Russel Brand

Club_B00k_Crutchless said:
Definitions change. What used to be acceptable isn't any more. More women are starting to understand they don't have to put up with the harassment that used to be laughed of as a bit of banter.
Click to expand...
Agree but surely the stats should clarify that the situation has improved a lot but stil has a way to go. Bit/lot of context please
 
hackneyfox said:
He just throws insults around, he's another version of Joe Gooner or the chef, pointless.
Click to expand...
I disagree. There've been some good points made in this thread.
His summing up of what RVL replied to you wasn't unique, but it also wasn't just a useless insult. I think it was relevant, but then I would think that, wouldn't I?

It does appear Hackney, that you just can't 'hack' it.
 
Richardvanles said:
But the UK Parliament don’t have a problem with Gary Glitter getting hundreds of thousands of £’s or Oasis fans for that matter.
Hello!
Click to expand...
Still not found guilty of anything, but worthy of a parliamentary letter to an American company asking him to be banned globally.
Now why would the UK parliament want to get involved in cancelling people?
 
Yorkfox said:
Agree but surely the stats should clarify that the situation has improved a lot but stil has a way to go. Bit/lot of context please
Click to expand...
I'm not sure the stats have shown things have improved. People (mostly women) seem to be more prepared to report incidents than they used to be and whilst police attitudes have improved slightly, they still get treated as though they were asking for it.

I would see 1.9% conviction rate as meaning there's a long way to go yet, whereas Dickie sees it as 98.1% are lying.
 
Club_B00k_Crutchless said:
I'm not sure the stats have shown things have improved. People (mostly women) seem to be more prepared to report incidents than they used to be and whilst police attitudes have improved slightly, they still get treated as though they were asking for it.

I would see 1.9% conviction rate as meaning there's a long way to go yet, whereas Dickie sees it as 98.1% are lying.
Click to expand...
www.bbc.co.uk

Rape victims say police investigations causing more harm

Three-quarters of survivors in a survey say their mental health worsened due to the police investigation.
www.bbc.co.uk
 
Club_B00k_Crutchless said:
I'm not sure the stats have shown things have improved. People (mostly women) seem to be more prepared to report incidents than they used to be and whilst police attitudes have improved slightly, they still get treated as though they were asking for it.

I would see 1.9% conviction rate as meaning there's a long way to go yet, whereas Dickie sees it as 98.1% are lying.
Click to expand...
98.1% have not been found guilty in a court of law. Only guilty in bookclubs head.
 
BigDave said:
The whole point of this place?
Thanks for running that by me.
Now can you ask Daz, the Book, the Sardine, the Photographer guy and your chum Golfer to run 'the whole point of this place' by me too?
Click to expand...
It’s got fuck all to do with me as well you know.
Don’t think the roof has ever banned anyone, apart from when logins don’t work.
 
Club_B00k_Crutchless said:
Suggest you send s strongly worded email then
rapecrisis.org.uk

Rape, sexual assault and child sexual abuse statistics

Want to know how many people are raped, sexually abused or sexually assaulted? We have key statistics from trusted sources showing the scale of the problem.
rapecrisis.org.uk rapecrisis.org.uk

It does amuse me how you and your cronies think you're on a higher level, with your alternative facts and railing against anything "mainstream"
Click to expand...
yeh, but, you are a proper thick cunt with a huge chip on your shoulder.

I mean, you can't deny it can you to be fair.
 
Yorkfox said:
Agree but surely the stats should clarify that the situation has improved a lot but stil has a way to go. Bit/lot of context please
Click to expand...
Context, fucking hell you’re hoping, they can only talk in sweeping statements that make no sense. One minute he’s all for blokes in dresses getting their cocks out in female areas, the next he’s harping on about sexism against women by bullying men with cocks without dresses. Actually perhaps if Mr Brand had worn a dress he’d have got away with it..
 
jackieguaccamo said:
Context, fucking hell you’re hoping, they can only talk in sweeping statements that make no sense. One minute he’s all for blokes in dresses getting their cocks out in female areas, the next he’s harping on about sexism against women by bullying men with cocks without dresses. Actually perhaps if Mr Brand had worn a dress he’d have got away with it..
Click to expand...
I used to think you deliberately misunderstood things to be a bit edgy and controversial. I now realise you're just not very brigt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top