I still fancy RB

[WesterChick]

I've watched the documentary.

I still fancy RB.

I identify as a radical feminist.

I'm married with kids.

I think that if you are a heterosexual woman, you are either in denial on what men are or you accept what they are but find them irresistibly sexually attractive and so continue to be with them.

RB is simply what the vast majority of men would be like if they could get away with it.

Therefore - and because he's bloody good looking, funny and intelligent - and sexy - I will continue to fancy the pants off him.

I think women who are being all shocked and descusted at his behaviour need to consider what men are actually like. There's not some massive demarcation between him and other men.

All I've done is muse about why aren't there more accusing him.

No a bit more than that.

No you're suggesting the more sex you have the more raping you'd be doing ( if you were a rapist )

^where I'm standing that's a very small number out of 2000.

it's a numbers game ^

Don't understand that at all.
@Poptones

Sexual abuse and rape isn't rare though. If you've ever had a boyfriend who continued touching after you said 'not right now' he's crossed a line. If you've ever felt pressured into sex after making it clear you don't want to, that's not consent. Rapists aren't mythical dark creatures who lurk in the shadows, who you immediately recognise.

I feel like it's common to not report, downplay and try to move on when these things happen. And most people don't have a 70minute expose about their life.

2000 sex partners is insane. That's definitely out of the ordinary

You aren’t a radical feminist though .
misogynistic over sexed rabid men aren’t attractive at all , society conditions us to go along with it as we are scared they won’t pick us or we will be marked out as abnormal .

If true not good at all. Still not rape, though.

This could be the start of a tsunami of complaints.

I'm undecided as to whether he's a rapist or not.

It's a sex offence though - flashing sits on the same spectrum as rape and sexual assault and is often a precursor to more violent sexual offences. Flashers used to written off as largely harmless pervs, but remember Wayne Couzens exposed himself in a McDonald's days before his murder of Sarah Everard, and it is increasingly recognised that flashing is often part of a wider pattern of sexual offending.

But for some reason you're writing off everything he's accused of except for one rape, which is a very odd approach.

You're the one who wanted to see a pattern of behaviour - here is yet another example of a sex offence he's accused of, but still that's not enough for you.

Any comment yet on why you've disregarded the other three women in the documentary? Is the oral rape of the sixteen year old girl not a sufficiently serious accusation for you?

As YearsOfTakingDownOurBanners it is often part of a pattern of offending.

Why do you doubt it is true?

A man who can get women at a drop of a hat feels the need to expose himself to a woman who has made it clear she is not interested. Why would he do that @Poptones ?

I'm not following why it is some people think a man has to show any signs that he might be capable in public for an accusation to be believable. The two men I know, who I absolutely know 100% committed sexual assault showed no signs of it. I was woken up in the middle of the night for one of them, when a friend made enough noise for another friend to go into her room and forcibly throw the man out of the house. I was slower getting up.

So, zero signs whatsoever and zero doubt of guilt. For what a better word, it's "lucky" that RB has said & done enough publicity to warrant suspicion. It's strange to see the extent of the doubt and desire to make up excuses

I'm staggered by some of the shit I'm reading on here.

The person claiming that because Brand has had a huge amount of sexual partners he's somehow a special case and less likely to be a rapist. Makes no logical sense at all.

The person refusing to acknowledge any evidence because he hasn't been tried in court. By that logic, Jimmy Savile should be presumed innocent.

The person who said that the apologies by text might have only related to non condom use and not rape. This is actually terrifying, if a woman consents to protected sex only and the man sees this as a green light to go ahead without a condom, THAT IS RAPE!

We clearly have a long way to go.

The odds very much suggest he's innocent.

No they don't. What bizarre logic.

The person who said that the apologies by text might have only related to non condom use and not rape. This is actually terrifying, if a woman consents to protected sex only and the man sees this as a green light to go ahead without a condom, THAT IS RAPE!

Quite - cannot believe anyone would think this would make it OK.

I identify as a radical feminist.

Nothing you have posted on this thread, or indeed any other post made in this name, suggests to me that you are any form of feminist that I recognise, and certainly nothing like any radical feminist I have ever known or read.

