George Hook

Darraghn92 wrote: He specifically states that there is personal responsibility on women who are raped. This coming from the same George Hook who, in his autobiography, talks about how deliberately gets women drunk whilst staying sober: 'When I pull up to collect her I notice that she's wearing black eye-shadow. We go into the bar and she asks for a gin and tonic. Where I come from, the only women who drink gin and tonic and wear eye-shadow are fallen ones. I'm thinking I've struck gold. It's the Klondike: fill your boots! I'm afraid to have a gin and tonic myself because I can't hold my drink. So I order tonic water for myself while pushing the G&T's into her'

From the transcript I read he made it clear she scumbags should be jailed.

I detest the man and have known him for over 30 years but some of what he says makes sense and I would never blame a girl for been raped but would strongly advise all girls to consider their own personal safety before going off witn a stranger.

As I said bring him to her room so she knows who else may or may not be there. That's not excusing the scumbag or blaming her it's suggesting ways of voiding harm nothing less.

Darraghn92 wrote: He specifically states that there is personal responsibility on women who are raped. This coming from the same George Hook who, in his autobiography, talks about how deliberately gets women drunk whilst staying sober: 'When I pull up to collect her I notice that she's wearing black eye-shadow. We go into the bar and she asks for a gin and tonic. Where I come from, the only women who drink gin and tonic and wear eye-shadow are fallen ones. I'm thinking I've struck gold. It's the Klondike: fill your boots! I'm afraid to have a gin and tonic myself because I can't hold my drink. So I order tonic water for myself while pushing the G&T's into her'

greenforever wrote: Advising people to be careful does not u rape is ever right

It's not "advise" after the event. It's "judgement".

I'm not a fan of George hook whatsoever, but actually feel bad for him as the whole interview hasn't been taken into context, rather zoning in on one sentence. certainly don't agree with fintan o'toole's attack on newstalk as a whole in his latest article. almost like a personal vendetta against the radio station. he should have stayed on topic of conversation about what hook said, and start a national discussion on the stigma around cases that question the consent of sex. but I suppose o'toole is riding the egotistical wave that has built under his opinions over the past while.previously sat on a jury for a rape case. difficult to take in the information at the time, but once deliberating, I was shocked at the reactions of some of my fellow jurors.

Is it true he brought the Big Mac to Ireland??

I'm not missing the point.

I'd say a lot of that protest would be against him and an poortunity to get him out as opposed to his comments. And I'd say Fintan O'Tooles piece was similar, it's a small place everyone knows everyone.

I Don't like Hook, nor do I completely agree with his comments. But all this hysteria and faux outrage following the incident is vomit inducing. People are using this for their own anti Hook agenda and some are just using it to outright virtue signal. Another exercise in who can be shown to be the most outraged.

flipper wrote: I Don't like Hook, nor do I completely agree with his comments. But all this hysteria and faux outrage following the incident is vomit inducing. People are using this for their own anti Hook agenda and some are just using it to outright virtue signal. Another exercise in who can be shown to be the most outraged. Hes a public commentator with sometimes controversial views, however in this instance he makes some vaguely valid points that a lot of people would agree with somewhat. Clayton hotels and other sponsors are well within their rights to discontinue their association with Newstalk, but this concerted effort to ruin his career/life because it goes against this new forced accepted narrative is part of something much more worrying. Also Id like to add, the accused in this case has been found not guilty of one count and the jury could not reach a verdict on the other as there were many holes/inconsistencies in the girls story. (This happened before Hooks comments afaik) Every single news outlet reporting on Hooks comments that I read failed to mention this. Why?  Theres a reasonable chance the accused may actually be the only victim in this case. to all the people losing their sh*t over Hook for 'victim blaming' but at the same time calling the guy a scumbag, how will you feel if he is exonerated and you become guilty of victim abuse?

Spot the virgin.