158Kviews
“Look at the way she was dressed…”: Women Tweet Their Underwear Pics After Lawyer Blames Teen In Rape Trial
“You have to look at the way she was dressed. She was wearing a thong with a lace front.” These words, uttered by a female defence lawyer at a rape trial in Ireland, were used to argue that the sexual contact between the accused and a 17-year-old girl was, in fact, consensual.
The 27-year-old man was acquitted of rape soon after. The use of the girl's underwear as evidence against her has sparked furious protests in Ireland and beyond, with people in disbelief that this kind of 'victim blaming' still occurs within the legal system of a developed European country.
In the city of Cork, where the trial took place, women took to the streets to lay underwear outside the courthouse, seeking 'the end of victim blaming in the courts.' The protests soon spread to other cities and online, where women have been posting photos of their own underwear on social media under the hashtag #ThisIsNotConsent.
The issues of sexual harassment and what constitutes consent have been major talking points since the #MeToo campaign, which began to question the archaic social norms that have been accepted for far too long. These protests highlight what really should be obvious by now: there is no such thing as an item of clothing that implies consent, no matter how 'cute' or 'sexy' it may appear.
Scroll down below to check out the campaign for yourself, and let us know what you think in the comments.
This post may include affiliate links.
shoot him in the d**k. he was asking for it, he doesn't wear bulletproof underpants
My thoughts exactly! It's not like she was walking around with her knickers on and nothing else for crying out loud. I'm sure she wouldn't have consented to being undressed either.
they want to make rules "every woman that use thong can be raped legally", this is just an excuse
I know, if it was her or someone she knows I bet she'd blame the actual criminal! But no-one should be raped anyway, she needs to get her act together.
There is no "allegedly" here. She was outright SAYING that the girl asked to be raped because she had lacy underthings that the rapist didn't even see until he dragged her by the throat into a dark alley to attack her.
Underwear is just that its under something, so how could a girl be asking for it as it wasn't seen till he had gone to far. Rape is Rape a girl could be naked it doesn't mean she wants someone to have sex with her. Consent is from two people not just one. This 27yr old needs to be on the other side and see how he would like it.
The sign reads: "Men think women dress for them. Dude, please. We dress according to our waxing schedules, periods, mood swings, location, season, matching shoes, marching bags, matching lipstick, availability of suitable underwear. You're not even on that list. So chill"
Underwear is just that its under something, so how could a girl be asking for it as it wasn't seen till he had gone to far. Rape is Rape a girl could be naked it doesn't mean she wants someone to have sex with her. Consent is from two people not just one. This 27yr old needs to be on the other side and see how he would like it.
Underwear is just that its under something, so how could a girl be asking for it as it wasn't seen till he had gone to far. Rape is Rape a girl could be naked it doesn't mean she wants someone to have sex with her. Consent is from two people not just one. This 27yr old needs to be on the other side and see how he would like it.
This is making me both ragingly furious and wanting to ask many of these women where they got their underwear because they are so cute
If this happened in the US, which I'm sure it has, I would not be surprised considering who our dictator is.
This is not about clothes, this is never about the clothes. And child never consent. Yet, justice doesn't seems to understand this basic stuff. This is how a man that raped an 11 yo in France was only charged with sexual abuse and not rape. She had follow him and was to paralized to say "no". The Court decided that in this case there was "no violence, no coercion, no threat, no surprise"... He was pursued because he shouldn't have sex with a minor, not because he raped her. This world is sick AF.
Whoooaaa... TF is wrong with that lawyer.. im a guy... im with that woman.. no means NO..
Good for you. Keep it up, we need more of you men out there
Load More Replies...
So let me see... if she had worn granny pants, that would have stopped the rapist in his tracks? "Sorry, ma'am, I thought you consented. So the screaming and fighting wasn't all for show?"
If that was true, no one with "normal" underwear would get raped. O a side note, lets start suing underwear companies as their sexy stuff is the sole cause for rape, as a woman can't say no while wearing it and man aren't considered responsible
So the defense was, "Once he dragged into the alley and pulled of her clothes it was OK to penetrate her with his penis because she was wearing a thong." Rape is determined by her clothing. Elizabeth O'Connell is the reason I don't care if there's a heaven, but I hope that there's a HELL.
