Weenz ft Dirt and Niamh – Local Celebrity
David writes:
The Rubber Bandits shared this video online produced by some of the guys involved with ‘Horse Outside’, it’s shockingly bad, sexist and gross. Definitely one for ‘the lads’. Probably enjoyed by the same kind of ‘lads’ who thought it was cool to surround my girlfriend on her own on Camden Street and grab her ass and laugh and at her, or the ones who thought it was cool to kiss her on the face as they walked past us last weekend in Temple Bar while we were out to dinner with both our parents.
It’s really disappointing that the very witty and funny Rubber Bandits would be associated with this sort of stuff because it’s promoting a lad culture that does not respect women at all, they barely have respect for themselves. The video and the lyrics are not ironic, they are disgusting. What I expect you to do about this I really don’t know.
Fight!
Haven’t watched the video, but I’m sure it’s crap and distasteful. David sounds like a right willy.
I don’t think you get the joke mate, even if it’s not a good one. How you can attach it to some random incident that happened your girlfriend is beyond me? Jesus
Because joke ironic sexism is hilarious even if it’s not funny and if you don’t laugh along there’s something wrong with you. People grabbing and kissing you in public is hilarious and if you don’t laugh along there’s something wrong with you.
How is the video in any way related to those unfortunate incidents that happened to David’s girlfriend?
He says why he thinks it’s related. Right there in what he wrote.
Video blocked at work, but this post is really about David wanting to talk about his girlfriend anyway, so it hardly matters.
I don’t think David gets the joke…
Is it a Traveller thing?
a time traveller thing
What fella in his right mind brings his girlfriend with both parents into Temple Bar on a weekend night…… classy!
And in fairness, nothing in the video I haven’t seen on X-Factor. I hope you complained about that too.
Can’t say for the lyrics… I dunno.
There’s some nice places in Temple Bar.
…in the middle of Xmas party season? :)
Yeah, it’s David’s fault his girlfriend got molested
haha molested.
Also yes it is.
If he wasn’t looking like he’d lick the boots of the men who did it then they wouldn’t have done it.
That’s not my point Stewie :)
Both acts are sexual assault Joe, so yeah, not that funny.
Also, what’s with the jokes about men who have sex with men? What’s wrong with that?
Hang on, are you are saying that what happened to David’s girlfriend is David’s fault because he presumed she would be unmolested in a public place? (or any place come to that)
A woman has the right to walk down a dark alley called “Murder’s hangout” in a bikini if she so wishes and should not be molested.
David, that video is clearly holding up lad culture to ridicule.
While I agree that it’s ridiculous to blame david for that, trying to suggest that anyone who walks down a dark alley called ‘Murder’s Hangout’ can ensure their safety with well honed moral outrage is a bit naieve.
So you think that there are circumstances in which it is perfectly acceptable to molest a woman based on her behaviour?
Actually I retract that question for this one:
So do you think that there are circumstances in which it is perfectly acceptable to molest ANYONE (man, woman, teenager, child) based on their behaviour?
My dog used roll over with his legs spawled out and up into the air and his belly and balls wobbling in the light of the fire.
I said ‘no’ sternly.
Going from what rotide said to putting it to him that he thinks it’s acceptable is unfair and to be honest when I saw you followed up with a retraction I thought that was the edit you’d be making.
Well you were wrong.
I was indeed.
A woman absolutely has the right to walk down a dark alley called “Murder’s hangout” in a bikini if she so wishes but she needs to remember that the people likely to molest her don’t give a damn about her rights. It’s a tough but necessary balance between what’s my right and what’s simply dangerous and stupid. That’s not a subtle attempt at victim blaming either.
You can say you are not victim blaming but you are really by implying that it is the victim’s fault for triggering the attention of the person that wanted to have their way with them. but she needs to remember that the people likely to molest her don’t give a damn about her rights
Wouldn’t the well honed moral outrage be better directed at anyone likely to molest anyone regardless of the circumstances in which they felt entitled to do such a thing?
“They were up for it”, “they wanted it”, “they put themselves in harms way” “she’s a slag anyway” … these are all excuses used by sex offenders. You by, your words have shown just how insidious that their sense of entitlement over other people’s bodies are.
