|
Post by fallheadsroll on Jul 18, 2015 20:47:13 GMT
Apparently the "glove" had its own peg ????
|
|
|
Post by philm87 on Jul 18, 2015 20:53:32 GMT
Squeekster: I would have thought violating someone's rectum is considered sexual abuse. But even if were not ''sexual'' abuse I don't see how it makes much difference. It doesn't really make much difference to anything I have said. If me calling you an ''apologist for rectal violation'' makes you feel better than calling you an ''apologist for sexual abuse'' than I am happy to oblige.
DOES WRITING IN CAPSLOCK AND ADDING EXTRA QUESTION MARKS MAKE YOUR ARGUMENT ANY LESS SILLY???????
But don't worry I will be having a long FUCKING REST now.
Trousers: If that's a metaphor then I disagree, although I will take the fact that you present your disagreement in the form of comic sketch metaphor as a backhanded compliment.
|
|
|
Post by Squeekster on Jul 18, 2015 21:12:47 GMT
Squeekster: I would have thought violating someone's rectum is considered sexual abuse. But even if were not ''sexual'' abuse I don't see how it makes much difference. It doesn't really make much difference to anything I have said. If me calling you an ''apologist for rectal violation'' makes you feel better than calling you an ''apologist for sexual abuse'' than I am happy to oblige. DOES WRITING IN CAPSLOCK AND ADDING EXTRA QUESTION MARKS MAKE YOUR ARGUMENT ANY LESS SILLY??????? But don't worry I will be having a long FUCKING REST now. Trousers: If that's a metaphor then I disagree, although I will take the fact that you present your disagreement in the form of comic sketch metaphor as a backhanded compliment. Good because you are just being argumentative for the sake of it,i have as have many as you put been abused but then because some one shouts at you that's abusing you! It doesn't matter if it's a finger a punch an in appropriate touch or what ever it was still abuse and again back then it was tolerated right or wrong now try to get that into your thick skull!# Shit bin this now because it's getting tedious.
|
|
|
Post by Trouserdog on Jul 18, 2015 21:27:39 GMT
Just to pick up on the 'sexual abuse' thing...
It's highly probable that, if this actually happened, it wasn't sexually motivated. But does that make the act itself any more acceptable? I don't think it does. Whether or not the perpetrator gets a sexual thrill out of it is neither here nor there- penetrating somebody's arsehole with one of your fingers is still penetrating someone's arsehole with one of your fingers, whether you got a stonk-on from doing it or not.
I can't think of a better way to categorise it than 'sexual abuse' or 'sexual assault' given the mechanics involved. If anybody has any better suggestions then shout up.
I understand the idea of cultural norms changing over time, but the whole "well, that kind of thing just went on then," doesn't wash I'm afraid. It was against the law in 1987 to violate someone's anus, just as it is now. While I think the whole idea of humiliation as an initiation ritual is pathetic, the vast majority of these things didn't involve actually entering someone's intimate orifices. I mean, for fuck's sake. Tying someone up, whipping their pants down and painting their bollocks blue is wrong, but it's in a whole different league than what's alleged to have happened at Stoke. Had I been the unfortunate recipient of some daft initiation then, like most people, I don't think it would have had any long-lasting effect on me and I'd have just got on with life. However, if I'd had something stuck up my arse, whether it was in 1987, 1967 or 2007 then I think I'd be pressing charges for assault.
