Seadog1408 Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 8 hours ago, panoma1 said: So how did you get lucky then? just come out with it......and ask "how about It then?" I can't see that working! As I said, if you touch a girl (and I don't mean in their personal areas!) and/or move in to kiss a girl you are trying to pull, and she responds positively, that's how you know your "in" if she tells you to "go away" that should be interpreted as pretty much a rejection! Some men cannot work out (do not want to!) that the hostess is being nice because it's part of her job and alcohol blurs judgment.....they confuse it with attraction, and try it on, at which point the woman can make apparant which it is.........what happens then is solely her choice! But it never ceases to amaze me how powerful, wealthy old/ugly men often have a stunningly beautiful young girl on their arm?..........it must be their "pulling" technique eh? Reading all of your posts in this thread, you do a good job of contradicting yourself, and your opinion of tipsy men round women scantily dressed or not is just plain creepy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walshie Posted January 25, 2018 Author Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 Not sure how this topic turned from a deaf woman being unreasonable to unwanted touching. To answer for me personally, over the years (before I was married obviously) I must have tried it on with many girls/women, but it only involved my best chat up lines. Touching was and is a no-no. Nobody should have their private space invaded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 11 hours ago, panoma1 said: You see contrary and vexatious are easy! Lol!... I didn't forget! You’ll just have to take my word for it I’m afraid; in a small community such as ours it would have been common knowledge if anyone had ‘copped a feel; youre simply clutching at straws in an attempt to justify what you said...lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 3 hours ago, Seadog1408 said: Reading all of your posts in this thread, you do a good job of contradicting yourself, and your opinion of tipsy men round women scantily dressed or not is just plain creepy. Perhaps pointing out where I allegedly contradict myself rather than just chucking the accusation about might give your posting more credibility? I don't believe I used the word "tipsy" so why are you are trying to put words in my mouth? 10 hours ago, 12gauge82 said: It' a fine line between flirting and giving unwanted attention, gripping someone is plain wrong and is sexual assault no doubt about it as was clearly the case in this instance. The only thing that worries me here, is I can see people scape goated because of the populism surrounding this type of behaviour at the moment, I'd like to think I've never upset anyone with unwanted advances before but then not everyone is as good at reading signs and itd be easy to particually say something in a flirty manner which isn't wanted by the opposite sex, especially when the alcohol is flowing and judgment is clouded, I'd hope if that ever happened, the receiving person would make it clear it was unwanted and you'd make your apology and move on, unfortunately I could see a situation arising where men could be made scapegoats or even set up for the publicity. Pretty much as I see it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seadog1408 Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 22 hours ago, panoma1 said: because the women the organisers employed as hospitality staff were groped and propositioned!.....well wealthy men, attractive women, copious amounts of drink, what do the women expect? You don't like the word tipsy, what word would you use. 12 hours ago, panoma1 said: Some men cannot work out (do not want to!) that the hostess is being nice because it's part of her job and alcohol blurs judgment.....they confuse it with attraction, and try it on Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ehb102 Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 16 hours ago, walshie said: Can't see it's a logical fallacy Henry. If you're going to cater for one person's needs, you'd have to cater for everyone's. The law of averages would suggest at any one concert there would be many people with differing needs. You have to make "reasonable accommodations" under the law. Is it reasonable for a multi-million pound company to provide an interpreter as an accommodation for a person with a disability? Probably more so than expecting the local pub to make the same accommodation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ehb102 Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 12 hours ago, panoma1 said: So come on you guys, who amongst PW male heterosexual membership has never, drunk or sober, in a club or pub or wherever, propositioned or made a move on an attractive female? And either scored or read the signs wrong and been blown out because the attraction was not reciprocated?.....all the girl has to say is ok or no thanks (or words to that effect).....if you on PW claim to have never propositioned or made a move on a woman? I can only assume you are all single.....unless of course the woman propositioned or made the move on you? If Political Correctness dictates men are not allowed to try their luck with a woman.....it will soon solve the over population of the planet! Genuine questions! If this is a genuine question it's displaying a massive lack of awareness of the world we live in. Women are socialised to avoid saying outright "no" to men because men, lots of men, get aggressive and get