No, I’m really not. I’m saying that she’s free to do so and within her rights to do so but the simple fact remains that there are lowlife scum out there who will not hesitate to justify their actions with “she was asking for it” and all the other examples you offer. There is a balance between “I have a right to do this” and “if I do this there are scumbags out there who may take advantage.” The decision to be made is whether exercising my rights is worth the risk. That’s not vicitm blaming, that’s just common sense.
The reality is that criminals will always find justification for their actions and people in parkas are as likely to be assaulted as people in miniskirts. It is possible to reduce the probability of being a victim but the decision to try and make you a victim remains entirely with the scumbag. Criminals don’t care about the rights of their victims. If they did they would not commit crimes.
There is a balance between “I have a right to do this” and “if I do this there are scumbags out there who may take advantage.”
At least you are taking the responsibility for the wrong doing out of the hands of the victim now and putting it where it belongs, with the scumbags.
It is possible to reduce the probability of being a victim but the decision to try and make you a victim remains entirely with the scumbag. Can you not see how these two statements completely contradict each other? First of all, it does not apply to the real world –
Hey, little child that was attacked, you did not do enough to stop yourself being molested.
Hey, man with red hair, here we see red haired people as being suitable fodder for murder so we can chop them up and put them in our magic potions.
Hey, woman just off the plane without a hijab, here we throw people like you in prison.
If you accept that fact that people have a responsibility to reduce their likelihood of being a victim, you have to accept that if anything happens to them, it is partially their fault. You know, that victim blaming you are so keen to distance yourself from.
Either someone is complicit in being attacked or they are not. You can’t have it both ways. And if you are insistent that there are circumstances in which someone will get “what is coming to them”, you are using the language and rationale of the scumbags.
Anne, nowhere have I said a victim is to blame. Nowhere have I said that people have a responsibility to reduce their likelihood of being a victim. I have never mentioned anyone getting what was coming to them.
What I have said is that people can reduce the likelihood of being a victim. Not should. Not must. Can.
I have also said that criminals will always find a justifiation for their actions which means that all the preventative measures in the world can amount to nothing if some scrote decides that you are going to be their victim. The scrote is always to blame, never the victim. If someone takes measures to reduce the likelihood of being a victim then that is a good thing. If, despite these measures, or having not taken other measures available to them, someone becomes a victim then that is not their fault. It’s the lowlife scumbag’s fault.
You need to understand how the scumbags think. They don’t care that you can wear your bikini in public. They don’t care that you can wear your parka in public. They don’t care that you have a right to walk down an alleyway. They don’t care that you have the right to take the longer, well lit route. They want a victim. More importantly, they want an easy victim. It is possible to make yourself less appealing as a victim but there is no guarantee and whether a victim took every measure or no measure it is still the scumbag’s fault. My interest is not in blaming the victim. My interest is in making people aware that it is possible to reduce the risk. Not remove the risk. Not blame people if they don’t take all measures to reduce the risk. Just make people aware that it’s possible to reduce it.
Your terminology is interesting and I am actually glad to see it evolving:
people can reduce the likelihood of being a victim
You need to understand how the scumbags think
How about turning that on its head:
No-one will tolerate scumbag behaviour
Everyone shows their scorn of people who are scumbags
The courts will penalise these people to the maximum of their abilities
Because if you accept that people can reduce the likelihood of being a victim the first question that is asked when someone is attacked will be why didn’t they reduce the chances of being a victim? Answer: Because they were ‘asking for it’ (Example: Multiple attacks on US campus where the victim was described in this way)
In the cut and dry case of a stranger with a record for sexual offences attacking someone, that scumbag is easy to sentence. However, what about the football player that is popular, good-looking and also holds the belief that they are entitled to “take” anyone that they want. In that case people ask what the victim did to avoid being attacked, looking at her sexual history and deeming her “up for it”
In that case, under your logic, where people can reduce the likelihood of being a victim she should not go anywhere near the person who attacked her. How does that even work? Should people move countries to avoid attacks they are not aware might happen?
You are determined to twist whatever I say into me blaming the victim despite my repeatedly stating that the victim is never to blame.
