Brooks Newmark "Entrapment"

[FloraFox]

There doesn't seem to be any suggestion "she" asked him to send her the photo, is there?

So simply being an attractive young woman and complimenting national politicians on twitter is "entrapping" men into sending photos of their genitals?

You were still defending him because the rest of what you said is both wrong and a continued defence, where you say it is not exploitation. I disagree with that. He was exploiting both his position and her junior status.

You really are struggling with the concept that someone might understand what you say and listen to what you say and still disagree. Seems to be a lot of it about tonight.

Empire we have a serious problem in our society with the hostile environment that women and children are exposed to when they try to complain about abusive behaviour by men. This is not a problem caused by nasty people who want women and children to be abused by men. It is caused by normal and often well-meaning people. There are a range of behaviours that contribute to this hostile atmosphere from police refusing to take seriously allegations made at the time (and repeatedly) about people like Jimmy Savile, to people saying now "poor DLT" because bum pinching and boob grabbing were normal then and are not really a big deal. In politics we have had Rennard who was not even expelled from his party despite very credible accounts from women whereas the women left the party. As with Rennard, a lot of the responses to Newmark have been "it's not a crime" combined with a close examination of the behaviour of the women and the extent to which they encouraged the man in abusing his position of power to get sex. Individual women making allegations can expect to see a closing of the ranks and them being pushed out while the men are protected - as with the SWP fiasco.

As a result of all of those things, it is extraordinarily difficult for women to come forward to talk about what happened to them. Your suggestion above for how to go about this is just another form of entrapment. In these circumstances, the sting by the journalist was justified, IMO. I don't see any way that this evidence could have been gotten without a sting.

Changing the way we, as a society, deal with allegations of abuse of power by men to get sex from women is very important and also very difficult. Changing behaviour always is. Demanding criminal standards of proof and refusing to make any judgment until an unrealistic standard of evidence has been met is the continuation of the hostile environment. Criminal standards of proof are for the criminal court, where loss of liberty is at stake. They are not necessary nor appropriate when looking at the behaviour we expect from public officials and powerful men. They also contribute to the ongoing abuses that we have not yet heard about because the victims are too afraid to put themselves through the public mangle.

From a feminist perspective, it is important to consider how we can change the environment so that more women can come forward and so that men know they will not be protected because they are powerful and their victims are not.

What part of -"the evidence points to serious entrapment and if this is the case it will affect his culpability, but I'm happy for it to be shown otherwise" do you not understand?

What part of - even on the basis of all the information we currently have, there is enough to see that he abused his position of power to get sex from a junior woman - do you not understand?

I think meaning is more nuanced than you think when it comes to the consideration of particular facts, particularly if you are considering what is acceptable entrapment and what is not. It helps if you don't get your knowledge and views about the matter from American TV shows. However feel free to disengage (again) as I was rather more interested in a discussion of feminist aspects of this case.

You may feel your posts are beacons of enlightenment. I will disagree. I do note you feel it is appropriate to carry on quibbling with your whataboutery where I have tried to make it clear that I am interested in discussing the feminist aspects of this. I'd did see from your posts that you were supposedly off. I wish.

There still hasn't actually been any suggestion that the journalist did ask him for the picture and the only accounts of it so far indicate he took the lead. He said: "resend without your hand in the way and legs parted and I will send something in return. That way we both have a secret.” Then sent his photo to the journalist. Interesting to note Newmark seems not to have made a complaint to IPSO.

However since threads develop, we did move on to broader issues about what he did on any of the possible situations being put forward by other people about how much the journalist may have encouraged that. You seem to be so stuck in your view of the journalist as a despicable man that you can't take it any further than that.

FF, You decided how it was before you actually knew and nothing will now deter you. It's as simple as that.

You're so far off track, only a proctologist can help you now.

still unable to do more than heckle, why?

I decided based on what I knew then, I considered some (actually unfounded so far) other possibilities for what happened and decided I still think the complaints about entrapment are based in a misogynistic view of the balance between men's rights to get sex using whatever means possible and women's rights to participate in public life without being subject to behaviour like Newmark, Rennard etc.

I don't think you get that this board is for feminist discussion.

So, being a feminist board means accepting any old bollocks does it? Read your own OP FF.

More heckling, still no value add. You haven't engaged in any actual discussion, despite several attempts from various posters to get you on track.

Whatever makes you feel better FF. You said there was 'no suggestion' and that was absolutely wrong. Until you admit that, there's no discussion to be had.

Who the fuck are you to set down the rules for whether there's a discussion to be had?

I don't think there's any discussion to be had either. It just is not a feminists issue as far as I can see from the information we have.

Well now Flora, if you close one eye, tilt your head and squint a bit then I guess you can distort any situation so that it fits into the predetermined narrative that you've already decided in your head.

completely agree with whoever said that.

feminist

Sometimes when I read the threads on FWR board I imagine it's a very earnest bunch of girls in a sixth form common room, so keen are you to find a feminist angle in the most tenuous of things. It's a little bit embarrassing.

How sweet.

There is a feminist angle to most things, just as there is a class angle to most things.

I am embarrassed for people who have nothing of value to contribute to a discussion and therefore try to throw their toys around and demand that the discussion is stopped.

A Cabinet Office minister trying to engage in sexual activity with someone he thinks is a young activist is not a feminist issue? In the context of Rennard, the SWP scandal and the pitiful numbers of women in government, it is not a feminist issue to consider what impact this has on women? Seriously, get your head out of your arse and open your eyes. Or, if you're not interested in discussing feminist issues, why not just fuck off from the feminist discussion boards?

It is not that we are not interested in discussing any feminist issues, it's that in this particular instance we disagree with your viewpoint. And it is a discussionis it not? Not a lecture or a sermon?