violent when told no. A smack in the face by a stranger because you said "no thanks" to having a drink bought for you, to being followed home and stalked thereafter to being shot. Don't bother saying "but not all men!" because when you are faced with a random stranger you have NO IDEA if this is one of the ones who will take no for an answer and go quietly away. Don't believe me? It's not my job to convince you, the news reports are there, the Government reports are there, the crime figures are there, women are putting their stories out there. The rape culture parts of your other statements in other posts make me shudder. What did pretty women in tight black dresses expect? How about being treated as human beings? Women are people with their own internal lives, preferences and wishes. They do not exist for the pleasure of men and they are not objects for men to stick their ***** in. Men with money get to buy things, they do not get to buy people. That's slavery and it's repugnant. Anyone more interested in the accounts of the night should read the FT report and the statements by Sophie Walker. NDAs you can't read or have a copy of, phones confiscated, no permission to leave. That's not free work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rewulf Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 (edited) 24 minutes ago, ehb102 said: You have to make "reasonable accommodations" under the law. Is it reasonable for a multi-million pound company to provide an interpreter as an accommodation for a person with a disability? Probably more so than expecting the local pub to make the same accommodation. Reasonable being the operative word in this case. I think the promoter has been reasonable by supplying the signer, she is not happy that it wasnt for the support act too, is she being 'un reasonable'? She says she has missed out on the 'full experience' an experience she was never truly going to have anyway, on account of being deaf. Or perhaps thats the promoters responsibility too ? Im sorry shes deaf, and misses out on a lot of life, but the issue is this, its no ones else's fault, so why do they have to pay for it ? In a way she is lucky to live in a society that really does try to help people with disabilities. Its a society, and a culture that wants and chooses to do this, because we have the will and the means to make it happen. Would she have been able to do this 50 years ago, or in a great many other countries? I dont think so. Its the sense of entitlement, she has DEMANDED that they provide the services, free of charge, that she feels she is entitled to, or else ! Like I said, where does it go from here ? Discrimination laws will eventually become totalitarian laws, that will make the 3rd reich look like playschool. It generates suspicion and resentment, that will lead to hatred. Edited January 25, 2018 by Rewulf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 1 hour ago, Scully said: You’ll just have to take my word for it I’m afraid; in a small community such as ours it would have been common knowledge if anyone had ‘copped a feel; youre simply clutching at straws in an attempt to justify what you said...lol. I don't have to take your word for anything, it is not unknown for someone to make up an example in order to strengthen their deliberately contrary opinion, is that what you've done? What in your opinion have I written that you claim needs justification? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 panoma1 - you question Scully's honesty, which is pretty shabby. Any respect for your opinions - bizarre though many are - has just gone out of the window. Are you judging by your own standards? If you are - they seem very low to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 1 minute ago, Gordon R said: panoma1 - you question Scully's honesty, which is pretty shabby. Any respect for your opinions - bizarre though many are - has just gone out of the window. Are you judging by your own standards? If you are - they seem very low to me. Gordon R, Read my post again I asked the question, because I think Scully is being deliberately contrary! How can he possibly know everything that went on at the function he describes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, ehb102 said: If this is a genuine question it's displaying a massive lack of awareness of the world we live in. Women are socialised to avoid saying outright "no" to men because men, lots of men, get aggressive and get violent when told no. A smack in the face by a stranger because you said "no thanks" to having a drink bought for you, to being followed home and stalked thereafter to being shot. Don't bother saying "but not all men!" because when you are faced with a random stranger you have NO IDEA if this is one of the ones who will take no for an answer and go quietly away. Don't believe me? It's not my job to convince you, the news reports are there, the Government reports are there, the crime figures are there, women are putting their stories out there. The rape culture parts of your other statements in other posts make me shudder. What did pretty women in tight black dresses expect? How about being treated as human beings? Women are people with their own internal lives, preferences and wishes. They do not exist for the pleasure of men and they are not objects for men to stick their ***** in. Men with money get to buy things, they do not get to buy people. That's slavery and it's repugnant. Anyone more interested in the accounts of the night should read the FT report and the statements by Sophie Walker. NDAs you can't read or have a copy of, phones