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Jul 18, 2015 21:40:02 GMT
I am wondering if the folks who are telling us it was perfectly normal around this time to be pinned down by someone old enough to be your father and have a gloved, deep heat soaked finger shoved up your anus are the same people who tell us there were 50,000 in the Victoria Ground every week? It's just more misty-eyed nostalgia.
|
|
|
Post by Timmypotter on Jul 18, 2015 21:57:54 GMT
Why is it that cultural relativism (e.g. female genital mutilation is fine because it's what people do in some countries) is bad, but historical relativism (e.g. sticking deep heat up someone's bumhole is fine because it's what people did in the 80s) is OK?
|
|
|
Post by Squeekster on Jul 18, 2015 21:58:29 GMT
I am wondering if the folks who are telling us it was perfectly normal around this time to be pinned down by someone old enough to be your father and have a gloved, deep heat soaked finger shoved up your anus are the same people who tell us there were 50,000 in the Victoria Ground every week? It's just more misty-eyed nostalgia. That's the point it was the norm. So maybe it's just me so i'll start i was what is now considered abused back then does anyone else on here think they were? PS this has nothing to do with being nostalgic about football!
|
|
|
Post by philm87 on Jul 18, 2015 22:45:01 GMT
Squeekster: I would have thought violating someone's rectum is considered sexual abuse. But even if were not ''sexual'' abuse I don't see how it makes much difference. It doesn't really make much difference to anything I have said. If me calling you an ''apologist for rectal violation'' makes you feel better than calling you an ''apologist for sexual abuse'' than I am happy to oblige. DOES WRITING IN CAPSLOCK AND ADDING EXTRA QUESTION MARKS MAKE YOUR ARGUMENT ANY LESS SILLY??????? But don't worry I will be having a long FUCKING REST now. Trousers: If that's a metaphor then I disagree, although I will take the fact that you present your disagreement in the form of comic sketch metaphor as a backhanded compliment. Good because you are just being argumentative for the sake of it,i have as have many as you put been abused but then because some one shouts at you that's abusing you! It doesn't matter if it's a finger a punch an in appropriate touch or what ever it was still abuse and again back then it was tolerated right or wrong now try to get that into your thick skull!# Shit bin this now because it's getting tedious. Trousers' last post sums up what I would have said far better than I could have done myself. I can't really see how you can argue with it? Read what he said, then reread what you said. Admittedly, your inability to craft a coherent sentence perhaps gives him an unfair advantage but when I read your two arguments side by side I can't help but thinking he is talking a lot more sense than you and that you cannot really respond to him other than by missing the point. It doesn't have to be tedious. It is only tedious when you have to repeat the same point, over and over, without the other person being able to address it. There are plenty of other people here with ''thick skulls'' who understand your argument perfectly well, including people who were alive during the period you are describing, they just disagree with you for pretty similar reasons to those I have spelled out.
|
|
|
Post by hcstoke on Jul 18, 2015 23:09:58 GMT
Peter Fox is a Stoke City Hero. Even if he is found quilty we need to be on his side because he is one of our own.
|
|
|
Post by Squeekster on Jul 18, 2015 23:14:53 GMT
Good because you are just being argumentative for the sake of it,i have as have many as you put been abused but then because some one shouts at you that's abusing you! It doesn't matter if it's a finger a punch an in appropriate touch or what ever it was still abuse and again back then it was tolerated right or wrong now try to get that into your thick skull!# Shit bin this now because it's getting tedious. Trousers' last post sums up what I would have said far better than I could have done myself. I can't really see how you can argue with it? Read what he said, then reread what you said. Admittedly, your inability to craft a coherent sentence perhaps gives him an unfair advantage but when I read your two arguments side by side I can't help but thinking he is talking a lot more sense than you and that you cannot really respond to him other than by missing the point. It doesn't have to be tedious. It is only tedious when you have to repeat the same point, over and over, without the other person being able to address it. There are plenty of other people here with ''thick skulls'' who understand your argument perfectly well, including people who were alive during the period you are describing, they just disagree with you for pretty similar reasons to those I have spelled out. I think i have spelled out pretty much that it went on back than and it was accepted as the norm how hard is this for you or any one to disagree? It's a fact weather or not you choose to like it or not it was accepted as the norm and that's the point they can only disagree if they never experienced it but that doesn't mean it didn't happen does it? Oh and if i can't "craft a coherent sentence" you don't seem to have a problem being "coherent" with it!
