Katie Price’s Rape In Pictures
IN “JORDAN: HATE MOB WILL GET ME”, the Daily Star has news of Jordan, you know, the former Mrs Peter Andre, the former Page 3 Girl known to celebrity insiders as Katie Price? Well, she’s back in the news:
KATE Price is terrified she will be targeted by hate mobs after facing the most brutal backlash of her life. The model has increased security after a baying crowd turned on her at boyfriend Alex Reid’s cage fight.
Katie Price is so concerned about her security she’s gone to watch a cage fight.
Things were nastier outside the ring than in it, as booing fans screamed insults and shouted in her face.
Sticks and stones can break my bones (so can chisels and the surgeons little metal hammer) but names will never hurt me.
The crowd turned against Kate, 31, and Alex, 34, as she admitted they have become the most hated couple in Britain.
A straw poll of the Anorak Typing Pool reveals Britain’s most-hated couples to be:
Noel Edmonds plus One
Anthea Turner & Grant Bovey
Tony Blair & Cherie Blair
The Chuckle Brothers
Charles & Camilla
Bodie & Doyle
Fears for her safety grew after she almost sparked a riot by goading the angry crowd. Several guards were even forced to step in to stop a scuffle as two fans tried to get to her. Cries of “slag” and “bitch” rang round east London’s Troxy arena as the mood turned sour.
Then the fighters got to it with nails and nasty pinching. And Jordan stood up and so as not to distract from Reid’s fight and retain a low profile, whooped and kept her Jordans retrained behind a tight fabric.
The Star knows why there were catcalls:
The backlash comes after Kate’s claim she was raped by a celebrity.
One thing any right-minded cage fight fan and web poster will not tolerate is Katie making light of violence:
One web poster even warned: “She better watch herself. I can see her letting her gobby mouth take over once too often, she’ll do it with the wrong person one day and someone is going to put a fist in it.”
Too right!
After her boyfriend had won, Kate flashed her knickers at other girls as she changed into a tiny black dress with the words “The Champ” on her chest.
Short for Champerty - a none-too-subtle dig at dignified Peter Andre:
n. - Partnership in power; equal share of authority. 2
n. - The prosecution or defense of a suit, whether by furnishing money or personal services, by one who has no legitimate concern therein, in consideration of an agreement that he shall receive, in the event of success, a share of the matter in suit; maintenance with the addition of an agreement to divide the thing in suit.
As for the fight:
The mob chanted the name of his opponent Jack “The Stone” Mason after Alex had retained his title. The “26-yar-old” (aka The Mail’s “City banker Jack Mason, 27”) tells us:
“I understand about the politics and the money, but I won that fight.”
Well, actually you didn’t. You lost. But better luck with the politics and the money – the Government needs all the help it can get…
Posted: 21st, September 2009 | In: Celebrities, Key Posts Comments (43) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- June on The Pirelli 2010 Calendar In Artful Nudity (NSFW)
- June on Susan Boyle: World Divided Over SuBo And Lady Susan
- Tony on Daily Mail And Tax Payers’ Alliance Attacks BBC Over Its Free Trees For A Better Planet
- Cheryl on Susan Boyle: World Divided Over SuBo And Lady Susan
- cheekyappleblossom on I’m A Celebrity: Quitter Katie Price Wanted To Die With Jedward
September 26th, 2009 at 11:59 pm
And most schoolgirls and teens rapes are not reported. Sadly.
September 23rd, 2009 at 12:46 pm
We’ll have ‘Driving a Mercedes while black’ on the statute books before we know it at this rate
September 23rd, 2009 at 11:52 am
C&C
I think there should also be a class of ‘provoked’ sex, rather like a pedestrian runs into traffic and expects it all to stop, contributory negligence, and its this point I was labouring over with SB, but moving goal posts stopped debate and turned it into silliness in the end.
My niece was walking home from work one winter evening and she was seriously attacked, she was also believed and well supported by the local police.
Women and girls who wish to parade all their wares should either face what comes or just give off a different message. Wondering if ever there will be a charge of woman/woman rape, because if the said women and girls aren’t trying to attract men, then who?
No does mean no, but if its preceded by yesyesyes then the law has its work cut out
September 23rd, 2009 at 11:32 am
SpongeBob, I do think you’re being unfair in your personal attack on June. She is saying what I say, you work with what you’ve got.
I should be able to walk through the no-go areas of, say, Manchester without the risk of being shot / stabbed / raped but I know its not a realistic expectation so I don’t do it.
While I agree that a woman should be able to lie stark naked and pis*ed in the middle of an alley without being assualted, it just aint gonna happen so we have to take some responsibilty for ourselves and we have to teach our daughters the same.
Better to let a few principles go than take unnecessary risks.