If this is evidence then every woman diserves it because every woman has pretty underwear. This backwards logic needs to stop. On a dating site my profile pic is a yellow t-shirt sweater brown shrug and basic make-up. A man sent me nudes stating that the way my sewater cupped my breasts was why he sent it. Men dont need to see underwear to rape if thats what they're mindset is already doing without seeing underwear. If you can't handle seeing a pretty girl without thinking like a predictor then you shouldn't be on the planet period. We're not toys nor do we want it or because we want to dress sexy beg for it. There's men then then theres predators. Men don't objectify us men care men understand and support. Predators are just as they are predators
This is infuriating... victim blaming should be a top level felon and any judge, defending lawyer, or clueless jury who allow it should be punished to the full extent of the law... no means no
No woman is "asking for it" unless they actually ask for it. It doesn't matter what they're wearing. Plus, he wouldn't know what she was wearing unless he undressed her and proceeded to rape her. NO MEANS NO
Truly, who was worse, the lawyer or the jury for actually taking it into account??
I really hope that lawyer is wearing boxers, because he is really asking for a series of professionally delivered punches.
It's totally insane and disgusting that a judge in a civilised country even lets a scumbag lawyer present the victim's underwear as evidence for consentual sex. Sadly it's not only this judge, but a lot of judges refuse to admit that times have changed. They are consciously denying women the right to be who they want to be, to dress how they want to dress or to look how they want to look. If it's up to these judges noone gets convicted for rape or sexual harrasment. They'll always find that the victims provoced the rapist because of something they said or didn;'t say, did or didn't do. And this is not the first time that a rapist gets off because the judge thinks that the victim shouldn't have dressed the way she did. I wonder if there politicians in Ireland who have the guts to call this judge out on his verdict. Problably not, "because politicians shouldn't interfere in the legal system."
Well.. I can't beat someone up because he looked like he was asking for it! So why is this way of thinking taken into account in rape cases?! Really weird. Or another example.. just because it looked like a parking spot when it isn't one doesn't save you from getting towed right?
Asking for sex and asking for rape are different anyway. It’s not even logically possible to ask to be coerced.
Load More Replies...
I normally don't swear on the internet, but FOR F**K SAKE!!!!! I said it a million times and will say it all the time: a person should be able to walk f****n' NAKED and not be touched!!!
And there was me thinking nothing can shock me.... this story DID...... as for the lawyer, I wonder what underwear SHE had on...
I cannot comprehend why we even have to prove that underwaer is not a reason for raping. This is all so messed up.
Absolutely a deplorable "argument" to show consent and I think it should not be allowed in any court, but it also doesn't mean he was guilty or that the lawyer's statement was the reason they acquitted him.
Hans, I reread too. There was a witness who saw the guy holding the victims for her throat. And a second witness who thaught somethings not right and asked "Is everything ok" but the convicted told him to mind his own buissiness in a rude manner so noone intervened. Also as known from my own experience bystanders rarely help and if he was holding her throat she was too scared and uncapable to answer herself which most ppl prefer to accept conviniently as "all cool" Both witnesses were dissmissed as being not giving enough information.
Or maybe the prosecuting lawyer should have called the judge as a witness about his/ her underwear, so we can see what that judge is "asking for", based solely on his/her tighty-whiteys. Or how about making sure everyone in the courtroom is wearing a chastity belt, regardless of sex/gender? After all, that dependent can't get a fair trial if anyone in the courtroom is wearing the wrong underwear and he is forced to rape them right there because of their fashion choices!
So that fucktard got out of jailtime, because of the underwear the victim was wearing? What the actual F! I guess we could get rid of the word NO, because aparantly it has no meaning?
If a judge thinks sexy panties allow rape, I just have to wonder how many women that judge has raped.
So, I wonder if the female lawyer was wearing lace underwear when she represented her client? Perhaps she would apparently also be "asking for it", even if she's standing in court...
he shouldn't even have been able to get close enough to see her underwear in the first place. thongs don't mean anything. they're a style, sometimes they're practical, they help with swamp a**, they go with outerwear that would show seams through the fabric, they don't mean f*ck me.
I'm so proud of everyone who has stood up for this girl. No means NO!!! Shame on you, Elizabeth O'Connell. #thisisnotconsent
All this yet men get raped more than women. Not even being sexist, google it.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-24/prosecutors-appeal-decision-to-acquit-rape-victim-of-abortion/10280896
Not to take anything away from female rape victims, but also consider the plight of male rape victims. The subject is pooh-poohed, usually with logic like "all men like sex, so you can't rape a guy". Try being raped/abused by a family member repeatedly for 16+ years. See what damage occurs, what warped world image results. Wrong should be wrong, and all rape is wrong.
Men are rapped, and it is wrong. I don't think anyone here would think it was anything but illegal and immoral.
Load More Replies...
