Jump to content

Brendan Cox


gdevoy

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, gdevoy said:

Don't know any of the details here but a theme seems to be emerging following the Oxfam scandal.

Seems to me the feminists have taken over the asylum and won't rest until every hetrosexual male has admitted that he is just basically a rapist and exiles himself to a monastery.  

Theh are hastening the end of common sense, and are belittling the suffering of those targeted by predators and the victims of sexual abuse and rape of both genders and all sexualities.

Edited by Beaker71
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Scooby_Doo said:

...... you'll present your opinion anyway? 

I cant say for certain whether the guy has a case to answer or not in this particular case. The polis were involved, but just because a wummin gets the polis involved, as we have seen from several recent high profile cases, it does not mean she has been the victim of a sexual crime. 

The point I was making is that in a number of recent cases the problem of sexual misbehaviour, while undeniably genuine has been exaggerated hugely by certain groups who seem to have a clear agenda.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cox has admitted "inappropriate" behaviour towards women! "I want to apologise deeply and unreservedly for my past behaviour and for the hurt and offence that I have caused", he is quoted.

You're either on the side of sex pests or against them. Who knows the full extent of what he has done (apparently he told a woman he wanted to f**k her as he held her by the throat) but isn't it strange that allegations can be excused or ignored depending on who it is and your own moral compass. Damn feminists though, who needs strong women with opinions, eh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Scooter said:

You're either on the side of sex pests or against them.

You see this is the very nub of he problem.

Like most people, men and women I would hope, I think being a "sex pest" is a very poor career objective for any man (or woman). And it is my experience that many women, although by no means all women, are quite adept at dealing with most apprentice to mid level male sex pests. In many cases persuading them that a change of career objective is in their best interests. 

The thing is I don't believe every male who has ever displayed any behaviour that might be categorised as being a "sex pest" should be locked in a padded cell and the key thrown away. Although that may be the only recourse for some more advanced pesterers.

Does this mean I am on the side of sex pests?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, gdevoy said:

You see this is the very nub of he problem.

Like most people, men and women I would hope, I think being a "sex pest" is a very poor career objective for any man (or woman). And it is my experience that many women, although by no means all women, are quite adept at dealing with most apprentice to mid level male sex pests. In many cases persuading them that a change of career objective is in their best interests. 

The thing is I don't believe every male who has ever displayed any behaviour that might be categorised as being a "sex pest" should be locked in a padded cell and the key thrown away. Although that may be the only recourse for some more advanced pesterers.

Does this mean I am on the side of sex pests?  

Nope just showing common sense and avoiding the McCarthyism which sweeps through every single current scandal like widlfire with everyone who once said hello to a woman being branded a vile rapist.

lets focus on the scum and help the victims of those vile creatures instead of tar brushing every man in the world, and branding is all set pests.

Edited by Beaker71
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is the issue not that Cox set up 2 charities, after allegedly holding a woman by the throat and telling her he wanted to ***k her - whilst he was working for a charity at the time?

Fair enough is a witch hunt on at the moment, but is anyone seriously suggesting Brendan Cox should be in charge of a charity?!  It's not like he denied it happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, RAG said:

Is the issue not that Cox set up 2 charities, after allegedly holding a woman by the throat and telling her he wanted to ***k her - whilst he was working for a charity at the time?

The alleged incidents occurred, I believe, while Jo Cox was still alive and the charities in her name set up.

However, he was working for Save The Children at the time, although I don't see that make any difference. 

Comments such as "everyone who once said hello to a woman being branded a vile rapist" do a disservice to the many, many women who have been bullied, propositioned and abused by more powerful male colleagues and bosses.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, skygod said:

Comments such as "everyone who once said hello to a woman being branded a vile rapist" do a disservice to the many, many women who have been bullied, propositioned and abused by more powerful male colleagues and bosses.

I agree the hyperbole is not helpful but human relationships are generally complex and I think it does a disservice to many men to paint the female as always the victim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dunno Skydog, if you're working for a charity and have admitted behaving like that - should you then be allowed to set up a charity and run one?  Mind charities get tax breaks, so are different to your standard business.  I reckon charities should be held to a higher moral standard. because of the tax breaks they get over a standard business.

A lot of self interest at stake here, who's gonna give to a charity associated with that kind of thing?  I'd guess nobody.

Edited by RAG
Poor typing
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, skygod said:

You're absolutely right but his behaviour, if to be believed, was abhorrent whether he worked for a charity or Tesco. 

