Girl Filmed "Consent Video" After "Doing The Whole Hockey Team" Leads To SA Case Acquitted - YouTube
-
The very reason that SA cases are so hard to prove is that the investigations are often just character and hearsay based.
Personally I’d say filming a consent video after the act, surrounded by the men, is evidence against consent, not for it.
yeah i agree 100%
-
I clearly fundamentally dont believe in casual sexual relationships where consent is an issue. The problem isn’t consent. Its that people have normalized hooking up with sexual partners they barely know, before they’ve even formed any kind of a bond, and then have to precariously navigate all kinds of sexual etiquette because there is little trust, little relationship and no commitment. Sexual assault from lack of consent is a problem created by people who have not made a commitment to love, cherish, protect and nurture the love of their life and made a lasting commitment to them. Its not rocket science to note that the people in this case only met each other a few hours before this whole sordid event happened and were only out for some ‘fun’. Its also not rocket science to note that the number of cases of committed couples who have been together for years dragging the issue of ‘consent’ into a courtroom is far far less, if you can even find those cases at all.
If you play with fire, you’re gonna get burned. Just ask some hockey players.
And Im 100% sure that my opinion will be fully accepted here on Lemmy especially by those who love their bar crawling hookups so Im gonna leave it at that. lol. I’m out.
You’re getting downvoted to oblivion for a reason. No one is agreeing with you. You need to understand what consent means.
-
I clearly fundamentally dont believe in casual sexual relationships where consent is an issue. The problem isn’t consent. Its that people have normalized hooking up with sexual partners they barely know, before they’ve even formed any kind of a bond, and then have to precariously navigate all kinds of sexual etiquette because there is little trust, little relationship and no commitment. Sexual assault from lack of consent is a problem created by people who have not made a commitment to love, cherish, protect and nurture the love of their life and made a lasting commitment to them. Its not rocket science to note that the people in this case only met each other a few hours before this whole sordid event happened and were only out for some ‘fun’. Its also not rocket science to note that the number of cases of committed couples who have been together for years dragging the issue of ‘consent’ into a courtroom is far far less, if you can even find those cases at all.
If you play with fire, you’re gonna get burned. Just ask some hockey players.
And Im 100% sure that my opinion will be fully accepted here on Lemmy especially by those who love their bar crawling hookups so Im gonna leave it at that. lol. I’m out.
Dude, you’re lying. Nobody who thinks women asked to be raped is capable of love. You sound like someone with a history of sexual assault desperately trying to act like they’re a person without a history of sexual assault. “Sex is about love and that’s why rape is their own fault.”
Have fun with the second divorce.
-
Oh yeah. Yep. That makes sense. Personally, I’m a fan of “unalive,” but only because it’s funny.
nothing really funny about that, but you do you
-
I clearly fundamentally dont believe in casual sexual relationships where consent is an issue. The problem isn’t consent. Its that people have normalized hooking up with sexual partners they barely know, before they’ve even formed any kind of a bond, and then have to precariously navigate all kinds of sexual etiquette because there is little trust, little relationship and no commitment. Sexual assault from lack of consent is a problem created by people who have not made a commitment to love, cherish, protect and nurture the love of their life and made a lasting commitment to them. Its not rocket science to note that the people in this case only met each other a few hours before this whole sordid event happened and were only out for some ‘fun’. Its also not rocket science to note that the number of cases of committed couples who have been together for years dragging the issue of ‘consent’ into a courtroom is far far less, if you can even find those cases at all.
If you play with fire, you’re gonna get burned. Just ask some hockey players.
And Im 100% sure that my opinion will be fully accepted here on Lemmy especially by those who love their bar crawling hookups so Im gonna leave it at that. lol. I’m out.
You’re being downvoted because modern research doesn’t back up your opinion.
If you look at the numbers published over the years by Stats Canada, the US Department of Justice, and The Department of Justice, Canada, you’ll see that that the majority of sexual assault victims are women who know their attackers, up to 80% of all reported sexual assaults. The percentage of those women in committed relationships with their abusers ranges from 20-50%
-
The world needs more nvidronfor period. I don’t care what people think. If you agree with me or not. Any woman, and any man for that matter, should be able to make as many nvidronfor as they want.
Neither DDG or Google has any idea what nvidronfor means. Please explain.
-
Neither DDG or Google has any idea what nvidronfor means. Please explain.