My goodness... It's stupid to say that she was raped because of her underwear.... It seems like the lawyer is talking about men as brainless creatures who do things impulsively just because they want to and they never think about the consequences. .. just like the lawyer himself... It makes me think that the lawyer is more likely to commit rape if he sees a woman wearing a particular type of underwear. I can't believe he was educated by his parents and ended up talking like this in court. tsk
This farce shows just how male chauvinistic our society still is. Women are cattle for men to abuse any way they damned well please. When we women stand up for ourselves and demand to be treated like human beings, we are "bitches" or "uppity" or "froward." FINE!!! I'm an uppity b***h and PROUD OF IT!
Last I checked, lesbians aren't sexually assaulting women based on their clothing, so I'm thinking that the clothing isn't the problem.
I don't think you can claim there are no lesbian rapists.
Load More Replies...
What the F**K , IRELAND?! Men need to stop thinking that we dress up for THEM! We literally dress up for ourselves or for our girlfriends to admire!
https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/counsel-for-man-acquitted-of-rape-suggested-jurors-should-reflect-on-underwear-worn-by-teen-complainant-883613.html. Enough said. Girls story is b******t. All the above articles are dumb as f**k and doesn't matter what panties you wear. Not gonna stop a rapist which this guy was clearly not.
I think that the prosecution lawyer should have asked what underwear the defense lawyer was wearing, and made it clear that only a chastity belt is enough for that defense lawyers humanity and bodily autonomy to be respected! Or maybe, since the defense lawyer was probably wearing lawyer clothes, the prosecutor should follow her out of the courtroom and home, arguing all the way, because regardless of all normal boundaries or context, that defense lawyer was "asking" to be argued at? Context matters!
It's bringing awareness to the s****y people in court. They're taking a stand and showing the girl that we care.
Load More Replies...
Whoooaaa... TF is wrong with that lawyer.. im a guy... im with that woman.. no means NO..
Good for you. Keep it up, we need more of you men out there
Load More Replies... So let me see... if she had worn granny pants, that would have stopped the rapist in his tracks? "Sorry, ma'am, I thought you consented. So the screaming and fighting wasn't all for show?"
If that was true, no one with "normal" underwear would get raped. O a side note, lets start suing underwear companies as their sexy stuff is the sole cause for rape, as a woman can't say no while wearing it and man aren't considered responsible
So the defense was, "Once he dragged into the alley and pulled of her clothes it was OK to penetrate her with his penis because she was wearing a thong." Rape is determined by her clothing. Elizabeth O'Connell is the reason I don't care if there's a heaven, but I hope that there's a HELL.
If this is evidence then every woman diserves it because every woman has pretty underwear. This backwards logic needs to stop. On a dating site my profile pic is a yellow t-shirt sweater brown shrug and basic make-up. A man sent me nudes stating that the way my sewater cupped my breasts was why he sent it. Men dont need to see underwear to rape if thats what they're mindset is already doing without seeing underwear. If you can't handle seeing a pretty girl without thinking like a predictor then you shouldn't be on the planet period. We're not toys nor do we want it or because we want to dress sexy beg for it. There's men then then theres predators. Men don't objectify us men care men understand and support. Predators are just as they are predators
This is infuriating... victim blaming should be a top level felon and any judge, defending lawyer, or clueless jury who allow it should be punished to the full extent of the law... no means no
No woman is "asking for it" unless they actually ask for it. It doesn't matter what they're wearing. Plus, he wouldn't know what she was wearing unless he undressed her and proceeded to rape her. NO MEANS NO
Truly, who was worse, the lawyer or the jury for actually taking it into account??
I really hope that lawyer is wearing boxers, because he is really asking for a series of professionally delivered punches.
It's totally insane and disgusting that a judge in a civilised country even lets a scumbag lawyer present the victim's underwear as evidence for consentual sex. Sadly it's not only this judge, but a lot of judges refuse to admit that times have changed. They are consciously denying women the right to be who they want to be, to dress how they want to dress or to look how they want to look. If it's up to these judges noone gets convicted for rape or sexual harrasment. They'll always find that the victims provoced the rapist because of something they said or didn;'t say, did or didn't do. And this is not the first time that a rapist gets off because the judge thinks that the victim shouldn't have dressed the way she did. I wonder if there politicians in Ireland who have the guts to call this judge out on his verdict. Problably not, "because politicians shouldn't interfere in the legal system."
Well.. I can't beat someone up because he looked like he was asking for it! So why is this way of thinking taken into account in rape cases?! Really weird. Or another example.. just because it looked like a parking spot when it isn't one doesn't save you from getting towed right?
