Garret Ross

[ChiHawks10]

This is that Tribune article with the woman who brought the accusations against Ross explaining her side of the story.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sport...-accuser-garret-ross-0331-20160330-story.html

From the article, definitely sounds like an icky situation but Ross is probably not going to face charges in Michigan because their statute regarding "revenge porn" doesn't involve text message exchanges and requires something to be published more widely on the Internet.

The one thing that also seems to be forgotten in all this... is his alleged distribution/dissemination of the photos/video were in a text TO HER. Everything I've read also states the same. He text the video TO HER. She even admitted as much in her Trib interview... How can he be charged with this if he only sent the video back to someone IN the video. I do believe threatening to distribute the material also falls under it... so that has to be the only way that he could have been reasonably charged with anything, I would assume. He sent her the video and said something along the lines of "Look what I've got. You wanna keep this **** up, I'll send it out all over the web." - Purely speculating of course. I still think the situation as a whole is still confusing, despite the charges being dropped against him.

 

[hawksrule]

Are we really going to go back to this whole "calling her stupid" argument? I don't see anyone victim shaming. I suppose if the roles were reversed and someone called the guy stupid it would be victim shaming as well, then? Or do your standards only apply to women? The knight in shining armor routine you're pumping here throughout this thread is getting old, and you can't come into the thread and have a discussion about any of this without going straight back to it. No one brought anything up in regards to the victim or her being stupid, yet here you come firing back about victim shaming. The discussion was involving Julie DiCaro, who is a first rate moron, and terrible writer. First you were the knight in shining armor for the victim in regards to the actual case, and now you're pulling the knight in shining armor routine for DiCaro. Seriously, get down from the horse.

The discussion was involving DiCaro and Boers and Bernstein, in relation to this entire situation, and their(Bernstein in particular) loud-mouthed, ignorant views on everything in general, ESPECIALLY in regards to the Blackhawks organization. And you bring back up victim shaming...

I wasn't talking to you, but if you're going to crowbar your way into my conversation...I was asked why I had a problem with these issues. Issues is plural. While you may have been focused on a single issue, I wasn't, nor was the questioner. But it's hardly surprising that your vacuous thought processes didn't grasp that and reverted to typical mra tropes . Put me on ignore, if you don't want to see my posts.

 

[ChiHawks10]

I wasn't talking to you, but if you're going to crowbar your way into my conversation...I was asked why I had a problem with these issues. Issues is plural. While you may have been focused on a single issue, I wasn't, nor was the questioner. But it's hardly surprising that your vacuous thought processes didn't grasp that and reverted to typical mra tropes . Put me on ignore, if you don't want to see my posts.

People shouldn't listen if they don't like DiCaro. The board's obsession with this woman is weird, and kind of creepy.

So my thoughts, comments, and thought processes lack intelligence? And WTF are you talking about mra tropes?

I didn't crowbar into any conversation... You actually brought yourself into the DiCaro conversation, and proceeded to label people as weird, and kind of creepy, due to an "obsession" with DiCaro... Then when people responded to you in regards to what you deem an obsession, you completely ignore the responses, and go off on your victim shaming rant again, and bring that back up, when the conversation had nothing to do with the victim whatsoever.

Is that your excuse for everything, rather than being able to have a civilized, intelligent conversation about it? Because you seem to always recommend things of that nature.

"If you don't like my posts, don't respond, or read them, or put me on ignore."
"If you don't like DiCaro, then don't listen to her."

Go thumb through the thesaurus some more. Your contemptuous attitude when posting and responding to people is starting to become a little annoying, to say the least.

 

[hawksrule]

So my thoughts, comments, and thought processes lack intelligence? And WTF are you talking about mra tropes?

I didn't crowbar into any conversation... You actually brought yourself into the DiCaro conversation, and proceeded to label people as weird, and kind of creepy, due to an "obsession" with DiCaro... Then when people responded to you in regards to what you deem an obsession, you completely ignore the responses, and go off on your victim shaming rant again, and bring that back up, when the conversation had nothing to do with the victim whatsoever.

Is that your excuse for everything, rather than being able to have a civilized, intelligent conversation about it? Because you seem to always recommend things of that nature.

"If you don't like my posts, don't respond, or read them, or put me on ignore."
"If you don't like DiCaro, then don't listen to her."

Go thumb through the thesaurus some more. Your contemptuous attitude when posting and responding to people is starting to become a little annoying, to say the least.

No need for a thesaurus. Sorry, that's how I speak, at least when writing. Is your concept of civilized, intelligent conversation incessant whining that I annoy you? Again, feel free to employ the ignore button or stop responding. You won't be missed.

Edit: And yes, I think it's creepy and weird that out of all the journalists and media personalities out there, the most frequent recipient of this board's ire is a woman with strong opinions on women's issues.

 

[BK]

I doubt I'm the only one with a severe distaste for the mra-bro mentality which reflexively lashes out at alleged victims. Victims of sex crimes are often reluctant to come forward as is. Shaming them with whataboutisms or calling them stupid (numerous times in this thread) is f'd up. I'm not being touchy. I'm reacting to people being *******s.

Lashes out against victims? I said she was stupid for sending the pictures/videos. Do you think sending naked pictures is very intelligent? I am am sorry you don't like it but sending naked pictures in today's world is careless and stupid. Never did I say she deserved what happened to her so understand the difference. You acting like this is mra-bro mentality is just uninformed. If this happened to guy/girl/transgender person my reaction would be the same, they were stupid for sending the pictures but don't deserve what has happened to them. This is not victim shaming so you can stop accusing people of that.

Edit: And yes, I think it's creepy and weird that out of all the journalists and media personalities out there, the most frequent recipient of this board's ire is a woman with strong opinions on women's issues.

Frequent ire? She was a huge critic of the Hawks during the Kane situation and ended up looking stupid. So when another incident like this happened you better believe that she is going to be brought up here. This is a Hawks forum where we talk about the the Hawks and the happenings around them. By her own actions but her own she has been identified as a critic of the Hawks in these manners. This is no different that Boers or Bernstein so you can stop bringing up that she is a woman because it has nothing to do with it.

 

[SAADfather]

I hate that in the PC world we live in, holding the victim accountable for their irresponsibility is automatically shot down with "victim shaming". I'm starting to get the sense a lot of people dont actually know what that phrase means.

Just because your the victim does not mean you can do no wrong.

 

[Pepe Silvia]

I hate that in the PC world we live in, holding the victim accountable for their irresponsibility is automatically shot down with "victim shaming". I'm starting to get the sense a lot of people dont actually know what that phrase means.

Just because your the victim does not mean you can do no wrong.

Amazing post. It drives me nuts as well.

 

[Hawkaholic]

I hate that in the PC world we live in, holding the victim accountable for their irresponsibility is automatically shot down with "victim shaming". I'm starting to get the sense a lot of people dont actually know what that phrase means.

Just because your the victim does not mean you can do no wrong.

Yup, pretty lame.

 

[hawksrule]

Lashes out against victims? I said she was stupid for sending the pictures/videos. Do you think sending naked pictures is very intelligent? I am am sorry you don't like it but sending naked pictures in today's world is careless and stupid.

So you continue to call her stupid while claiming to not be shaming her. Your cognitive dissonance is off the charts.

Never did I say she deserved what happened to her so understand the difference. You acting like this is mra-bro mentality is just uninformed. If this happened to guy/girl/transgender person my reaction would be the same, they were stupid for sending the pictures but don't deserve what has happened to them. This is not victim shaming so you can stop accusing people of that.

Wrong, as I cited on the top of the previous page, you did say she was at fault. I don't blame you from wanting to distance yourself from that ugly sentiment.

Frequent ire? She was a huge critic of the Hawks during the Kane situation and ended up looking stupid. So when another incident like this happened you better believe that she is going to be brought up here. This is a Hawks forum where we talk about the the Hawks and the happenings around them. By her own actions but her own she has been identified as a critic of the Hawks in these manners. This is no different that Boers or Bernstein so you can stop bringing up that she is a woman because it has nothing to do with it.

Who cares if she criticizes the Hawks? I mean seriously, who gives a ****. When a movie critic doesn't like your favorite film do you whine about it? If a food critic gives your favorite restaurant a bad review do you whine about it? She supposedly means nothing to you all, but you're so bent out of shape over what she thinks. If you want to pretend that's not the case, go ahead, but it's zero percent convincing.

 

[ChiHawks10]

No need for a thesaurus. Sorry, that's how I speak, at least when writing. Is your concept of civilized, intelligent conversation incessant whining that I annoy you? Again, feel free to employ the ignore button or stop responding. You won't be missed.

Edit: And yes, I think it's creepy and weird that out of all the journalists and media personalities out there, the most frequent recipient of this board's ire is a woman with strong opinions on women's issues.