Nvidronfor is like hermbodrinfer
-
I clearly fundamentally dont believe in casual sexual relationships where consent is an issue. The problem isn’t consent. Its that people have normalized hooking up with sexual partners they barely know, before they’ve even formed any kind of a bond, and then have to precariously navigate all kinds of sexual etiquette because there is little trust, little relationship and no commitment. Sexual assault from lack of consent is a problem created by people who have not made a commitment to love, cherish, protect and nurture the love of their life and made a lasting commitment to them. Its not rocket science to note that the people in this case only met each other a few hours before this whole sordid event happened and were only out for some ‘fun’. Its also not rocket science to note that the number of cases of committed couples who have been together for years dragging the issue of ‘consent’ into a courtroom is far far less, if you can even find those cases at all.
If you play with fire, you’re gonna get burned. Just ask some hockey players.
And Im 100% sure that my opinion will be fully accepted here on Lemmy especially by those who love their bar crawling hookups so Im gonna leave it at that. lol. I’m out.
What the absolute fuck are you on about here.
-
So you’re commenting on something you didn’t watch?
Yes, engaging in any sexual act is not implied consent for every sexual act. In what world is it hard to ask if someone wants something? They’re like, right there. Source: I’m a slut.
Quite the source you’ve got there!
-
Neither DDG or Google has any idea what nvidronfor means. Please explain.
it’s a typo of “video for”
-
What’s wrong with exploring the details of a high profile case involving Hockey players sexually assaulting a woman? I think the videos are well researched, and together form up 3 hours of well thought out detail.
I point out that this is a deep dive into the issue, and you roll up with a BBC article that probably takes 5 minutes to read.
Also, I watched the videos, and there’s discussion about how badly the case was handled from all fronts; and, there’s treatment on how netizens have some consensus that there was very little likelihood that the charges would result in convictions because of how the laws are.
I won’t go over all the highlights. A few points raised for me were:
Criminal law standards vs morality standards - I felt that the video also distinguished the issue of the court’s formal finding of guilt or innocence based on a standard of beyond a reasonable doubt. They even went over the moral issues that arose when exploring the culture of sexism in the Hockey players online “bible”, consent, and even the pinch points on evidence that were in favour of either the Hockey players and the complainant.
What’s society comfortable with issues of team sports and toxic behaviour? We’re being reminded about the ugly side of Hockey culture and whether we want these players to be flaunting their wealth and power around in this way. Or should they pay a price? Who should trust these roving packs of guys, travelling from town to town, grabbing at booze and women, then rushing home to their well compensated handlers at the first sign of trouble?
What credibility does Hockey Canada have? An organization that’s supposed to be hand holding these guys, and upholding some semblance of a honour/conduct system? There’s clips of the players making alleged statements to Hockey Canada for conduct over the allegations of sexual assault, and their statements are not even consistent with what ends up out during the criminal proceedings.
For those following the story, this isn’t an isolated incident. There’s the 2003 “Lamb Roast” allegations, and who knows how many other allegations that have been settled or unreported over the decades.
Whether you feel the 2018 incident with “EM” is an open and shut case, the broader misogyny issue in Hockey Canada and Junior Hockey isn’t over.
Source says he told police names of 2 hockey players in 2003 video of alleged sexual assault | CBC News
Halifax police now have the names of at least two members of the 2003 World Junior hockey team who may have appeared in a video of an alleged group sexual assault nearly two decades ago, CBC News has learned. The source says the players went on to have NHL careers.
CBC (www.cbc.ca)
Hockey Canada paid out $8.9 million in sexual abuse settlements since 1989 | CBC News
Hockey Canada executives told a House of Commons committee Wednesday that they've paid $8.9 million for sexual abuse settlements to 21 complainants since 1989.
CBC (www.cbc.ca)
-
Quite the source you’ve got there!
I’m a people person.
-
Neither DDG or Google has any idea what nvidronfor means. Please explain.
Pretty sure (based on a ton of other mistakes in the same post) that previous poster had a stroke while typing “video for” so the next post is a joke.
-
God, I fucking hate the self censoring so much. There is just something so corpo-cucked about it.
Unfortunately it’s not as simple as self sponsorship. There’s a long list of words that YouTube auto detects, and then those videos will get automatically demonized. Technically you can say pretty much whatever you want, but you cut yourself off from making any ad revenue and the YouTube algorithm will suppress your views as a result. I guess it’s more like a coerced corpo-cucking.