To take a man up to the bedroom at a party, especially under the influence, get into bed with him, start to get down to it, change your mind at the last minute and then claim rape if he continued may well be correct in the eyes of the law but its not good self-preservation.
Surely its common sense to just not put yourself in that position?
Yes men should understand that No means No (and most of them do) but is it really worth risking your own safety to prove that point?
I agree with the lawlords who want different levels of rape to be considered in order to prevent the ‘not guilty’ verdicts being returned time and time again.
There should be a crime of forced sex in the mix. Judging them all equally actually does a huge disservice to women (and men) who suffer the enormous trauma of stranger rape.
September 23rd, 2009 at 10:38 am
Thankyou Percy.
What with Harriet Harmans’ intended targets for rape convictions, and the redefinition of rape too, before long most men will have become gay and women reliant on dildoes and turkey basters
September 23rd, 2009 at 8:59 am
spongebob………I should know better than to get involved in a cat fight but methinks it is you being derogatory to a woman I respect for her honesty…i.e. June.
You are obviously very close to the issue…so do you see nothing derogatory to women & men , boys & girls, in Katie’s behaviour and her story telling? …I do but what do I know…I’m just a man.
September 23rd, 2009 at 8:18 am
Absolute rubbish! I did not say that. Whatever I said you moved the goalposts. It stops now
September 23rd, 2009 at 6:47 am
I have read your posts. Your language re. women is derogatory, you blame the ’slappers’ and ’slags’ for sexual violence against them on the basis that they are responsible for ‘arousing’ poor men.
You must have been out for lunch in the 60’s when some of the more progressive attitudes to women were being discussed. Still, I see your views have been long firmly fixed so will wish you well and retire
September 22nd, 2009 at 9:13 pm
Try reading my posts Sponge Bob!
Didn’t miss out on the sex, was just selective with whom I had it with.
Free love, the Pill and bra burning were all in the 60’s!
So, no, I didn’t miss out- just wasn’t a slag - thats all byeeeee
September 22nd, 2009 at 7:14 pm
Hey June. I get it, you’re old school, believing that men are strange beings not quite in control their faculties . Can quite understand why the likes of Ms. Price shock the hell out of you. As I have said, I’m not her biggest fan… but simply believe that she doesn’t ‘deserve’ to be raped. Or disbelieved if she was.
I’m guessing that as well as the sex, you missed out on the bra burning in the 60’s
Peace!
September 22nd, 2009 at 6:25 pm
Back in the days when I was a gel, free love and the Pill were just in full swing, but you either had to be married or over 21 to get the Pill. I was neither.
I had no desire then for children, but I did feel the need for a steady, adult relationship.
Not an oil painting by any means, but equally not short of boyfriends.
I had heard all the old boys tales of how they will die if they don’t have sex, but I never seduced anyone until I met someone who did feel right.
Back then we had the grand art of seduction, even with mini skirts which did reveal leg, but skimpy and tight clothes were not in my wardrobe. But we had body language, and eye contact ( not drugs texts ‘n’ sex)
We had the excuse ‘I’m washing my hair’ Sex wasn’t expected of us, and it wasn’t given. No meant No, not Maybe or ‘lets go to bed and I’ll see’.
Drink and drugs weren’t so freely available, and pregnancy and loss of reputation were good deterrents.
These days its kids having sex and kids and awful diseases and no fun, just the odd fumble . And the intermittant screech of ‘Rape’!
Perhaps these days girls don’t know quite how they may be tormenting a man, but isn’t it time for respect for the feelings of the other person, or are the rights of the one eclipsing the other?
September 22nd, 2009 at 5:46 pm
“if you have aroused a man, and then say no, who is abusing who”
- Jesus, It’s a hard on - you haven’t killed his aunty!
THIS is the problem in fact, the notion that men are incapable of controlling themseleves or even worthy of pity when aroused. I take it the same incapability excuse can be given to a man aroused in any circumstance? We must investigate that one eh, that should be a humdinger of a discussion!
September 22nd, 2009 at 5:21 pm
Sponge Bob
It was a bed in someone elses house at a party they were attending, couldn’t she just have said no before then?
In a loving caring relationship if either party doesn’t feel like sex, they say so, but if its continually no, isn’t there a real deepseated problem, and the reason for refusal dealt with properly?
If people just want casual sex then at times they will be treated casually.
But if you have aroused a man, and then say no, who is abusing who?
I also feel very much that Jordan is taking everyone for a ride over this matter, and it will backfire.
September 22nd, 2009 at 4:24 pm
June
It was you that mentioned she was in a sexual relationship. Many people are and do not feel like having sex at times, for many reasons, even though they are in the same bed. So the same does apply re. marriage - or when does a woman have a right to say no?
