sway any ultra conservatives that may be on the Jury.
@Ruaridgeback: it should not have been allowed as an exhibit, it’s irrelevant to his motivation. Nonetheless it was a unanimous verdict of not guilty. Surely, they were not all ultra conservative jurists. The tone on here now appears to be about laying a cloud of guilt over a proven innocent man. I hope that wasn’t the intention. The focus should only be on the barrister’s action and the judge’s allowance of it.
@Ruaridgeback: That barrister should be ashamed of herself.
@Ruaridgeback: what planet are you living on! The barrister did her job and did it well!
@Greg Blake:
and we have to assume in the context of the trail, actual evidence and how the case was run the trial judge did not see fit to caution the jury or admonish the barrister. In short we don’t fully know the context.
@Earth Traveller: ashamed of herself ? Why? For defending a defendant
@Earth Traveller: The bottom line is, barristers are paid to sow seeds of doubt in jurors’ minds. This barrister did her job. We may not like it, but that’s how the system works. Having said that, a barrister can decline to take on a case.
@Ruaridgeback:
Barristers don’t do morality.
They get employment based on their success rate.
I can see a jury balancing the serious consequences of a conviction and the temptation/provocation/lack of common sense of the injured party.
The purpose of a jury is to bring the common sense of the common man/woman into justice.
In regard to what the woman/girl was wearing – the perpetually ‘outraged’ should draw the conclusion that the precautionary principal should apply to clothing. Everything is done by fashion, night life and peer pressure that encourages girls to dress more provocatively than prostitutes. Is there an outrage about that. ?
If a woman is intending to have sex on a night out, she’s more likely to wear a thong. If she’s planning not to have sex, there’s a greater chance she’ll wear something else. Now in court you have one person saying the sex was consensual and the other saying it wasn’t, so you need to provide evidence for or against consent being given. The defence claims that having worn a thong means it’s more likely, if only very slightly, that the woman was intending to have sex and more likely, if only very slightly, that the sex was consensual. This is a valid, if weak, point in defence. But it’s the defences job to highlight it.
The defence isn’t saying the thong “justifies” the attack. If you think they are then you haven’t properly understood the situation. The defence is claiming there was NO attack. It isn’t “victim blaming” because in court, they are trying to establish if there was a victim. The defence claims there wasn’t.
The defendant is a court case has every right to use every piece of evidence in their defence. The fact that you find it distasteful is irrelevant. It’s a core tenet of a functioning justice system.
@JayK: You must be in your 80s if you think every woman who wears a thong intend having sex. WAKE UP, you moron.
@JayK: can you provide a link to some empirical evidence that backs up your statement that women wearing things being more up for sex? Or are you just more likely to wear a thong when you feel like having sex?
@Slevvvy: *thongs, obviously.
@JayK: your first 4 lines are utterly and totally ridiculous…speak for YOURSELF maybe.
@Slevvvy: if someone goes on town wearing half nothing and private’s hanging out of their clothes then I’m sorry some personal responsibility needs to come into it. Of course they will be looked at differently
@Peter Mc: So if I choose to expose my skin in a way that I’m comfortable to do – I should take personal responsibility for a man forcing himself into my body? My fault for wearing revealing clothes? I should expect it because of what I’m wearing?
Imagine if you were wearing a pair of tight jeans and a man decided that because he felt they were invitational, he had the right to force himself inside your body & surely you should take responsibility for that.
What would you suggest that I wear on nights out so that I don’t get raped Peter?
@Breda Kelly: Holy god , are your reading comprehension skills completely non existent ?
Ther low of the low
I think a high percentage of women have worn sexy underwear at some stage .. even family members
To suggest that they are at fault in any way if attacked is pretty sick in most people’s eyes
Who ever went down that line should be ashamed of themselves and should apologise..
Out of curiosity, what was the exact reason why the underwear was displayed in court. Was it just to prove it was “enticing” or whatever, or was it for some legitimate DNA purpose? I haven’t read into his case much so I’m none the wiser
@Del Boy:
“Does the evidence out rule the possibility that she was attracted to the defendant and was open to meeting someone and being with someone? You have to look at the way she was dressed. She was wearing a thong with a lace front.”
Was how it was presented to the court by the barrister.
@Del Boy: simply to plant doubt in the heads of Jurys. did not work , but it would seem our legal profession has not caught up with the rest of society.