Aye you're right.  But if he worked at Tesco I'd be more inclined to say; innocent until proven guilty.  In a charitable situation, I think it's different, morally and on a tax basis. Cox doesn't deny it, yet gives an unspecific weasel apology - yet its all nothing compared to the Oxfam Scandal.

Cox is a tortured soul, widower, I'd let him disappear away from the public eye and hopefully he'll get peace and some sort of redemption as an individual in due course.

The other charity scandals (eg Oxfam in Haiti) are 100 or a 1000 times worse than this.

Edited by RAG
your and you're error - as ever!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

23 hours ago, Beaker71 said:

Nope just showing common sense and avoiding the McCarthyism which sweeps through every single current scandal like widlfire with everyone who once said hello to a woman being branded a vile rapist.

Clearly common sense is out the window with you if you honestly think men are subject to scandal for saying hello to a woman. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, RAG said:

Aye you're right.  But if he worked at Tesco I'd be more inclined to say; innocent until proven guilty.  In a charitable situation, I think it's different, morally and on a tax basis. Cox doesn't deny it, yet gives an unspecific weasel apology - yet its all nothing compared to the Oxfam Scandal.

Cox is a tortured soul, widower, I'd let him disappear away from the public eye and hopefully he'll get peace and some sort of redemption as an individual in due course.

The other charity scandals (eg Oxfam in Haiti) are 100 or a 1000 times worse than this.

So it sounds like your advice to any man working in the charity sector, in order to avoid any "misunderstanding" would be the same as we get when it comes to doing any voluntary work with weans.

"Never intentionally let yourself be alone with any female and if you are in a room with one make sure the door is open." 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, gdevoy said:

So it sounds like your advice to any man working in the charity sector, in order to avoid any "misunderstanding" would be the same as we get when it comes to doing any voluntary work with weans.

"Never intentionally let yourself be alone with any female and if you are in a room with one make sure the door is open." 

Not what I was suggesting at all mate.  I'd argue, you are being a wee bit reactionary in how you're looking at this - viewing it as somehow sexist against men.  My apologies if I picked that up wrong!

Much like priests or vicars in loads of other sex scandals through the years, those working in a supposedly morally superior industry that is the charity sector, shouldn't use it as a cover for morally repugnant personal behaviour - which grabbing women by the throat and making sexual comments clearly is - in any context 

But this like other scandals is high profile, cos in the media Brendan Cox has a higher profile than most blokes.

"Do as I say, not as I do" and the hypocrisy of it all does stink, but is nothing compared to the exploitation of aid budgets vulnerable people in Haiti, in the other charity scandal.

They built 7,00 homes for a mere 12.5 billion dollars, never mind the exploration of women!

Maybe some of these jumbo charities are too big arguably.  Charity is more efficient localised and unbranded.  We can all think of big charities logos (like any business) with all the junk mail you get.

Edited by RAG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Beaker71 said:

My comment was ironic, but that’s clearly beyond you.

It'd be easy to interpret this as some sort of new anti male sweeping McCarthyism though!

Probably why this is only a media (both social and MSM)  campaign and not something you see posters up in windows about or mass marches.

It's a classic game of "divide and rule" played by the very media that brought us Weinstein.

Split the population 50/50 down gender line - when most of this is to do with a scandal about media power being abused.  Cynical as feck.  They control folks thoughts en mass with this gash too. :( 

 

Edited by RAG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RAG said:

Much like priests or vicars in loads of other sex scandals through the years, those working in a supposedly morally superior industry that is the charity sector, shouldn't use it as a cover for morally repugnant personal behaviour - which grabbing women by the throat and making sexual comments clearly is - in any context 

I thought Brendan Cox had set up a charity after his wife was murdered and then was judged morally unrighteous enough to have set up a charity because of some sexual misbehaviour in his past.I did not realise he was actually a charity worker at the time of his miss-behaviour. There still seems to be some uncertainty regarding what actually happened. (he said / she said sort of stuff)

I do agree that people in the position of priests and charity workers are in a special category and, unlike working for Tesco. They really should not be taking any risks at all that their behaviour might be miss-construed.  

Edited by gdevoy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And as you say @gdevoy, it happened while his wife was still alive, were she still alive - I bet you we wouldn't know about it.

The 2 charities set up are still on the go, so Brendan Cox did the right thing to leave.

I'd let him get on with his life as no-one can change the past.

I'd guess his accuser thinks he's suffered enough to not bother pressing charges - hence the media witch hunt in this case!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...