At a recent self defence class a girl asked me how to defend against a punch from behind. She said her boyfriend had been attacked that way and she wanted to be sure it didn’t happen to her. I asked her for more information. She said they had been walking towards a bus stop and a load of lads were sitting on a wall. As they passed them one lad stepped in front of her friend and asked a typical “what did you say about me?” type question. Then another one punched him from behind.
Those idiots were looking for someone to punch. Did I tell her it was her mates fault? No. Did I teach her a super ninja move to protect from a punch from behind? No. I told her that those idiots were looking for someone to punch and unfortunately that someone was her friend. I also told her that the best way to defend against such an attack is to avoid it. I told her that the next time she sees this scenarion a safer option is to cross the road and if some of them also cross, turn around and walk back the way she came.
I was not blaming her or her friend for what happened. Instead I showed her how to spot the danger and avoid it. Telling her that she had the right to walk past them without her friend getting a dig would be entirely true and entirely useless.
Steps can be taken to avoid danger and to reduce the likelihood of being a victim. Teaching people those steps in no way puts the responsibility on them to follow them. Nor does it make being attacked their fault.
Where did I ever suggest tolerating scumbag behaviour? We have a dedicated policing, judicial and prison service because we refuse to tolerate scumbag behaviour. That doesn’t stop scumbags turning new people into victims every day. Telling the girl above that the guys were scumbags and what they did was terrible would be entirely true and also entirely useless.
It’s all well and good having these wordgames on the internet but the reality is that scumbags are out there, ignoring our rights and our law enforcement agencies, and looking for people to turn into victims. You can spend your time going to self defence classes and telling the instructors and students that they are all victim blaming if you like but as long as I can help prevent someone from becoming a victim by teaching them something then I will continue to do so. And while doing so I will continue to blame the scumbag and never the victim.
What other people ask victims when looking to get good looking footballers off sexual assault cases is not my responsibility. I sugest you take that up with people who are actively victim blaming. There are plenty of examples of them in this thread but, despite my wilingness to engage with you on the topic, I am not one of them.
I have replied to this but I messed up my email address so now it’s awaiting moderation. I bet you can’t wait ;)
Bertie, I understand how you intend for your words to be used but unfortunately you are using the language of people who victim blame.
Victim blaming has greater consequences than just some woman hating dicks on the Internet speculating if a woman is up for it or not. It leads to lenient (or no) sentencing for scumbags and cuts to councelling and other services for victims. Why as a country are we not holding the Catholic church in a choke hold to compensate for all the lives they ruined? Why doesn’t every proven attacker get a minimum mandatory sentence? Because the attitude that the victim could have / should have / can do something to avoid being attacked is dominant in our legal system too. Therefore the scumbag does not have to take responsibility for all of the crime. It’s sick.
How could this woman and her child have avoided being punched on a public bus?
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/barechested-thug-punches-woman-and-teenage-girl-during-racist-attack-on-london-bus-a3112276.html
How could this woman and man have avoided being beaten up on a public bus?
http://www.thejournal.ie/dublin-bus-attack-2-2143243-Jun2015/
How could this woman have avoided being smashed in the face, ignored by police and then victim-blamed by some douche on the Internet :
http://m.dailylife.com.au/news-and-views/dl-opinion/why-are-police-still-ignoring-alleged-victims-of-domestic-violence-20151215-glocxq.html
Vera,
I have never suggested that I have a magic trick that will remove any and all threat so you listing examples of people that were assaulted and asking me to monday morning quarterback their way out of the situation is a waste of your time and mine.
I don’t work in the criminal justice system and I’m not about to get dragged into a sidebar about sentencing of guilty scumbags.
It is possible to reduce the danger and stating that simple fact is not vicitm blaming. Going by your logic, teaching the safe cross code in schools is the same as saying that everyone who ever got knocked down was at fault.
Again, playing word games on the internet is all well and good but it means nothing when some criminal scumbag is looking for an easy target.
What a poo song. Small man’s disease.
I knew David would get mauled for this post. I’m sorry that happened to you and your girlfriend David. These people were clearly bottomholes. Unfortunately they don’t need any lad culture to be so.
You should post in on Broadsheet or something.