@Del Boy: It was solely used to show that the underwear she was wearing was worn with intent to have sex.
@Shane Corry: That Barrister should have been asked what type of underwear she was wearing that day in court.
@Dáithí O Raghailaigh: should have said it did work…
@Dáithí O Raghailaigh: You do know that in this case the defendant was found not guilty by unanimous verdict so it would seem there was sufficient doubt in the minds of the jury.
That said without hearing all the evidence it’s hard to quantify the impact of this particular piece of evidence.
@David McShite: I know corrected that above
@Pixie McMullen: She was sneaky enough to have put that statement into her closing statement to the jury so the opposition were not given the opportunity to challenge her with anything.
@Richard Lippy Collins: wearing seductive underwear doesn’t infer an intention to have sex. Even if it did, it in no way legitimizes sexual assault.
@Richard Lippy Collins:
So every woman wearing a thong is asking for it,
Is anyone dim enough to think that if a man is intent on raping a woman what she is wearing is of no consequence to him and will not stop him.
@Shane Corry: what under pants was the man wearing??
@Shane Corry: just stating for the record. Many girls wear the equivalent of dental floss in terms of underwear these days, the barrister must have been hoping for a jury of nuns
@Aine O Connor: You took my comment up wrong. I don’t know how you took away that I think women wearing a thing are asking for it.
@Ruaridgeback: You also took my comment up wrong. I was responding to the question that was presented. I’m not saying that underwear infer intention to have sex, I was informing the question asker of the reason the underwear was used in court.
@Aine O Connor: Or is anyone dim enough to believe a jury of twelve after a trial acquitted on that statement?
@Del Boy: Intent to have sex, not to get rapped. This is outrageous. When are men going to get a grip?
I don’t the court verdict came down to just a thong, you need to read the complete reports of the court case. Just saying it came down to a thong is way over simplifying the case and very wide of the mark
@Peter Byrne: as a closing argument, it’s the lasting thought you are left with. easily could have swayed a jury. rape cases are notoriously hard to bring before the courts and don’t have significant success rates.
@Peter Byrne: No one is saying that it was just the thong. The man was found not guilty and that must be respected. But there is a bigger picture. There is no way this should ever be used as evidence. The same way that a person accused of rape’s underwear should never be displayed as evidence that he was out for the night for the purpose of rape. I think you would agree that it would be ludicrous to hold up a pair of y fronts in court as evidence that a male alleged of rape was really on the prowl. That barrister should be ashamed of herself. I don’t believe we have a rape culture and I believe that the vast majority of men would not view a woman’s choice of underwear as evidence that she was asking for it. And that makes the barrister’s claims highly disrespectful of men as well.
@Anne Marie Devlin: What I also find unsettling is that the barrister must have thought that using the thong would influence at least some on the jury. All legal representatives are obliged to defend their clients as well as they are able, so they must think juries can be impacted by what I would hope most people find abhorrent.
@Bernard McGarvey: Very insulting towards society
@Bruce van der Gutschmitzer:
” rape cases are notoriously hard to bring before the courts and don’t have significant success rates.”
Another myth. Approximately 60% of cases resolved by the Central Criminal Court result in conviction and approximately 40% in acquittal. (source: Court Service annual reports).
@Bruce van der Gutschmitzer: unless they ALL are complete morons then sorry no!
@Anne Marie Devlin: No way underwear in a rape case should ever be used in evidence why? I would say there are many valid reason not least samples, but others easily spring to mind. I recall there was reference and exhibits of underwear in the rugby rape trial. Wherein the alleged victim had said she bled because of the attack but it was shown she had bled before the incident. It could come down to whether they were torn etc etc.
The jury deliberated for over four hours before coming to a unanimous ‘not guilty’ verdict. They would have listened to all the evidence during the course of the trial. To suggest that this comment by the defence barrister and showing the thong was a decisive factor in reaching the verdict is stupid, unless you believe that they sat for four hours talking about a thong. The jury’s verdict was ‘not guilty’ and that verdict should be respected.
@Frank McGlynn:
The point is that it never have been brought up in the first place as it was irrelevant.
@Frank McGlynn: Not guilty is not the same as innocent. Means there is some “reasonable doubt”. Juries may believe a person is guilty, but if there is even one iota of reasonable doubt they cannot convict.