No, my idea of an intelligent, civilized conversation is what everyone else on this thread is doing. This, as opposed to the incessant spewing forth of your "victim shaming" agenda that you've continually pushed on everyone for the entire thread for having the opinion that a woman can make a stupid decision in regards to HER OWN body, the same body that she willingly recorded nude and sent to people. The comparison can be made to a porn star feeling ashamed that she made a porno and it's all over the web... after she willingly made it. Or the women in New Orleans who flash their chest for the simple idea of a plastic bead necklace, and then get upset when footage of them doing that is seen by their Mother and Father, without any regard to the fact that they willingly showed their chest to 1000's of people in the streets of a city for a 5 cent plastic bead necklace to go around their neck. Am I womanizer, or of the mra-bro mentality for those statements as well? Get real, man. Or are you actually a woman? Because it comes off that you're a woman feeling scorned by a group of men calling someone out for making a stupid decision, and is evidenced even more by the fact that you take such offense to guys on a hockey forum discussing the idiotic viewpoints of a woman reporter, who continually makes an ass of herself to the general public, when those discussions have absolutely nothing to do with her strong opinion of women's issues.

And for the second bolded portion, not a single poster in this thread, or in the Blackhawks boards in general, is singling out DiCaro for her "strong opinions on women's issues."

They're singling her out due to her continuous agenda against the Blackhawks organization, and making them look bad in the public light. And we're what? Womanizers and thugs for calling her out for being an idiot, while continually pushing her anti-Blackhawks agenda to the general public in Chicago? Nothing whatsoever has to do with her strong opinion on women's issues. It has to do with her strong opinion on Blackhawks issues, and the lack of anything informed coming from her mouth in regards to them. To take your line from you, if you don't like the conversation, see yourself out of the thread. You don't have to read it, or post on it.

Or do you enjoy what you do? Creating something out of nothing?

 

[hawksrule]

I hate that in the PC world we live in, holding the victim accountable for their irresponsibility is automatically shot down with "victim shaming". I'm starting to get the sense a lot of people dont actually know what that phrase means.

Just because your the victim does not mean you can do no wrong.

Everyone knows that sending private photos isn't a good idea, you can stop patting yourself on the back, Captain Obvious. But put yourself in her shoes for a second, from the moment she was (allegedly) victimized. She had to go to the police station and explain what happened to a bunch of cops and prosecutors who wound up watching what she intended to be a very private video. That can't be easy, and it takes guts to for her stick up for herself like that. Calling her stupid discourages others from sticking up for themselves, and is plain dickish. That's the point, and it has nothing to do with whether she put herself in a vulnerable position, which again, is obvious.

 

[BK]

So you continue to call her stupid while claiming to not be shaming her. Your cognitive dissonance is off the charts.

No your ability to comprehend here is lacking. I said her actions were stupid. She might be personally intelligent but her action in this situation were stupid.

Wrong, as I cited on the top of the previous page, you did say she was at fault. I don't blame you from wanting to distance yourself from that ugly sentiment.

She put herself in the situation but she is not at fault for what happened. I already have said I misspoke. How many times more do you need? Here I will give you 3 more times of me admitting it.

She put herself in the situation but she is not at fault for what happened. I already have said I misspoke.

She put herself in the situation but she is not at fault for what happened. I already have said I misspoke.

She put herself in the situation but she is not at fault for what happened. I already have said I misspoke.

Who cares if she criticizes the Hawks? I mean seriously, who gives a ****. When a movie critic doesn't like your favorite film do you whine about it? If a food critic gives your favorite restaurant a bad review do you whine about it? She supposedly means nothing to you all, but you're so bent out of shape over what she thinks. If you want to pretend that's not the case, go ahead, but it's zero percent convincing.

It is not about her criticizing the hawks (that is her right) but it is about what she is saying. Her previous articles on the matter were off base and she ended up being wrong. I like your logic that since I comment on what her articles have said and her stances are I am getting bent out of shape? Solid logic there. If anything you white knighting her on here makes you the one that is bent out of shape but hey maybe you and her are one in the same. (No I am not actually saying you are her but you do talk like a lawyer which is a compliment). People can bring up people on beat writers and other journalists on here all the time but again you seem to get bent out of shape with this one. Sorry but you really are the only one bent out of shape on this topic.

 

[hawksrule]

The comparison can be made to a porn star feeling ashamed that she made a porno and it's all over the web... after she willingly made it.

In that sea of stupidity, this line takes the cake. Bravo.

 

[ChiHawks10]

In that sea of stupidity, this line takes the cake. Bravo.

Can't comment on anything else? Nothing to say to any of it? I would fully expect someone of your intelligence to make something out of everything I just said, but then again... nah. I put that line in there fully knowing you would zero in on it, with absolutely no regard to anything else I said. You, my friend, are the one floating in the sea of stupidity on a sinking ship. Time to abandon it.