I don’t even know where to start with many of the comments here…

if I started to reply to the self identification as feminist or the flashing apologists, I would not get any work done.

I still am amazed that there are women who found him attractive…. And who still look at him, listen to him, read about all these accusations and think…. Wow… I would like some of that 😵‍💫.

But then again, we are all different and it means that should my marriage ever fail I would have less competition for the friendly, kind, intellectual geeks.

I mean what circumstances were so unusual for him to decide to rape one person out of that number?

What would be acceptable circumstances to you? What circumstances are ever acceptable to rape someone? It's like someone excusing DV as the husband 'only' hit his wife once...

**or someone not believing a father abused only one of his daughters, what was so unusual about the daughter? It's victim blaming.

Just seen a sick meme on FB from an ‘enlightened’ friend, basically saying all the RB stuff is a distraction for the stupid masses.

Ironically, this friend has also gone to the papers about her own rape experiences. It seems that sympathy for other victims of rape isn’t always a given.

RB’s followers are just so ‘cool’ and ‘free’ aren’t they…

I don't understand your comment, which seems to refer to my comment, which refers to a statement made by the OP of this odd thread.

Your post seems to exist for the purposes of self-congratulation alone.

This is a very strange thread from the off.

To what purpose ?

Self flagellation for OP?
She's cooler cos she admits she still fancies him? ( I know)
Men are all like him anyway?

And she's nowhere to be seen.

Tbh he's always given me the ick.

Nonsense.
As sick and disgusting as the subject is, a man is unlikely to have 2000 daughters.

Not comparable at all. And might I add we are talking about straight up cut and dried abuse in those incidences and not situations whereby any sexual activity may be consensual as in Brand and these women.

And why is it exactly victim blaming something that is an entirely valid observation?

Fact is after all this witch hunt, they can only find one woman who accuses him of actual rape.

One out of two thousand. Doesn't add up at all.

But women never lie do they? Not to say this woman is lying, but to not even give credence to the idea that she might be is as bad as saying Brand's definitely innocent.

I'm just weighing up the evidence. But it's like anyone just merely suggesting Russell Brand is innocent must be a rape apologist. and a victim blamer.
Reductio ad absurdum.

Ok @Poptones you are being completely disingenuous, as it has been pointed out to you repeatedly on here that there are at least four women accusing him. If you'd watched the documentary you'd know that.

The evidence has also been pointed out to you.

Your obsession with the '2000 women' is utterly bizarre.

You clearly don't want to engage in an actual discussion.

Why are you saying again only one woman?

There are four in the documentary.

@YearsOfTakingDownOurBanners If my memory is correct, I think one accusation is rape and the rest other offenses. I'm guessing the implication is therefore that the other incidents are lesser or not important. Kinda reminds me of how some people attempted to dismiss or minimise the Rubiales incident due to the lack of physical force or violence and how she managed the situation immediately afterwards. As if it somehow made everything okay.

Perhaps @Poptones might want to offer an alternative account for his behaviour?

Fact is after all this witch hunt, they can only find one woman who accuses him of actual rape.

You don't know that. You don't know that they can only find one person.

Fact is they've only found one person within their remit of time and scope.

@Poptones

Oh yeah @spookehtooth that's exactly it - the use of the phrase 'actual rape' in their last revolting post exposes @Poptones for what they are, as does 'witch hunt'. They would like to dismiss oral rape, attempted rape, sexual assault, indecent exposure and coercion as no big deal because they aren't 'actual rape' apparently.

I mean - it’s two instances of rape at least. Rape is hard to prove - a lot of the time it’s his word against hers. This investigation is 4 women whose allegations can’t be scared off by RB legal team so presumably they’re pretty watertight.

im still waiting to hear how many more allegations from different women who have nothing to gain from this it will take before poptones changes the tune. It’s hardly as if the notorious womaniser RB with very little respect for women is going to have treated them all impeccably except for these four isn’t it? Far more likely that many of the women have come away feeling uncomfortable with their encounters with him but how can you prove that? It’s not a crime but it’s not right either.

I hope any jury are a bit more open minded than poptones