@Ann Experiment: He enjoys the presumption of innocence unless and until proven guilty in a court of law.
@Ann Experiment: come back down to earth there and off your experiment. Not guilty = Innocent you buffoon
@Ann Experiment: Hang em high so … just undermined the whole basis of justice and law
Rape culture!? What does that even mean
@Michael Eric Devine: rape culture
noun
a society or environment whose prevailing social attitudes have the effect of normalizing or trivializing sexual assault and abuse.
For future reference if you don’t know what something means type whatever it is followed by the word ‘meaning’ into Google and it should help you out, happy to do the 3 second research for you today, you’re welcome.
@Michael Eric Devine: it means there are two small camps trying to dominate the discourse over everyone in the balanced centre. One feels that rapes are fabricated or even deserved, the other feels that all rape claims must all be true. Both are as bad as each other, but either can do damage to justice in the courts.
@Diarmuid Hunt: maybe Google should’ve been in the courtroom. Toss pot, Google that condescending fool
@Diarmuid Hunt: I think you know that he was asking a rhetorical question but just in case you didn’t….”A rhetorical question is a figure of speech in the form of a question that is asked to make a point rather than to elicit an answer”. You’re welcome.
@Greg Blake: well said Greg. There are too many rapes AND false claims of rape going on in society but that is what it is…. minority groups pushing opposite agendas in society. One case of either is one too many in my opinion. Neither of them though is part of our culture. I have never heard of a single person that condones either rape or false rape claims and both are as destructive as the other but it is definitely not part of our culture.
@Greg Blake: That’s not what rape culture means.
Deliberately misrepresenting something is a cop-out.
If you can’t defend against the actual term don’t just make up a definition you can “defend”
There was a perfectly valid explanation above your comment: “a society or environment whose prevailing social attitudes have the effect of normalizing or trivializing sexual assault and abuse.”
@Tricia G: ok so that sounds like the situation in india,there but what about in ireland? You cant seriously be suggesting that prevailing social attitudes have the effect of normalizing or trivializing sexual assault and abuse here?
@Neill Mcilwaine: Your answer is in the admissable ‘evidence’ in this particular case. Whether it is the correct outcome or not I don’t know as I don’t know all the details of the case but this shouldn’t be allowed to be used sway the jury.
@Neill Mcilwaine: Prime example of rape culture. A goalkeeper was arrested for sexual assault and it was reported by Joe.ie’s Facebook page. Vast majority of comments on Facebook were about the goalie “keeping a clean sheet”. If that’s not “trivializing sexual assault” then what is?
@Anthony Whelan: Very well thought out argument, thanks for your contribution.
@John Mullin: I knew he was asking a rhetorical question and didn’t ask the meaning of a rhetorical question. In asking that rhetorical question he gave the impression that he actually didn’t understand what rape culture is or how damaging it is to our society.
@Greg Blake: unfortunately as you most likely know there will never be a balanced Centre, as bias will alway exist. The thing that concerns me as these hardcore feminists groups are looking to ignore facts and want people to have to prove their innocence instead of the other way around. That is unacceptable and open to serious abuse and bias!
@Diarmuid Hunt:
Interesting you read the first answer google spewed up without further research… My 10 year old is doing a report on Meerkats I told him don’t just read the first this you find on google. muppet ( noun: a jim henson puppet or a complete tool)
@Tricia G: lifted from the urban dictionary as one opinion on what the term means … It is not an accepted term let alone clearly defined. It is to be frank mumbo jumbo and serves no purpose only to sensationalise and bring that which women don’t want discussed to the fore. It is a self-defeating term
@Emmet Doyle: Hence the use of the word ‘should’ in the word ‘should help you out’, if you read my words as carefully as I wrote them I wouldn’t have to explain this to you. Do you disagree with the definition or are you just trying to pick a bone with me?
@Diarmuid Hunt: *sentence, obviously wasn’t all that careful that time.
The barrister should be reported to law society
Close the Dail bar.
“Rape culture”- what nonsensical rubbish.
@Mike Conway: an oasis in an otherwise sea of twaddle.. a complete myth that such a term is definable. It is however sure to raise the sensationalism and be self defeating.