C&C
I agree that rape should not be shouted for revenge. Indeed, if it turns out that this is the case here I would join you in complete contempt for the lady, or any lady concerned. But in fact it’s just a case of not believing her because of her previous behaviour, and as I’ve said before, this means that such a lady cannot ever be raped, because she has somehow lost her right to say no.
It seems far too easy to blame the scantily clad woman for all the ills of men. Indeed, it seems that there is no possibility that rape happens if the lady in question is dressed in a certain way. I disagree with this theory, nor do I think that all men see clothing as a licence to do whatever the fuck they want, when they want. Is rape only rape for ‘respectable’ women? Again, we go back to the argument that a woman ‘is asking for it’ etc if they don’t meet demands of ‘respectability’. I have several nieces who dress in a small clothing items, but they are simply reflecting the fashions of the time. I personally don’t like the fashion but to them, I am simply an old fuddy duddy. Do they deserve to be raped? Would they if they went to a man’s home/hotel? What if they had already slept with a man, would they have the right to say no on subsequent occasions?
I dislike the kiss and tell culture too and have no admiration for Katie Price, indeed, I fail to see why she gets so much air time. But I still do believe she has the right to say no, and if she doesn’t have that right then we may as well line up all the ‘weak’ men and let them all take turns to fuck her. And film it, while we’re at it.
September 22nd, 2009 at 2:23 pm
Sponge Bob
that is another culture and country and hardly relevant to the discussion or the laws of the UK
September 22nd, 2009 at 2:17 pm
I’ve been freed! Post 23………
September 22nd, 2009 at 1:59 pm
I have posted on this but I’m stuck in moderation! soon…… maybe!
September 22nd, 2009 at 1:57 pm
That’s fine June
But as a final consideration, perhaps the Karzai was right after all when he said that women do not have the right to refuse sex with their husbands and rejected the concept of rape in marriage. A husband and wife have after all been previous sexual partners.
September 22nd, 2009 at 1:46 pm
She was already in a sexual relationship with him.
Perhaps its best that sex is left to adults and not fools of either sex who are unable to control themselves.
I have nothing more to say to you on this matter Sponge Bob, if you wish to champion reckless women thats up to you, but do remember they have responsibilities as well as rights
September 22nd, 2009 at 1:38 pm
This is a low opinion of women in general in regards to sexual contact. And not much of one of men either..
‘Leading them’? ‘Changes her mind then cries rape’? I take it from that there is no mind changing allowed for a woman then? In any circumstance? Do you know wat happened in that room? - perhaps the man in question was a cruel partner, perhaps he was too rough, perhaps he was abusive, perhaps he was simply just crap at it.. is it a fait accompli to finish the deed, in any situtation?
September 22nd, 2009 at 1:21 pm
I think many women have been caught out over the years in the situation where things go too far (usually with both under the influence) and the next morning they regret it.
Once upon a time they might, in the sober and cold light of the next day, have thought ‘Oh bugger, wish I hadn’t done that’ and clocked it up to stupidity. Sometimes now though, the word rape is used as an excuse-all.
And also sex with someone pissed and famous is often now seen as a quick route to fame via a tabloid story deal.
if a girl goes back to a hotel room with a couple of drunk footballers she met in a club is she really expecting tea and biscuits and a follow up date? No. Chances are she has the NOTW on redial and the story will be ‘They used me’.
For example, if the girls involved in the current Jack Tweed case remain anonymous and don’t sell their story then they will have my full sympathy however if we eventually see them in suspenders on the front page of a red-top reliving their trauma then I won’t feel that way.
Please don’t get me wrong, there are many semi-feral men out there who prowl the bars and clubs for sex and who do rape and abuse randomly and I despise every one of them and would love to see them rounded up and taken off the streets. However as women we do have to take some responsibilty for ourselves. The law isn’t a catch-all after the event and neither should it be a way of taking revenge for something completely unrelated.
Right now KP is in full manic mode and becoming more outrageous by the day as she tries everything to overshadow Peter A’s record release. No wonder we are so cynical about her claims.
September 22nd, 2009 at 1:12 pm
No thats not what I’m saying that men are poor weak creatures who cannot control their bodily urges, but if some woman is leading them , then changes her mind and cries ‘rape’.
Perhaps men should wait then until they put a ring on her finger and a signed certificate, but even then she might ‘change her mind’ (all assuming she has one and its not a complete vacuum firing off oestrogen)
Its actually women who are fickle and silly with their sexual behaviour doing the disservice to real rape victims, and to other women who do know what and who they want, and similarly to most men who can and do control themselves
September 22nd, 2009 at 12:57 pm
Ah June - we will never agree on this then. I don’t believe that men are so weak that can be tempted ‘beyond endurance’.
It is a highly insulting assertion that men have so little control over themselves and is a low and demeaning opinion of men that they are weak with no free choice in such matters and so ‘not much better than animals’. Or that women are the ones are ultimately responsible in such situtations, and must be respectable, ‘restrain inate slut tendencies’ so as not to tempt a poor week fella who cannot be held responsible. For shame.