Should go away faster that way
Dave complains about publicity seeking promo video by promoting publicity seeking promo video. It’s just like being John Malkovich…
yes correct burt….small man syndrome…. this is the only action this guys gets, hes probably ignored by women every day of the week, unless like in the video, he pays them!
Anyone who thinks this is funny needs a labotomy.
Fine, so long as it is not a cat.
There have been worse ‘Decent Irish Hip Hop’ submissions here in fairness and this one gets coverage because some fella relates it to a bad night out in Temple Bar?
He’s taking the urine out of himself, David.
‘Dirt’ has talent too, I’ll add.
So put a quarter in your ass cos you played yourself
Methinks Prop Joe doth protest too much.
Unhappy people are very easy to spot. Merry Christmas, Joseph.
I love the haha I’m hilarious to you’re vomit in two comments that really are typical of the underlying aggression behind this kind of humour.
You’re not wrong Nigel
However it does appear to be somewhere in the region of self-aware after a couple of viewings. Hard to say for sure
What’s the bet that Prop Joe is Jonotti considering his rugby claim to fame? Explains the tone of the comments.
This is the second time I’ve been told I’m Jonotti
I’d like to meet this guy.
Seriously though, I’m not him.
Nigel upsets me greatly. He’s an apologist for everything. Not a liberal. He is spineless.
Says the guy acting as an apologist for sexual assault.
Rubber Bandits? Yawn. One horse joke, are they still here?
Haha one horse joke
You’re the Ringo Starr of the group aren’t you?
I thought that was you?
Here Don, I hate to do this but I will have to explain the joke to you I think.
Song by the name of A Hard Days Night, came from a Ringo quote which made no sense, he had intended to say “A hard days work”, but got the words mixed up in his head.
Likewise “2 foot small” from You’ve Got To Hide Your Love Away was a Ringo sentence which made no sense.
What I’ve done above is draw a comparison between those two examples and the mistake made by Willie Banjo. What he said was “One horse joke”, you see he made a mistake and has the basic idea of what the saying is in his head – the correct saying is “one trick pony”
Now back to your civil service job you fat hack.
And I was making the illusion to the fact that you are desperate to be noticed, like Ringo.
“Now back to your civil service job you fat hack.”
Charmed, I’m sure. Is that the best you got?
allusion*
See?
See what? Your allusion or your illusion?
David f*g Copperfield here
Fig? Fog?
Don’t know him.
I will. Will the cancer come before or after I get my golden handshake from my fat hack civil service job? It would be good to know.
Oh, so you don’t know. Will I catch the cancer from Facebook then?
We criticise in others the faults we see in ourselves.
Something to think about Joe.
And there it is again. Explain the joke, attack anyone who doesn’t find you funny. And people have a hard time understanding the link between that kind of video and public groping and kissing?
Why don’t you explain that link to us Nigel
His meaning seems clear. ‘Probably enjoyed by the same kind of lads’ and ‘promoting lad culture’ are the links he refers to, I’m not sure it’s that difficult to understand, though perhaps witnessing something like that happen to somone you care about might make your tolerance for that sort of video plummet. To elaborate, I expect he views the sexism of the video as an artifact of a sexist culture that exploits and female sexuality to an almost parodic degree, and which, in a post-modern world, often sees videos like this which do parody that sexist culture, ironically using supposed satire as a license to go ahead and exploit female sexuality. That culture manifests itself in the public domain in the form of young men who see women as sexual objects to be exploited and toyed with for their own amusement, and any who do not share in or object to that amusement will soon experience the sharp end of the belligerence and violence that underlies these assumptions. We’ve already seen some comments here having a go at people for finding that sort of behaviour objectionable, questioning David’s masculinity and throwing a bit of homophobia at him just for fun. Just in case you had your doubts.
You really love the look of your own text, don’t you.
I think anyone with eyes in their head can make that sort of comparison. I had hoped for something better from you. You’d be better off exploring the clear viral marketing aspect of it.
If any of these “assualts” actually took place, which i doubt, then this video would not be to blame any more or less than david himself would be.
*asks someone to explain, tells them explanation is showing off*
Excellent stuff.
Could do with an edit function to tidy it up, actually.
So you’re agreeing with me.