There is no culture or rape in this country, a culture of allegations maybe. Such a claim is irrational and emotional and some of the comments made by this woman showed absolute contempt for the judicial process of a democratic nation. If she would rather a situation, like in many nations, where a mere allegation against someone can result in capital punishment(for women), she should at least make that clear. Reducing the chamber to a circus has become all too common.
@Daniel Donovan: Unavoidable when you have Clowns in the Circle, Sorry I mean Ring.
Rape culture has poisoned every aspect of our society, consent classes should be made mandatory in all boy’s schools.
@NPC4452347: cool name. Respect and appropriate interpersonal behavior should be covered in all schools, if it’s to be embedded.
‘Ok boys, don’t get all rapey out there, we know what you’re like’ .. doesn’t quite cover it, that’s just bashing all young lads for the sins of some.
@NPC4452347: start with your own sons if that’s the opinion you have of boys
@NPC4452347: it is not on the curriculum in secondary school SPHE. All students do it now….boys and girls
Surely the use of the underwear in evidence should be taken in the context of the accused persons defense and we shouldn’t rush to judgement based on one part of a closing statement which may or may not reported out of context . I’ll say it again , he was acquitted unanimously by a jury of his peers
Is this common elsewhere or is producing the underwear of a rape victim the norm just under the Irish judiciary?
@Damocles: Ciara Kelly on newstalk claimed that she has heard from British barristers that it would not be admitted as evidence in Britain.
@Damocles: as of now there was no rape victim… it was the underwear of a women who made a (false) allegation
@Emmet Doyle: #BelieveAllwomen even when they are wrong or lying!!!!!
@Emmet Doyle: Just because the guy was found not guilty does not mean he is innocent. It is wrong to assume there is no rape victim or the allegation was false.
Far too many people don’t get done for rape because it is really difficult to prove. More often than not it comes down to victim blaming. Comments and attitudes like yours are why a lot of rape victims don’t come forward.
@Richard Lippy Collins: its exactly what it means. INNOCENT UNTIL PRIVEN GUILTY. Not proven guilty + innocent. Cornerstone of democracy, justice and law
@Seanniemac1983: Nope. Not proven guilty does not mean you are innocent. It means that a group of people decided that you weren’t guilty. That is NOT the same thing as being not guilty.
Also even if he didn’t rape the girl, what the hell is a 27 year old doing chasing 17 year olds!??
Men instinctively act upon women and the desire to seek out partners is far stronger in them . Women on the otherhand are in competition with other females for the most competent males. Therefore dressing up in a particular way will encourage a certain type of male to make unwanted advances .
The same can be said of young males with lots of cash or valuable property. If your flaunting it you will invariably attract the wrong type of person .
People should take personal responsibility with regard their own safety and wellbeing first and foremost.
@Jason Fogarty: Did you just victim blame?
@Richard Lippy Collins:
No i said take personal responsibility!! big difference.
@Jason Fogarty: Your comment suggests that in order to take personal responsibility women shouldn’t dress in a certain way so they don’t attract a certain type of person. That sounds an awful lot like victim blaming.
I think it’s time judges barristers who have training understanding on what type of crime rape is should only be allowed in these trials .I cannot beleive that what the woman young 17yr old was wearing by way of underwear has anything to do with whether or not she was raped .women wear nice underwear all the time dies it mean were asking to be sexually assaulted. This type of talk belongs to the 1970s or earlier …….rape is a crime of violence it’s using sex as a weapon against a woman ……please can judges not get this into their heads ……
@Bernadette Fitzpatrick:
Letting 17 year old girls mix with adult men is asking for trouble.
Who was responsible for that? Her mother? father? the venue management? the feminits?
@Bernadette Fitzpatrick: you do know men can be raped by women right!!!!!!
The prosecution barrister needed to argue the defence case that the underwear was provocative. The whole world knows that rape is about power, not about some bloke with a little willie getting his rocks off. Why didn’t the prosecution argue that point?
barrister never said it was to do with consent , it had already been established there wasn’t consent
For the gents that get real tetchy on cases of rape and sexual assault. There are 3 very simple rules that I really believe can allay the fears of gents that appear so nervous regarding their inevitable framing as a sex predator
1. No is no
2. If you’re unsure get a definitive on 1 (major tip – if you can’t decipher the answer to q.1 it’s a no).
3. There is no shame in getting a curry chips.
have your say