|
|
|
Post by Trouserdog on Jul 18, 2015 23:16:13 GMT
I am wondering if the folks who are telling us it was perfectly normal around this time to be pinned down by someone old enough to be your father and have a gloved, deep heat soaked finger shoved up your anus are the same people who tell us there were 50,000 in the Victoria Ground every week? It's just more misty-eyed nostalgia. That's the point it was the norm. So maybe it's just me so i'll start i was what is now considered abused back then does anyone else on here think they were? PS this has nothing to do with being nostalgic about football! Throughout history, some absolutely dreadful things have been considered 'the norm' at certain times in certain countries...
|
|
|
Post by Squeekster on Jul 18, 2015 23:31:26 GMT
That's the point it was the norm. So maybe it's just me so i'll start i was what is now considered abused back then does anyone else on here think they were? PS this has nothing to do with being nostalgic about football! Throughout history, some absolutely dreadful things have been considered 'the norm' at certain times in certain countries... Yes and some still are continuing with the Neanderthal traits but America/South Africa and the like have seen the error of their ways and although still split within communities are moving on.
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Jul 24, 2015 19:36:02 GMT
Has Peter Fox's trial ended yet. Can't find anything online. What was the outcome?
|
|
|
Post by bassmaster on Jul 24, 2015 20:29:15 GMT
Has Peter Fox's trial ended yet. Can't find anything online. What was the outcome? He's in the shit again* *allegedly
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Jul 24, 2015 20:56:47 GMT
Has Peter Fox's trial ended yet. Can't find anything online. What was the outcome? He's in the shit again* *allegedly What's happened?
|
|
|
Post by pistol on Jul 24, 2015 21:05:32 GMT
I mean this whole topic should be removed as discussion of an active court case is not allowed and can be cited as contempt of court and lead to a mis-trial
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2015 21:07:45 GMT
I mean this whole topic should be removed as discussion of an active court case is not allowed and can be cited as contempt of court and lead to a mis-trial Are you sure about that?
|
|
|
Post by Gifton on Jul 24, 2015 22:36:09 GMT
I'm staggered by the time and effort some folk seem to have spent on this thread!
Some of the posts smack of having been written, reread and edited to death in an apparent attempt to appear more enlightened and intelligent than the last.
Get a grip lads....
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Jul 26, 2015 7:22:33 GMT
One very important message we should all learn from this thread............Never, ever put the ANUSOL piles relief cream on the same shelf of your bathroom cabinet as DEEP HEAT muscle rub, just in case there is a power cut.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2015 8:32:39 GMT
I mean this whole topic should be removed as discussion of an active court case is not allowed and can be cited as contempt of court and lead to a mis-trial Are you sure about that? nope he's talking shit...unless it's someone involved in the case that's on here discussing it.and it's also not a criminal trial anyway. apart from all that,he's bob on (if he's in an episode on ironside anyway). He may want to stick to his TV programmes and possibly see if he can get in touch with Jessica Fletcher to see if she can crack the case!
|
|
|
Post by kidcrewbob on Jul 26, 2015 9:07:09 GMT
This is such a bizarre case and I do not know who to believe TBH - there was almost certainly some form of treatment handed out to juniors as was common place in the day although my experience of this was being sent to the stores for a "long weight" or 200g bag of dehydrated water, fetching chips, papers, fags for all and sundry until another junior came along etc etc - I had heard other lads telling tales of having their nether regions caked in axle grease and iron filings and the like down these pit or the PMT garages where they were allegedly tied to a rotating prop shaft and pulled up into the air by a running bus on a hydraulic ramp???? BUT what is described in this case is just aggravated assault and if true in all gruesome detail Foxy (and others involved) should be severely punished for it - even unproven it brings shame to our club and that is most disappointing given what we are doing and have done to establish ourselves as a well run family club these last 15 years or so - obviously I hope it's not true and it never happened of course but why would someone make up such an extreme detailed story - an outside chance of compo doesn't convince me either.
