Advanced search

Take responsiblity for how you act and what you wear

(145 Posts)
PurpleStrawberry Wed 15-Jun-11 12:23:36

Nick Freeman (AKA Mr Loophole), lawyer to the stars, had this to say in his column for the Manchester Evening News yesterday. A friend who lives in Manchester has e-mailed me the article.

Because yes, of course, if a woman is dressed in a certain way, she is only out to attract/lure men.


PurpleStrawberry Wed 15-Jun-11 12:24:59

Clicky link...

DontCallMePeanut Wed 15-Jun-11 12:52:55

GAHHHH! FFS, this argument annoys me.

1) If I dress whatever way, it's because it makes me feel good/better.It's not up to society to dictate what I wear, how flirty I am, or how many male friends I am

2) Kissing does not always equate to sex. Bajeeesus!

3) He's already PROVED that HE is able to control his urges when a woman says no (Things heated up quickly but literally at the critical moment she suddenly cried: ‘no, stop, what about my boyfriend?’ I was astonished. But mustering every fibre of willpower, I leapt off the bed, pulled on my clothes and made my exit. ) His arguement therefore counteracts his own personal experience.

4) How many FUCKING times! Clothes do NOT make a man commit rape. Being a misogynistic, power trippy twat of a rapist makes a man commit rape. Rape is never, has never been, about what the fuck a rape victim is wearing. Despite what the lawyers try to say

Would the blogger be a DEFENCE lawyer, per chance?

HerBeX Wed 15-Jun-11 12:56:13

Why doesn't he think men should take responsibility for how they act? Like when they rape?

SardineQueen Wed 15-Jun-11 12:58:57

What the fuck is he on about? What a total prick.

He seems to want a big round of applause for not raping someone. Well done you hmm

He also seems to get the concepts of being attracted to someone and sexually assaulting them mixed up.

SardineQueen Wed 15-Jun-11 12:59:39

What is he talking about being victimised because he got off with someone and then she realised it was a bad idea. I don't get it. Can anyone explain that?

sunshineandbooks Wed 15-Jun-11 13:01:21

It's such patent rubbish isn't it! angry

And if you want proof that it makes no difference what you wear (as if anyone on this board needs it), does anyone remember the case of a woman whose rapist was acquitted on the grounds that it was impossible for her to have been raped because she was wearing skinny jeans and he wouldn't have been able to get the jeans off without her help which must have meant she gave consent. hmm angry

DontCallMePeanut Wed 15-Jun-11 13:01:23

No idea, sardine... I think he wants a medal for not being seduced by this woman who didn't want him to stop when she said no... You know, these women who WANT to be raped? hmm Yeah. I don't know any either...

queenofthecapitalwasteland Wed 15-Jun-11 13:03:10

And he's not the only one

I've got to a point where I can even be bothered to have this arguement discussion with OH. My point to him has always been if I dress 'slutty' (for want of a better word) I would probably be looking for sex, and hoping to attract men to me, but that would be my choice, I would not be looking for rape. The problem is, and always will be, with the men who cannot see that a woman might want to meet someone to spend the night with, but it's her choice, not theirs.

He tends to respond with the 'yeah, I see your point, but then why dress like that?' arguement and then hides for the rest of the day.

DontCallMePeanut Wed 15-Jun-11 13:05:50

I can see it now...

"OOH, I love that dress, do you think it'll get me raped? Amazing... I'll buy it then..."

Do rape apologists not REALISE how stupid that fucking argument is?

Adair Wed 15-Jun-11 13:11:01

Oh my god.
This article is appalling.

PurpleStrawberry Wed 15-Jun-11 13:12:41

DontCallMePeanut - yes he is a defence lawyer, he is quite infamous for using legal loopholes to get his clients (who are usually the right and famous, as they're the only people who an afford his fees) off motoring offences.

He managed to get one footballer cleared for doing 120mph in a 30mph zone because of a loophole.

One can only imagine what depths he'd go to to clear one of his clients of a rape charge.

DontCallMePeanut Wed 15-Jun-11 13:16:16

Grrrr... Defence lawyers make me angry. They really do...

ElephantsAndMiasmas Wed 15-Jun-11 13:16:29

"Disappointed? Obviously. But more significantly I was disgusted to have been manipulated and, yes, victimised"

A lawyer who's been involved in rape trials thinks that the definition of victimised = "not been allowed to rape".

Rather than, say, being raped?


And also, this: "To have ignored her wishes would have been rape. End of career, end of future, end of everything."

He didn't rape because of what the consequences would have been FOR HIM. Not because it's wrong to rape or because it might have ruined her life.

It's so clear that to some people only men's lives are important. Hence the "she's ruined his life" argument.

HerBeX Wed 15-Jun-11 13:16:55

Another man with the attitudes of a rapist.

We should just start calling it wherever we see it.

They are the rapists' friends.

DontCallMePeanut Wed 15-Jun-11 13:19:40

HerBeX, I agree! They are the one's ENABLING rape, by excusing it, apologising for it. It. Fucking. Sickens. Me. 'Nuff said.

PurpleStrawberry Wed 15-Jun-11 13:20:07


I e-mailed the article to my husband, who on this comment...

But mustering every fibre of willpower, I leapt off the bed, pulled on my clothes and made my exit.

... had the same response as you. He just replied to me and said, "what does he want, a medal for not having raped her?"

Bramshott Wed 15-Jun-11 13:22:44

I've said it before, and I'll say it again - No means no even if a woman is naked in your bed at 2am. Once we've established that, any debates over clothing worn on the street are kind of irrelevant really hmm.

DontCallMePeanut Wed 15-Jun-11 13:23:55

That was Sardine that picked up on that tone of it first wink But sounds like your husband is one of the sensible ones out there.

And unfortunately, it sounds like they're far and few between...

PurpleStrawberry Wed 15-Jun-11 13:24:37

Having just gone back and read the article a second time, I just can't believe the hypocrisy of the man.

He calls rape a heinous crime, but instead of condemning the perpetrators of the crime, he's calling out the victims who he sees as dressing to 'ask for it'.

I say again, arsehole.

DontCallMePeanut Wed 15-Jun-11 13:27:33

Rape and domestic abuse are, as far as I can recall, the only crimes where the victims are blamed almost, if not more so, as much as the sick fucks perpetrators.

You don't hear people saying of murder victims "ahh, he shouldn't have been wearing that tshirt"... or any other stupid, fucked up analogy

ElephantsAndMiasmas Wed 15-Jun-11 13:36:34

yes, or "what was he doing drinking in the red lion anyway? Everyone knows there are always fights there".

PurpleStrawberry Wed 15-Jun-11 13:40:59

Completely agree.

Does anyone recall the Sophie Lancaster case, the 'Goth' girl who was beaten to death by a bunch of yobs, after trying to stop them beating her boyfriend? They were attacked for being Goths. No-one went around saying, "well they asked for it as they're Goths."

DontCallMePeanut Wed 15-Jun-11 13:41:07

Or "what was HE doing out alone at night..."

MisterDarsey Wed 15-Jun-11 14:03:15

<sigh> Slutwalk was wasted on him, I guess he was too busy ogling the women to look at the slogans

Some good (hostile) comments though, like this one:

"perhaps if manner of dress is the problem, men should be forced to wear trousers that are locked and can only be unlocked by a woman accompanied by a police officer and / or a priest? After all, rape is more likely to occur if men can unzip their trousers. Common sense really, and would be much fairer."

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now »

Already registered? Log in with: