Yes, if they didn't get consent. It isn't. Only yes means yes. That's just victim blaming, and sexist. Freedom of speech doesn't not mean freedom from criticism. He said something stupid and he should be criticised. Ched Evans was found guilty of rape. Just because he didn't beat her, and it wasn't in an alley, doesn't make it any less worse what he did. Rape is rape. Most rapes are not bloody and carried out in alleys--they are carried out by friends, lovers, husbands, wives. Often in ways which leave no physical marks whatsoever. It's still rape, and the worst thing a person can do to another.
He wasn't invited to join in. Yet he still went and then invited himself. If he wasn't sure then maybe he should not have put himself in that position.
Minuteman - I don't necessarily agree with all that. So when 'on the job', should we men be asking our partner every few minutes if it still OK to be 'on the job'? and when they say 'no', then we stop or if they don't say anything we stop? How often do we need to ask because I believe a woman can say 'No' at any time? A verbal contract isn't worth the paper it is written on so are you suggesting that we need to get written consent before? I suppose that will be more of a passion killer than condoms! I suspect over 99.99% of men are decent and are no way rapists as per your definition - I really think the use of common sense is often overlooked in legal situations. I agree that rape is one of the worst acts possible and affects victims all their lives and rapists are scum of the earth, but if we are all going to judged as rapists because we don't get signed consent, then there is no real point to it. In addition, what if his appeal or investigation shows the conviction un-sound? Plenty of innocent people have been tried & convicted. Just cos a jury said he did doesn't mean he actually was guilty of a crime.
Well said Steve...It is about time more people stood up for common sense and rejected the PC bullshit we have to put up with..
If your partner says no, that means no, and if you don't listen and stop, that is rape. Your view on that is also very naive. Obviously you don't need a signed contact from your partner, but you should never proceed with sex if you are not completely 100% that you are both on board. Obviously what this means and how you will tell will change from relationship to relationship. Incidentally, that ambiguity is one of the factors that leads to rape in a relationship--along with pressure and expectations. If the conviction is found to be unsound, or if he is found to be innocent, then (and only then) you address those issues.
Way to avoid the entire point I made re: the seemingly new level of consent btw You can't say he wasn't invited to join in, as you don't know that, even the girl involved couldn't say that for sure, as she couldn't remember! A jury concluded that they could 'without reasonable doubt' say that he wasn't. I've still no idea how that works either.........
There is said to be 2 other Premier League managers who have offered their support to Oldham (along with Bruce).
That's obvious, the problem is that in this instance, nobody is claiming they did say no and someone still got five years for rape.
He benefits of having a 'boring' manager. 1) He doesn't come out with tabloid ****e that doesn't concern him.
I think it does concern him though, he as a football manager may want to sign a player one day who has committed a serious crime and been found guilty, will this be allowed? How are clubs meant to know where they stand?
That because Evans had to show she said yes rather then no. As she said she couldn't remember and the jury thought she was in no state to consent he got 5 years. His mate who also had sex with her was acquitted because her actions up to getting to the room implied consent had been given and there was no evidence she changed her mind.
One thing that puzzles me is, I've seen a lot of people state that rape is rape, theres no lesser or greater degrees of it, its all the same. In that case, why are sentences for rape so different? Shouldn't they all be the same?
So let the club release a statement, if you really feel they need to tell the public where they stand. Steve Bruce's personal opinion on the matter is unprofessional. He should have said "It doesn't concern me" when asked the question and moved on. He's in the same ilk the likes of Mourinho, Holloway and Redknapp in that they think the world is interested in what they have to say when actually it damages the reputations of not only themselves but also their clubs. If a club needs to confirm it's position in the Evans saga then it need only release a statement on their website or to the press saying "We can confirm that we are/aren't looking to sign Ched Evans".