confiscated, no permission to leave. That's not free work. So you are saying women are frightened to say no, because of what might happen? Rubbish! You are trying to make your point by describing a worse case scenario and inferring it's common! To which "rape culture" parts of "my other statements in other posts" do you refer? I was reacting to the words used by the investigative reporter, present at the function when interviewed on TV, she said hostesses were "groped and propositioned" when asked to say how, she went on to describe this as touching stomachs, small of the back and holding hands, nothing more! that was I was commenting on. Edited January 25, 2018 by panoma1 Clarification Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 1 hour ago, panoma1 said: I don't have to take your word for anything, it is not unknown for someone to make up an example in order to strengthen their deliberately contrary opinion, is that what you've done? What in your opinion have I written that you claim needs justification? You’re right, you don’t have to take my word for anything, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t true. I’m happy in the knowledge that what I’ve written is correct. In my opinion you’re trying to justify your comment regarding the hostesses at the functuon in question, namely by ‘what do they expect?’ If you can’t see how wrong that is then I think we’re done here. Oh.....LOL! ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
12gauge82 Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 1 hour ago, Rewulf said: Reasonable being the operative word in this case. I think the promoter has been reasonable by supplying the signer, she is not happy that it wasnt for the support act too, is she being 'un reasonable'? She says she has missed out on the 'full experience' an experience she was never truly going to have anyway, on account of being deaf. Or perhaps thats the promoters responsibility too ? Im sorry shes deaf, and misses out on a lot of life, but the issue is this, its no ones else's fault, so why do they have to pay for it ? In a way she is lucky to live in a society that really does try to help people with disabilities. Its a society, and a culture that wants and chooses to do this, because we have the will and the means to make it happen. Would she have been able to do this 50 years ago, or in a great many other countries? I dont think so. Its the sense of entitlement, she has DEMANDED that they provide the services, free of charge, that she feels she is entitled to, or else ! Like I said, where does it go from here ? Discrimination laws will eventually become totalitarian laws, that will make the 3rd reich look like playschool. It generates suspicion and resentment, that will lead to hatred. Very good post. Your last paragraph is what worries me, i fear the PC, anti free speech culture we have in this country is going to end up doing the exact opposite of what they are trying to achieve, by building resentment and hatred towards those the legislation is trying to protect, the more laws they bring In, the further the right will rise, loom what led to the second world war, one of the driving factors was the Germans being kept down, blamed for ww1 and forced to pay for It, people eventually had enough and the Nazis came to power, no sane person wants to see a repeat of that, but look at trump and Brexit, all the polls said they wouldn't happen, because people didn't feel free to speak, when asked they said they were voting for remain/Clinton, but as soon as they were in the booth on their own they voted for what they wanted, much to the shock of the lefty lunitics, I actually think Brexit is good and the jury's out for me on trump but if the left keep pushing I worry were it could end, what happens if people start voting BNP! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Scully said: You’re right, you don’t have to take my word for anything, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t true. I’m happy in the knowledge that what I’ve written is correct. In my opinion you’re trying to justify your comment regarding the hostesses at the functuon in question, namely by ‘what do they expect?’ If you can’t see how wrong that is then I think we’re done here. Oh.....LOL! ? So women being told what underwear to wear, provided with the reportedly skimpy dresses they were to wear, sign a non disclosure agreement, and other reportedly dubious contractual requirements, as conditions of their employment as hostesses at an evening all male function, where drink is freely available and drunkenness a distinct probability...........do you really think these women were so naive they didn't know what they were doing, identify the risks involved, and were ignorant of what to expect? If they were not prepared to accept the contract as offered and the likely risks involved, they didn't have to take the gig did they? They always had the option to say no! I'm not saying it's right, I'm saying in the real world, that's how it often is! So what can I not see that is wrong? And what do I have to justify? Edited January 25, 2018 by panoma1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trevorevans Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 1 hour ago, ehb102 said: You have to make "reasonable accommodations" under the law. Is it reasonable for a multi-million pound company to provide an interpreter as an accommodation for a person with a disability? Probably more so than expecting the local pub to make the same accommodation. I personally don’t think it’s a reasonable request. A concert is an audible experience, the