Darkzzz_ Posted 17 March 2009 Posted 17 March 2009 Or have been raped I doubt they have been raped by Essien though? Ouch!
Floating Fox Posted 17 March 2009 Posted 17 March 2009 I doubt they have been raped by Essien though?Ouch! Yeah they probably wouldn't be around to tell the tale if they did!
lcfc_jme Posted 17 March 2009 Posted 17 March 2009 Yeah they probably wouldn't be around to tell the tale if they did! Essien is smaller than Chrissy P.
Darkzzz_ Posted 17 March 2009 Posted 17 March 2009 Yeah they probably wouldn't be around to tell the tale if they did! Actually doesn't Essien sleep about 23 hours a day? He wouldn't have time to rape anyone. Pardew I want a refund you bitch.
Floating Fox Posted 17 March 2009 Posted 17 March 2009 Never heard of sleep rape? Similar to sleep walking but...
Number 6 Posted 17 March 2009 Posted 17 March 2009 The Mail Gives Pardew A PillageA slip of the tongue, a moment of madness or just an example of warped footballing vernacular? Alan Pardew's description of Michael Essien 'raping' Man City striker Ched Evans during Sunday's edition of MOTD2 continues to cause quite a stir even after his apology on Monday. And it's no surprise to find The Daily Mail leading the way in the moral crusade against the former West Ham manager and, in all probability, former pundit. Having repeated the remarks that they are so offended by, the newspaper then declares: 'Co-hosts Adrian Chiles and Alan Hansen looked stunned, but there was no apology during the show.' This is, it's fair to retort, absolute bollocks. Chiles and Hansen looked nothing of the sort and both they and the programme's production staff have since claimed that they thought Pardew said "rakes". "If it had been heard, there is no question there would have been an on-air apology," confirmed a Beeb spokesman. Not that it matters. Because the Mail is already in full flow as it explores the fertile ground of moral indignation with familiar relish. But is their criticism against Pardew and the apparent trivialisation of sexual assault or just another excuse for Beeb-bashing? Even Yvonne Traynor, director of Rape Crisis, wheeled out to put another nail into Pardew's coffin, cannot avoid taking a dig at the Beeb: "I thought the BBC was supposed to be being more careful, what a joke!" Mediawatch may not be in the habit of defending the Beeb but it's struggling to fathom how exactly the corporation was careless in this instance. This was Pardew's first appearance on the show and unless he auditioned with the promise to give punditry "an absolute raping" then it's difficult to understand the basis of Ms Traynor's complaint. "I can't see how he can carry on, but I doubt the BBC will tell him not to come back, that doesn't seem to happen these days," she continues. "They'll probably just slap him on the wrist, but he should be hauled over the coals." How exactly? Should he be arrested? Even the Beeb might struggle to sack someone who is not in their employment.
lildave3 Posted 17 March 2009 Posted 17 March 2009 Never heard of sleep rape?Similar to sleep walking but... Yawn rape?
Guest Bilo Posted 17 March 2009 Posted 17 March 2009 It isnt rape if you shout 'surprise' Rape is no laughing matter. Unless you're raping a clown.
AmericanScott Posted 17 March 2009 Posted 17 March 2009 Rape is no laughing matter. Unless you're raping a clown. Personal experience?
Guest MarshallForEngland Posted 18 March 2009 Posted 18 March 2009 The guy has quite obviously been gaming online. This phrase was being used 10 years ago in online games and still is. It shares a virtually identical meaning to "owned". The most important thing to remember is that it has no relevance to the conventional use of the word "rape", despite its etymology. He didn't mean "He's had sexual intercourse with him without his consent", he simply meant "He's destroyed him". What gets me most is that people actually took time to complain about this. Actually, that's a lie, what gets me most is comments like this. This is from Lee Eggleston, the chairwoman of Rape Crisis England and Wales: That something as serious as sexual assault has been misused to describe football is appalling. He has trivialised and undermined the seriousness of rape and anyone who has suffered sexual violence will rightly be angry. Please, if you're going to target your complaints at anybody, aim them at this clueless dullard for saying something as ridiculous as this.
C-man Posted 18 March 2009 Posted 18 March 2009 The Daily Mail The terroists that the DM hate have more morals than the cunts that write that paper.
Edmund Posted 18 March 2009 Posted 18 March 2009 The most important thing to remember is that it has no relevance to the conventional use of the word "rape", despite its etymology. He didn't mean "He's had sexual intercourse with him without his consent", he simply meant "He's destroyed him". Don't mean to sound harsh but I think that's pretty obvious. The guy has quite obviously been gaming online. This phrase was being used 10 years ago in online games and still is. It shares a virtually identical meaning to "owned". I doubt this very much. Maybe the phrase originates from that but it is a common slang word. I use it, my mates do and we never did online gaming. I tend to use it when I have been ripped off, or if something which I had has been taken off me without liberty.
