The Premier League Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Steve*
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 10K
  • Views Views 688K
I keep seeing this but seriously, how?

Unless you are in some proper ****** bar or club where anyone can get in and served then you should know, but still **** off to anyone who can't tell a woman above the age of 22/23 from a teenage girl, it's easy. Just by speaking to some you get a general idea how old someone is but then again he wasn't doing much talking was he.....

Now tbf 16-21 can be tricky at times because some do look older and some younger.
 
Last edited:
Its always going to be an arbitrary line regardless of where it is drawn

They could just put team of psychologists on each victim individually and determine whether she's mentally mature enough to give informed consent. Some will, some won't. Certainly better option then current situation when 14 years and 364 days - you're a rapist, 15 years and 1 day - you're a law abiding citizen (talking about Poland, not sure how the limit is in UK).
 
They could just put team of psychologists on each victim individually and determine whether she's mentally mature enough to give informed consent. Some will, some won't. Certainly better option then current situation when 14 years and 364 days - you're a rapist, 15 years and 1 day - you're a law abiding citizen (talking about Poland, not sure how the limit is in UK).

The problem is that then you will just have to extend that privilege to every criminal in existence. If a teenager murders a guy then spend weeks pyscologically testing him to determine his cognitive maturity before deciding whether to charge him as a juvenile or adult. Similarly if a 40 year old guy murders someone else then pyscologically test him to determine his cognitive maturity and and then charging him likewise

Costs would be horrendous. Our crappy judicial system would be overloaded with stalled drawn-out cases. I am not even sure you can determine someone's maturity this way anyways. What you say does exist in a way though when we test certain criminals pyscologically to determine if they are insane or suffer from any other mentail ailments. But cognitive maturity and suffering from a mental disease are two different tangential things

Current system is not ideal agreed but it's the best of a bunch of bad ideas. It's bad for Johnson but he dug himself into this mess
 
Unless you are in some proper ****** bar or club where anyone can get in and served then you should know, but still **** off to anyone who can't tell a woman above the age of 22/23 from a teenage girl, it's easy. Just by speaking to some you get a general idea how old someone is but then again he wasn't doing much talking was he.....

Now tbf 16-21 can be tricky at times because some do look older and some younger.

I can tell you from experience that a pair of **** and a smile is enough to get you into most of London's top clubs. Can't imagine it's much different in Sunderland.

No one said anything about a girl over the age of 22/23 either. Unless you're suggesting that you need to be IDing every girl you fancy under that age which is ludicrous, not least because any underage girl going out clubbing regularly has a fake ID anyway.


And @Alc, legally her being in an 18+ environment means very little. What will matter is if he was directly deceived, in which case he'll just be looking at stat rape charges with a suspended sentence and his name on the register.
 
The problem is that then you will just have to extend that privilege to every criminal in existence. If a teenager murders a guy then spend weeks pyscologically testing him to determine his cognitive maturity before deciding whether to charge him as a juvenile or adult. Similarly if a 40 year old guy murders someone else then pyscologically test him to determine his cognitive maturity and and then charging him likewise



But this an entirely different issue. With murder, we already know the crime has occurred. We only need psychological assessment to determine whether perpetrator can be assigned guilt. The crime itself is indisputable. Meanwhile with legal age, the question is whether there was a crime at all. If victim was mentally capable of giving informed consent, everybody can go on about their business. If she wasn't, then we proceed as usual and start the whole legal process, at which point the Johnsons of the world can plead insanity, which as you said, is perfectly viable defense for at least a century.
 
It's rather easy though: Just make it illegal to get with girls who are so young that you have to make the aeroplane sound to get your **** in their mouth.
 
But this an entirely different issue. With murder, we already know the crime has occurred. We only need psychological assessment to determine whether perpetrator can be assigned guilt. The crime itself is indisputable. Meanwhile with legal age, the question is whether there was a crime at all. If victim was mentally capable of giving informed consent, everybody can go on about their business. If she wasn't, then we proceed as usual and start the whole legal process, at which point the Johnsons of the world can plead insanity, which as you said, is perfectly viable defense for at least a century.