 

[SAADfather]

Everyone knows that sending private photos isn't a good idea, you can stop patting yourself on the back, Captain Obvious. But put yourself in her shoes for a second, from the moment she was (allegedly) victimized. She had to go to the police station and explain what happened to a bunch of cops and prosecutors who wound up watching what she intended to be a very private video. That can't be easy, and it takes guts to for her stick up for herself like that. Calling her stupid discourages others from sticking up for themselves, and is plain dickish. That's the point, and it has nothing to do with whether she put herself in a vulnerable position, which again, is obvious.

Not one person said what she had to go threw isn't terrible. Sending naked pictures is stupid. It's as simple as that. So because she's a victim, in your eyes that means there's no way she could have made a dumb decision? At least other posters are starting to catch on that you just like to make arguments out of nothing.

In that sea of stupidity, this line takes the cake. Bravo.

Pot meet kettle.

 

[hawksrule]

Can't comment on anything else? Nothing to say to any of it? I would fully expect someone of your intelligence to make something out of everything I just said, but then again... nah. I put that line in there fully knowing you would zero in on it, with absolutely no regard to anything else I said. You, my friend, are the one floating in the sea of stupidity on a sinking ship. Time to abandon it.

Ironic, as I would expect people of intelligence to not waste time on that IQ lowering post.

 

[hawksrule]

Not one person said what she had to go threw isn't terrible. Sending naked pictures is stupid. It's as simple as that. So because she's a victim, in your eyes that means there's no way she could have made a dumb decision? At least other posters are starting to catch on that you just like to make arguments out of nothing.

A return visit from Captain Strawman. Re-read post 211 and you'll find your answer.

Pot meet kettle.

That makes no sense.

 

[Toews2Bickell]

A return visit from Captain Strawman. Re-read post 211 and you'll find your answer.



That makes no sense.

Are you Bernstein?

 

[hawksrule]

No your ability to comprehend here is lacking. I said her actions were stupid. She might be personally intelligent but her action in this situation were stupid.

Please see post 211.

She put herself in the situation but she is not at fault for what happened. I already have said I misspoke. How many times more do you need? Here I will give you 3 more times of me admitting it.

She put herself in the situation but she is not at fault for what happened. I already have said I misspoke.

She put herself in the situation but she is not at fault for what happened. I already have said I misspoke.

She put herself in the situation but she is not at fault for what happened. I already have said I misspoke.

Still missing the point. But at least you're acknowledging that I did not in fact misquote you.

It is not about her criticizing the hawks (that is her right) but it is about what she is saying. Her previous articles on the matter were off base and she ended up being wrong. I like your logic that since I comment on what her articles have said and her stances are I am getting bent out of shape? Solid logic there. If anything you white knighting her on here makes you the one that is bent out of shape but hey maybe you and her are one in the same. (No I am not actually saying you are her but you do talk like a lawyer which is a compliment). People can bring up people on beat writers and other journalists on here all the time but again you seem to get bent out of shape with this one. Sorry but you really are the only one bent out of shape on this topic.

That's just deflection. You didn't answer, why do you care so much what she thinks?

 

[ChiHawks10]

Ironic, as I would expect people of intelligence to not waste time on that IQ lowering post.

Thanks for proving that you have absolutely nothing to say when someone proves you wrong, or calls you out for exactly what you're doing, which is making something out of absolutely nothing.

 

[ChiHawks10]

Please see post 211.



Still missing the point. But at least you're acknowledging that I did not in fact misquote you.

That's just deflection. You didn't answer, why do you care so much what she thinks?

I would imagine it has something to do with the fact that he cares about the Blackhawks and the organization, and the fact that DiCaro has done nothing but continually paint something he is passionate about in a bad light with her misinformed, and uninformed dribble that she considers journalism.

Which would be the same issue I have with her, and what most other Hawks fans have with her.

 

[CourtneyDagger50]

Wow.

 

[SAADfather]

A return visit from Captain Strawman. Re-read post 211 and you'll find your answer.



That makes no sense.

It's not strawman because that's the point I was making in the post that you quoted in #211. So technically your entire post in #211 is strawman. Another term you used incorrectly. Well done.

 

[hawksrule]

Thanks for proving that you have absolutely nothing to say when someone proves you wrong, or calls you out for exactly what you're doing, which is making something out of absolutely nothing.

Look man, your post was nonsense, and I'm not going to parse every word as you seem desperate for me to do. Sorry.

 

[hawksrule]

It's not strawman because that's the point I was making in the post that you quoted in #211. So technically your entire post in #211 is strawman. Another term you used incorrectly. Well done.

What did I say that was a strawman? I don't think you know what the word means. Here's an example of one. Where did I say this? Please don't respond to me until you find it.

Originally Posted by SAADfather View Post
So because she's a victim, in your eyes that means there's no way she could have made a dumb decision?