Asking for sex and asking for rape are different anyway. It’s not even logically possible to ask to be coerced.
Load More Replies... I normally don't swear on the internet, but FOR F**K SAKE!!!!! I said it a million times and will say it all the time: a person should be able to walk f****n' NAKED and not be touched!!!
And there was me thinking nothing can shock me.... this story DID...... as for the lawyer, I wonder what underwear SHE had on...
I cannot comprehend why we even have to prove that underwaer is not a reason for raping. This is all so messed up.
Absolutely a deplorable "argument" to show consent and I think it should not be allowed in any court, but it also doesn't mean he was guilty or that the lawyer's statement was the reason they acquitted him.
Hans, I reread too. There was a witness who saw the guy holding the victims for her throat. And a second witness who thaught somethings not right and asked "Is everything ok" but the convicted told him to mind his own buissiness in a rude manner so noone intervened. Also as known from my own experience bystanders rarely help and if he was holding her throat she was too scared and uncapable to answer herself which most ppl prefer to accept conviniently as "all cool" Both witnesses were dissmissed as being not giving enough information.
Or maybe the prosecuting lawyer should have called the judge as a witness about his/ her underwear, so we can see what that judge is "asking for", based solely on his/her tighty-whiteys. Or how about making sure everyone in the courtroom is wearing a chastity belt, regardless of sex/gender? After all, that dependent can't get a fair trial if anyone in the courtroom is wearing the wrong underwear and he is forced to rape them right there because of their fashion choices!
So that fucktard got out of jailtime, because of the underwear the victim was wearing? What the actual F! I guess we could get rid of the word NO, because aparantly it has no meaning?
If a judge thinks sexy panties allow rape, I just have to wonder how many women that judge has raped.
So, I wonder if the female lawyer was wearing lace underwear when she represented her client? Perhaps she would apparently also be "asking for it", even if she's standing in court...
he shouldn't even have been able to get close enough to see her underwear in the first place. thongs don't mean anything. they're a style, sometimes they're practical, they help with swamp a**, they go with outerwear that would show seams through the fabric, they don't mean f*ck me.
I'm so proud of everyone who has stood up for this girl. No means NO!!! Shame on you, Elizabeth O'Connell. #thisisnotconsent
All this yet men get raped more than women. Not even being sexist, google it.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-24/prosecutors-appeal-decision-to-acquit-rape-victim-of-abortion/10280896
Not to take anything away from female rape victims, but also consider the plight of male rape victims. The subject is pooh-poohed, usually with logic like "all men like sex, so you can't rape a guy". Try being raped/abused by a family member repeatedly for 16+ years. See what damage occurs, what warped world image results. Wrong should be wrong, and all rape is wrong.
Men are rapped, and it is wrong. I don't think anyone here would think it was anything but illegal and immoral.
Load More Replies... My goodness... It's stupid to say that she was raped because of her underwear.... It seems like the lawyer is talking about men as brainless creatures who do things impulsively just because they want to and they never think about the consequences. .. just like the lawyer himself... It makes me think that the lawyer is more likely to commit rape if he sees a woman wearing a particular type of underwear. I can't believe he was educated by his parents and ended up talking like this in court. tsk
This farce shows just how male chauvinistic our society still is. Women are cattle for men to abuse any way they damned well please. When we women stand up for ourselves and demand to be treated like human beings, we are "bitches" or "uppity" or "froward." FINE!!! I'm an uppity b***h and PROUD OF IT!
Last I checked, lesbians aren't sexually assaulting women based on their clothing, so I'm thinking that the clothing isn't the problem.
I don't think you can claim there are no lesbian rapists.
Load More Replies... What the F**K , IRELAND?! Men need to stop thinking that we dress up for THEM! We literally dress up for ourselves or for our girlfriends to admire!
https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/counsel-for-man-acquitted-of-rape-suggested-jurors-should-reflect-on-underwear-worn-by-teen-complainant-883613.html. Enough said. Girls story is b******t. All the above articles are dumb as f**k and doesn't matter what panties you wear. Not gonna stop a rapist which this guy was clearly not.
I think that the prosecution lawyer should have asked what underwear the defense lawyer was wearing, and made it clear that only a chastity belt is enough for that defense lawyers humanity and bodily autonomy to be respected! Or maybe, since the defense lawyer was probably wearing lawyer clothes, the prosecutor should follow her out of the courtroom and home, arguing all the way, because regardless of all normal boundaries or context, that defense lawyer was "asking" to be argued at? Context matters!
It's bringing awareness to the s****y people in court. They're taking a stand and showing the girl that we care.
Load More Replies... 