|
|
|
Post by skip on Jul 27, 2015 8:20:54 GMT
One very important message we should all learn from this thread............Never, ever put the ANUSOL piles relief cream on the same shelf of your bathroom cabinet as DEEP HEAT muscle rub, just in case there is a power cut. Whatever happened to the Oatcake's very own Mr Anusol?
|
|
|
Post by estima on Jul 27, 2015 9:03:34 GMT
Well at least he didn't allegedly go in dry. Allegedly. And allegedly lubed up the alleged glove. Allegedly. That's thoughtful.
|
|
|
Post by SamB_SCFC on Jul 27, 2015 9:23:02 GMT
I must admit when I first heard about this I thought it was just one of those stupid initiation things that used to go on in the past, like greased bollocks, sending people out for a bag of sparks etc and thought that the accuser was after a bit of compo and jumping on the Jimmy Savile 'let's all drag things up from decades ago and try to get some money' bandwagon. However reading into it in more detail if Foxy did indeed shove his finger up his anus that does take things into a different league and if true I'm afraid he deserves what's coming to him.
In some ways I think the way football apprentices used to be treated was actually a good thing, paying them small wages making them clean the boots and mop out the changing rooms etc built character and encouraged them to work hard and make it as a professional so one day someone would be cleaning their boots and mopping up after them. Compared to today's academy players who get well paid for their age and are mollycoddled and live a life of luxury despite having not achieved a thing and not got anywhere near the first team. What is alleged though clearly crosses the boundaries if true and it'll be a sad day if he is found guilty.
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Jul 27, 2015 12:10:00 GMT
Is this trial still running. If so this is the 4th week isn't it?
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Jul 27, 2015 12:19:47 GMT
This is such a bizarre case and I do not know who to believe TBH - there was almost certainly some form of treatment handed out to juniors as was common place in the day although my experience of this was being sent to the stores for a "long weight" or 200g bag of dehydrated water, fetching chips, papers, fags for all and sundry until another junior came along etc etc - I had heard other lads telling tales of having their nether regions caked in axle grease and iron filings and the like down these pit or the PMT garages where they were allegedly tied to a rotating prop shaft and pulled up into the air by a running bus on a hydraulic ramp???? BUT what is described in this case is just aggravated assault and if true in all gruesome detail Foxy (and others involved) should be severely punished for it - even unproven it brings shame to our club and that is most disappointing given what we are doing and have done to establish ourselves as a well run family club these last 15 years or so - obviously I hope it's not true and it never happened of course but why would someone make up such an extreme detailed story - an outside chance of compo doesn't convince me either. Take some making up wouldn't it? But that in itself would not constitute evidence. I really don't know what to think. I'd need to see the faces of the defendant and the alleged victim to have any meaningful opinion at all. It's pretty tawdry stuff, that is for sure.
|
|
|
Post by JoeinOz on Jul 27, 2015 12:28:06 GMT
There seems little doubt it all happened. The issue at stake is context. Although even for the raucous days of 80s football it's inexcusable. Initiation ceremonies to humiliate people has no place anywhere. It's one aspect where societies have improved.
|
|
|
Post by northstaffycher on Jul 27, 2015 21:30:14 GMT
It could have been much, much worse. Imagine if those big sponge supporters' fan-hands were around in the 1980's.
|
|
|
Post by pottermost on Jul 28, 2015 2:56:29 GMT
You wouldn't want to be the kit man collecting his gloves, in fact, if I were him I think I'd sue! In all seriousness though, if this is true then Fox does need to be dealt with, he should prepare himself for some heavy probing. And what about the defendant? Perhaps his argument is moving with the aid of some unadvertised lubrication. The whole things a minefield, the jurors really need to pull their fingers out.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2015 12:34:25 GMT
So what is happening with the court case?
|
|