The Reverend Posted 18 March 2009 Posted 18 March 2009 At the end of the day, you have to accept it is now used as a descriptive slang word in our vocabulary. And it is becoming ever popular. Okay, maybe its not the wisest move to use it on national television, but so fucking what. Get over it. There was no malicious intent there, it was said how the majority of people use it nowadays.
Nationwider Posted 19 March 2009 Posted 19 March 2009 I can't say I'm a fan of using the word in the context that Pardew did. I accept it's slipped into the vernacular but it conjures up pretty unpleasant images all the same. I think using a word with as brutal a connotation as rape and equating it to something happening on a football pitch shows a certain lack of intelligence, probably more because he said on TV. Then again, I've used the phrase Bugger me if.... on many occasions and have rarely meant it as an open invitation to sodomise me.
Edmund Posted 19 March 2009 Posted 19 March 2009 I can't say I'm a fan of using the word in the context that Pardew did. I accept it's slipped into the vernacular but it conjures up pretty unpleasant images all the same.I think using a word with as brutal a connotation as rape and equating it to something happening on a football pitch shows a certain lack of intelligence, probably more because he said on TV. Then again, I've used the phrase Bugger me if.... on many occasions and have rarely meant it as an open invitation to sodomise me. No different to someone saying I could "murder" an ice cream etc etc.
Nationwider Posted 19 March 2009 Posted 19 March 2009 No different to someone saying I could "murder" an ice cream etc etc. Well language evolves so perhaps that example is a good one, it might have caused offence years ago, but doesn't now. But 'murder' doesn't conjure up any specific image, and used in connection with an inanimate object, it has no impact at all. I think if you said, "I could rape someone for an ice cream", you'd get some funny looks... I'm not sure it is in accepted usage yet, that's all.
Katy Posted 19 March 2009 Posted 19 March 2009 I don't like the word at all, in fact I hate it but i'm not going to complain about people using it in a footballing context.
lcfc_jme Posted 20 March 2009 Posted 20 March 2009 The fact that this is still rumbling on is quite farcical to be fair. I think everybody (bar rapists, obv) knows that rape is wrong, and I'm sure Pardew wouldn't have been as enthusiastic if Essien had ripped off Ched Evans' shorts, pulled his pants down and climbed inside him. I use the word rape in a footballing context all the time and not once has anybody looked gone out or offended. Mehhh. And as far as the DM goes, I wouldn't even wipe my arse on it if I was desperate.
Guest MarshallForEngland Posted 20 March 2009 Posted 20 March 2009 Well language evolves so perhaps that example is a good one, it might have caused offence years ago, but doesn't now. But 'murder' doesn't conjure up any specific image, and used in connection with an inanimate object, it has no impact at all. I think if you said, "I could rape someone for an ice cream", you'd get some funny looks... I'm not sure it is in accepted usage yet, that's all. They're not the same though. The comparison is a valid one. The heinous and deplorable act of murder is used casually without thought of its alternative uses. Would anybody be complaining if he'd have said "He's come in an absolutely murdered him"? Imagine that. Families of murder victims everywhere would be so outraged at the comparison between something as vile as murder and a football game.
Nationwider Posted 20 March 2009 Posted 20 March 2009 The fact that this is still rumbling on is quite farcical to be fair.I think everybody (bar rapists, obv) knows that rape is wrong, and I'm sure Pardew wouldn't have been as enthusiastic if Essien had ripped off Ched Evans' shorts, pulled his pants down and climbed inside him. I use the word rape in a footballing context all the time and not once has anybody looked gone out or offended. Mehhh. And as far as the DM goes, I wouldn't even wipe my arse on it if I was desperate. Yes, but it's in context amongst your peers - and probably not on TV. I just think there's a time and a place, that's all. They're not the same though. The comparison is a valid one. The heinous and deplorable act of murder is used casually without thought of its alternative uses. Would anybody be complaining if he'd have said "He's come in an absolutely murdered him"? Imagine that. Families of murder victims everywhere would be so outraged at the comparison between something as vile as murder and a football game. Cute argument. The comparison isn't valid because one has been watered down in everyday, common, accepted usage and one hasn't - and that's the difference. Sunday league footballers and Premiership managers don't constitute the majority of the population. And if you really want to dig down into connotation, there are circumstances (morally, if not legally) where you might justify murder as an act, thus giving it a plausible second meaning or use. I've yet to hear a strong argument for justifying rape. This is probably getting a bit silly now.... Anyway, more annoying is the fact that a no-mark like Alan Pardew gets to broadcast to the nation in the first place.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.