Its still hard to determine whether someone was capable of giving 'informed consent' through pyscological assessments to be fair. It's like trying to quantify someone's maturity putting a number on it. I doubt it can happen
 
And @Alc, legally her being in an 18+ environment means very little. What will matter is if he was directly deceived, in which case he'll just be looking at stat rape charges with a suspended sentence and his name on the register.

Technically he was deceived. Because for her to even be physically present in the environment of a nightclub would mean she is 18+ and thus if she was physically present, their is little reason for Johnson to suspect otherwise. Particularly if she got in with a fake ID which makes it even more hard for him to detect her true age
 
Technically he was deceived. Because for her to even be physically present in the environment of a nightclub would mean she is 18+ and thus if she was physically present, their is little reason for Johnson to suspect otherwise. Particularly if she got in with a fake ID which makes it even more hard for him to detect her true age

Directly deceived.
 
Sexist chanting must be tackled says FA after 'horrible' footage

The Football Association is calling on fans to report sexist abuse at games after being shown disturbing scenes of women officials and staff being subjected to obscene chants.

Footage obtained by the BBC shows Chelsea's female medic Dr Eva Carneiro and a female assistant referee Helen Byrne suffering taunts during recent matches.

FA board member Heather Rabbatts described the abuse as "horrible".

She said it should not be tolerated, adding: "We are absolutely encouraging people to report incidents like this."

The footage was taken at Chelsea matches against Manchester City and Manchester United, as well as a game in the Football League.

Chelsea said in a statement: "'The issue of equality is one that we take extremely seriously at Chelsea Football Club and we abhor discrimination in all its forms, including sexism. We find such behaviour unacceptable and we want it eradicated from the game."

This season, 25 match-day incidents of sexist abuse have been reported to anti-discrimination campaign group Kick It Out and equality group Women in Football (WiF). Last season, there were just two.

However, a lack of evidence means no club or fan has ever been punished by football's governing bodies.

Manchester City admitted "a breakdown in communication" meant "the usual investigation process was not followed".

The club added: "A new specific guidance on sexist abuse was introduced from the very next game and a new training programme implemented."

Manchester United said: "No complaint was made at the time, so any feedback of this nature made after the event has to be referred to the police, which the club did within 24 hours."

The Football Supporters' Federation said it "doesn't receive many complaints in relation to sexist chanting at games, although that isn't to say it doesn't happen".

There have been a number of high-profile sexism cases in football in recent years:


Carolyn Radford, the chief executive of Mansfield Town, says sexist chanting is a big problem.

When she joined the League two club at the age of 29 in 2011, the headlines were about her blonde hair and looks rather than her university and legal qualifications.

"I've had fans chanting abuse at me," she said. "It's hurtful."

Radford said such abuse was not widely reported because women are "kind of made to feel" they should tolerate it.

"If it was racist language being chanted at me, perhaps people would do something about it," she added. "But because it's 'banter', so to speak, I've got to flick my hair and just accept it."

Anna Kessel, chair of WiF, said sexist chanting continued at matches because stadium safety managers and stewards were often not briefed on how to recognise and deal with it.

That contrasts with the stated zero-tolerance approach to racist or homophobic abuse at games.

"Sexism in football is so entrenched within the culture of the game to a point where racism is recognised as wrong but sexism is just recognised as banter," said Kessel.

"Women don't have the confidence to report it. This is the message that we're getting through our network. They are very reluctant to complain. They feel they should put up with it."

Women make up 20% of attendees at Premier League games.

The FA also says it is trying to encourage more women to get involved in football via several initiatives - but Rabbatts admitted more needs to be done to stamp out sexism in the game.

The former Millwall deputy chairwoman said clubs, leagues and authorities needed to take "collective responsibility" for tackling the issue.

"It's about how we all try and ensure the game is open and available to everyone," said Rabbatts, the only female on the 11-strong FA board.

How to report sexist chanting:

The FA: 0800 085 0508 or [email protected]
 
Sherwood has completely rejuvenated Aston Villa from the looks of things
 

Is it really? Male officials and players/staff from away teams have been heckled in this manner for what, over a hundred years now? Every game, every week, every club on entire planet, there's somebody doing that. Nobody ever gave a ****.