No way to really prove or disprove it, but unless you’re denying that this sort of harassment goes on all the time, then this video and videos like it are not to blame so much as they are indicative of the way women are treated, and comment threads like this are indicative of the way people who criticise this are treated, though in fairness Journal.ie would probably be a lot worse.
Please stop Joe.
Your slip is showing…
If it makes you feel better, I totally objectified him while watching the video. Looks good with his top off.
Turns out you can only objectify people positively on BS. We all learned something today…
David dude, relax. And as above, I really don’t get the connection between the inappropriate attention towards your girlfriend and a music video which is clearly a parody. Have you banned all the music channels on TV as well? And obviously most TV programmes are a no go for you, due to the inevitable innuendos. I’m sure they’ll offend you rightly.
Have a nice cup of tea and throw on the Late Late tonight.
Cool story David, bro.
So some broadsheet readers think it’s either David or his girlfriend’s fault she was assaulted? Or that the assaults were funny or trivial.
Tolerance towards people of all sexual persuasions but ok to grab a girl by the bottom. Hypocrites!
No they don’t.
They think David is making some massive leap to connect his video with an unverified and unrelated incident, I think people probably object to the use of the term “lad culture”
“I think”
Well that’s news.
Niall on head
David,
I think you secretly get off on this. Freudian.
Amazing work David. Not since I pretended that Westlife were killed in a plane crash to promote ‘flying without wings’ have I seen such an excellent piece of stealth promotion. You’ll go far in this game.
lol
How come David couldn’t stop some other guy kissing his partner? I’d imagine her parents witnessing the incident marks you down as a terrible suitor.
…all sounds a bit makey uppy in fairness :)
Yeah, they’d probably have been impressed if he bate him to a pulp
That’s exactly what I thought. He needs to toughen up a bit and stop blaming the world for his inadequacies
Why should he? There’s plenty who’ll do all the blaming for his girlfriend being assaulted on him and his girlfriend and give the lads who did it a pass as being hilarious and in no way influenced by a culture that makes hilarious sexist videos. Or perhaps the videos are influenced by guys who think sexual assault is hilarious? Who can tell? Either way the guy talking about it is the guy to blame.
Your outrage knows no bounds Nigel.
Haha no, I’m joking, I’m being ironic, it’s ironic outrage and your response shows you are humourless and dry and can’t take a joke and should get a life and stop whining.
No, I got that you were joking. But every comment I see from you on broadsheet is one of outrage, usually at some perceived injustice suffered by women. I’d be surprised if you were really a man.
I wasn’t really joking at all. I’m not surprised you think that questioning my masculinity means anything.
Joking/ sarcasm.. whatever.
Bottom line: you’re a girl’s blouse.
And you think that’s some kind of insult.
Not if you agree with the description!
What is it with Broadsheet and the blue shirts and the girls’ blouses?
This should really get Nigel’s dander up
https://vimeo.com/103686907
“while we were out to dinner with both our parents.”
Oh no, one of THOSE couples who can’t wait to be in their 60s.
They could be 60 and their parents very elderly.
How awful for the 20 gyrating women in the video that they were made to gyrate at gunpoint and disrespect themselves like that.
Who the feck’s this David fellah?
Some mighty fine anger in the comments today. Good work everyone. Job and knock…let’s hit the pub.
Really getting into the Christmas spirit!
The Blind Pig it is then – shall we say 3 bells?
Finally! Some sense.
Wait till you see the responses to actual christmas posts!
I wish to redact my comments above. Having reread David’s post and noticed that he describes rubber bandits as “very witty and funny” he’s totally lost my respect.
They’re pretty poo all right.. I had to put the video on mute after a few seconds.
Woefully bad plop is being too kind to them.
parody no?
I got the arse grabbed off me in Coppers circa 2009 and moved to get this filth banned and no one gave a sh!t!
Laddette culture!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJDGcxAf9D8
… https://youtu.be/PFjYNJiOXtA
What with all the butter face in that video.
Rubber bandits are artists and above reproach, if you have a problem with them its because you dont recognise the artistic value of everything they do and any criticism of them is why they say all great Irish artists leave the country
https://www.instagram.com/p/_b9XtFLbHb/
The ginger in the video – is he a dwarf or what? Little leprechaun men acting the bollix