lady knows very well that it’s not an experience that she can share in and for that I feel desperately sorry, but there is nothing anybody can do that will make her experience what it should be/is for the rest of the audience. If a blind person were to go to an art gallery or some other predominantly visual experience should the promoter of that event then have to provide someone to sit next to them and describe the art to them? Wouldn’t be anywhere near the same experience as it would be for a sighted person would it? It’s an impossible situation and not one where I think someone should be facing a court case or receiving large payouts for either. If multi million pound company’s became expected to provide interpreters then pubs etc. Would also be expected to do so at some point down the line. Just needs someone to be sensible about the situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rewulf Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 5 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said: Very good post. Your last paragraph is what worries me, i fear the PC, anti free speech culture we have in this country is going to end up doing the exact opposite of what they are trying to achieve, by building resentment and hatred towards those the legislation is trying to protect, the more laws they bring In, the further the right will rise, loom what led to the second world war, one of the driving factors was the Germans being kept down, blamed for ww1 and forced to pay for It, people eventually had enough and the Nazis came to power, no sane person wants to see a repeat of that, but look at trump and Brexit, all the polls said they wouldn't happen, because people didn't feel free to speak, when asked they said they were voting for remain/Clinton, but as soon as they were in the booth on their own they voted for what they wanted, much to the shock of the lefty lunitics, I actually think Brexit is good and the jury's out for me on trump but if the left keep pushing I worry were it could end, what happens if people start voting BNP! Exactly. Never mind the nanby pamby state that so infuriates people who were born in simpler times, where if you didnt work, you didnt get, and people just got on with life ,no matter what it threw at them. We are getting to the point where people who have really done nothing wrong in any sensible world, are going to be financially ruined, reputations destroyed or locked up. Offence crime, where maybe, someone, somewhere, 'might' get offended by what someone does or says is to me , like a precursor to 1984s thought crime . If you think that is over the top, imagine the deaf womans story 30 years ago (if youre old enough) it would sound like a headline out of the sunday sport, you wouldnt believe it. Some people on here might say weve moved on, its progress, but its not, its creating problems that werent there to start with, then trying to solve them with solutions that will cause untold resentment and hate to fester. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 I suppose in this case, the law will determine what is "reasonable"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 I am not deaf, but quite hard of hearing - and under some circumstances (mainly excess noise from noisy busy rooms, parties, noisy concerts, air travel etc.) my hearing declines and my tinnitus increases to the extent I am (at least partially) deaf. It takes an hour or two to recover sometimes. However - there is a very satisfactory 'work round' - avoid things one can't do - or enjoy doing. It really is as simple as that! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 30 minutes ago, panoma1 said: So women being told what underwear to wear, provided with the reportedly skimpy dresses they were to wear, sign a non disclosure agreement, and other reportedly dubious contractual requirements, as conditions of their employment as hostesses at an evening all male function, where drink is freely available and drunkenness a distinct probability...........do you really think these women were so naive they didn't identify the risks involved, and were ignorant of what to expect? So what can I not see that is wrong and what do I have to justify? You just don’t get it do you? Does any of the above mean they shouldn’t complain if they get groped? And if they do complain, would it be justifiable to be answered with your statement of what did you expect? I may be wrong, but I’m pretty sure most if not all of the hostesses there were there to work, and to get paid ( and tipped ) handsomely for that work, and I’m equally sure there were some who had done it before, so were well aware of what could happen, but you have made a clear implication that what did happen doesn’t really matter; of no real concern, by your comment ‘what did they expect?’ Now im definitely out; this is akin to flogging a dead horse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry d Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 1 hour ago, Trevorevans said: I personally don’t think it’s a reasonable request. A concert is an audible experience, the lady knows very well that it’s not an experience that she can share in and for that I feel desperately sorry, but there is nothing anybody can do that will make her experience what it should be/is for the rest of the audience. If a blind person were to go to an art gallery or some other predominantly visual experience should the promoter of that event then have to provide someone to sit next to them and describe the art to them? Wouldn’t be anywhere near the same experience as it would be for a sighted person would it? It’s an impossible situation and not one where I think someone should be facing a court case or receiving large payouts for either. If multi million pound company’s became expected to provide interpreters then pubs etc. Would also be expected to do so at some point down the line. Just needs someone to be sensible about the situation. A concert is more than an audible experience otherwise why would we have concerts? It`s the theatre, the buzz, the shared experience, otherwise it`s an Mp4/3/CD/tape/record. Your train of thought about those with visual impairments then fails as it is a single experience and your slippery slope argument is ridiculous as a pub is somewhere people go to drink, alone or with others and not an experience such as a music concert. Please don`t go down the route of "pubs have music..." route as not all of them do and it isn`t there main business Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rewulf Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 4 minutes ago, henry d said: A concert is more than an audible experience otherwise why would we have concerts? It`s the theatre, the buzz, the shared experience, otherwise it`s an Mp4/3/CD/tape/record. Your train of thought about those with visual impairments then fails as it is a single experience and your slippery slope argument is ridiculous as a pub is somewhere people go to drink, alone or with others and not an experience such as a music concert. Please don`t go down the route of "pubs have music..." route as not all of them do and it isn`t there main business And again ! Youve completely missed the point. No one has said that a concert is all about 'just' listening to music, although I will say that is a major part of it. What we are talking about is the womans expectation of 'full' enjoyment of said concert, which she clearly is never going to have, being deaf. She has taken a high horse route, declaring she is entitled to full enjoyment as a paying guest. There is no power on earth that can grant her wish, but she is clearly not happy with that. So ,I will ask you again, what is she trying to achieve , money, publicity, notoriety, deaf rights ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry d Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 18 hours ago, Rewulf said: You have completely lost sight of the issue here. Thanks for keeping me right, I`ll try my best, sorry More concerned that the woman in question gets her pound of flesh, than any sensible, rational discussion on the pros and cons of what she is trying to achieve. I don`t like the idea of a pound of flesh, I think it is wrong that you use it as you have made an assumption. If she wants £0000`s in damages, then yes. You tell me then, (no need for that tone) what she is after, by pursuing this case. I hope I am right in assuming she is after a better situation for people like her, same as the idea of women getting paid less for the same job as someone else doing the same job (Usually a man but not always, my wife and others were discriminated against in this fashion). Is that too much to ask of a post-modern society? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trevorevans Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 23 minutes ago, henry d said: A concert is more than an audible experience otherwise why would we have concerts? It`s the theatre, the buzz, the shared experience, otherwise it`s an Mp4/3/CD/tape/record. Your train of thought about those with visual impairments then fails as it is a single experience and your slippery slope argument is ridiculous as a pub is somewhere people go to drink, alone or with others and not an experience such as a music concert. Please don`t go down the route of "pubs have music..." route as not all of them do and it isn`t there main business No not for me, a concert is mainly about the music and it’s live performance, and it’s the live bit that separates it from an mp3/4 playback that was recorded in a studio. Yes there’s the atmosphere at a concert but mainly I go to hear the performance, standing in a crowd of strangers is not the main appeal for me. What is the difference between needing an interpreter in a stadium concert and a small pub type venue? Still the same for me, a deaf person can’t hear so if the stadium needs one then so does the pub. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry d Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 1 hour ago, Trevorevans said: I personally don’t think it’s a reasonable request. A concert is an audible experience.... 9 minutes ago, Rewulf said: And again ! Youve completely missed the point. No one has said that a concert is all about 'just' listening to music, although I will say that is a major part of it. Read the above quote, it is exactly as Trev said What we are talking about is the womans expectation of 'full' enjoyment of said concert, which she clearly is never going to have, being deaf. So the words don`t mean anything? That is part of the experience, not that I think much of Little Mix`s lyrics, but people enjoy what they enjoy. She has taken a high horse route, declaring she is entitled to full enjoyment as a paying guest. Imagine being stuck in a seat behind a huge pillar and complaining that you didn`t get to see the concert, and then being told; "But its all about the music, its not a performance..." There is no power on earth that can grant her wish, but she is clearly not happy with that. So ,I will ask you again, what is she trying to achieve , money, publicity, notoriety, deaf rights ? See my post above Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.