70000 United fans sing offensive chants to Gerrard every home game, for as long as I can remember. Nobody gives a ****.

But now one dude shouted abuse at a chick, so have to make a stand!
 
Is it really? Male officials and players/staff from away teams have been heckled in this manner for what, over a hundred years now? Every game, every week, every club on entire planet, there's somebody doing that. Nobody ever gave a ****.

70000 United fans sing offensive chants to Gerrard every home game, for as long as I can remember. Nobody gives a ****.

But now one dude shouted abuse at a chick, so have to make a stand!

Are people deliberately trying to look as stupid as they can? Like if there is a racist chant, people say so what? Even people call ginger head as ginger that is also offensive.

Abusing women is different from men slagging off men. History proves that women and black people were not treated as equals so it's always a sensitive subject. One of the reason why sexist comments gets you banned from every office.
 
Is it really? Male officials and players/staff from away teams have been heckled in this manner for what, over a hundred years now? Every game, every week, every club on entire planet, there's somebody doing that. Nobody ever gave a ****.

70000 United fans sing offensive chants to Gerrard every home game, for as long as I can remember. Nobody gives a ****.

But now one dude shouted abuse at a chick, so have to make a stand!
Completely different just like Sunil said in his earlier post!
 
Slightly relevant:

[video=youtube;6CmzT4OV-w0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CmzT4OV-w0[/video]
 
Abusing women is different from men slagging off men. History proves that women and black people were not treated as equals so it's always a sensitive subject. One of the reason why sexist comments gets you banned from every office.

I actually have the opposite view from Tyton overall, but this is still bad logic. You're essentially answering with more discrimination. You're still maintaining the idea that certain groups are abnormal and thus need to be treated in a different way, it just happens to beneficial. That may have the desired short term result, but it doesn't address the underlying issues and arguably adds to them instead.

Maybe, just maybe, instead of saying "don't be a **** to A, B, D, M, T, Y and Z", we could just say "don't be a ****."
 
I actually have the opposite view from Tyton overall, but this is still bad logic. You're essentially answering with more discrimination. You're still maintaining the idea that certain groups are abnormal and thus need to be treated in a different way, it just happens to beneficial. That may have the desired short term result, but it doesn't address the underlying issues and arguably adds to them instead.

Maybe, just maybe, instead of saying "don't be a **** to A, B, D, M, T, Y and Z", we could just say "don't be a ****."

I agree but because what happened historically women are not into sports as much as men, so if it wouldn't do any harm in bringing some protection to them and welcome them to the game. If the sexist chants are not addressed just because abusing men is common in the game, then how can anyone expect them to be more involved in the game?

Not a whole new rule for them but at least like racist abuse, sexist chants should be banned and rightly addressed.
 
I agree but because what happened historically women are not into sports as much as men, so if it wouldn't do any harm in bringing some protection to them and welcome them to the game. If the sexist chants are not addressed just because abusing men is common in the game, then how can anyone expect them to be more involved in the game?

Not a whole new rule for them but at least like racist abuse, sexist chants should be banned and rightly addressed.

No one is saying they shouldn't be addressed. Tyton merely pointed out that it's hypocritical on our part to be disgusted when someone abused a women yet act nonchalant when abuse of certain male players happens every weekend and we dismiss it as 'banter'. At the end of the day, if you are a **** to Eva Caneiro or Steven Gerrard, you are still a ****. Let's not try and differentiate one from the other just due to the nature of the victim
 
No one is saying they shouldn't be addressed. Tyton merely pointed out that it's hypocritical on our part to be disgusted when someone abused a women yet act nonchalant when abuse of certain male players happens every weekend and we dismiss it as 'banter'. At the end of the day, if you are a **** to Eva Caneiro or Steven Gerrard, you are still a ****. Let's not try and differentiate one from the other just due to the nature of the victim

Completely agree with this.

At the end of the day, everyone is saying sexist comments shouldn't be a part of the game but you cannot rule one form of insults/discrimination over others and suddenly decide to act more harshly on it
 
Back
Top