September 22nd, 2009 at 12:37 pm
Sponge Bob
I think women can decide if they wish to have sex with someone, if during arousal they change their minds, then I think they need to get up and go away, or just not let that happen in the first place.
I don’t think women need wear burkhas, but I do think some women are out to tempt beyond endurance and they must address why they do that.
The little boy who cried ‘wolf’ and when he meant it, what happened? no one believed him.
A while back men were talking about getting women to sign a consent form to sex.
It all a matter of his/ her word.
And only a fool would put herself in a situation where she has led someone right to the brink, she obviously doesn’t want sex, she just wants to be desarired , and have her name in the papers as a victim.
Perhaps though a return to the days when sex wasn’t so freely available, it has become a very cheap commodity, and young women especially leaving themselves vulnerable to nasty infections and unwanted pregnancies, and perhaps very serious assaults.
Mainly because they hold themselves so cheaply.
Men might well still undress women, but they don’t dress them, women do that themselves, and if its skimpy and too revealing whose fault is that?
There is a world of difference between being sexy and dressing like a slapper.
But I give in to you -women can dress like sluts.
September 22nd, 2009 at 12:20 pm
Interesting that you mention ‘prick teasers’. This means that a poor man has no control over himself after being driven wild with lust by the temptations of a woman. It matters not what they are doing, the proceddings can be stopped at any time, or are men so incapable of controlling themselves? Do they have the right to ‘take’ after a predetermined serving of ‘tempatation’?
If we are to believe that rape is inevitable after a certain point of no return, this means that rape must be a result of a woman’s behaviour and never the man’s.
So, with the exception of the shadowy lurking stranger rape and even then not completely if a woman is drunk, ‘inappropriately’ dressed etc, then rape is always a result of the woman’s choices and never the man’s?
If so, then we have come no further than applying the burka to hide a woman’s temptations. It also means that men are not to be trusted with their sexual desires and have no control over themselves. This, I do not accept.
September 22nd, 2009 at 12:10 pm
So was she just in bed with him to sleep?
If I get into bed with a man its specifically for sex, if I don’t want sex I do not get into any situation where consent can be implied.
I agree men can and should control themselves, and so should women, and not send out very conflicting messages then scream rape if they themselves don’t have a clue what they want.
This is why a lot of ‘rape victims’ are misunderstood - perhaps they are just prick teasers?
Something like if you can’t take the heat, stay out of the kitchen
September 22nd, 2009 at 11:37 am
That she was in bed with him is of no consequence. Sexual consensus is just that: each party has the right to withdraw (again no pun!) at any time. Are we to believe that at a certain point a man has the right to proceed with impunity regardless of his companions objections?
Also, the notion that a man is incapaple of stopping after a point is one that I do not accept. With the obvious scumbag exceptions, men are perfectly capable of controlling their sexual desires
September 22nd, 2009 at 11:23 am
But the Media do put clayey feet on pedestals, just for the sheer pleasure of knocking them down - over the years Diana, Michael Jackson , and many more- they are all media tarts.
Heroes and heroines such as Mother Teresa who do not court the media remain figures of respect.
September 22nd, 2009 at 11:10 am
Yet until recently she was hailed as the good mother etc. Seems to me that the media/public obsession with this gloriously untalented woman and subsequent judgement of her says much more about their collective values than it does hers.
And most child rapes are not reported. Sadly.
September 22nd, 2009 at 10:57 am
Sponge Bob
Surely her parents/guardians would have done something when a child is raped?
Lets put it this way about blabbing - ‘a very famous celeb raped me while I was in bed with him?’
Defend her rights if you feel you must, Sponge Bob, but why not simultaneously get her to respect the system, and herself while you are at it.
She chooses to present herself as a flesh/blood/plastic sex toy, and yes she must take the consequences of that choice - one of the consequences being a lot of money, the other is a lot of contempt. Her choice.
September 22nd, 2009 at 10:44 am
Why would there necessarily be a police report or a social service report.
Rape is often not taken seriously and is not progressed / taken to trial because of the woman’s circumstances (alcohol, dress etc)
I am in agreement that rapes should be reported and taken to trial, but the reality is that rape convictions are very low, shockingly low and most rape victims do not report. Why is she to be targeted and disbieved when the majority of rape victims do not report the attacks? Perhaps because, like them, she suspected, correctly as it happens, that she would not be believed.
Yes, some women make false claims. But who is the judge that she has done so? She is disbelieved, purely, because on the basis her previous behaviour. Meaning that such a woman CANNOT be raped because her behaviour showed that she was available and therefore it would be impossible for her to be raped, she was simply asking for it, inviting ‘it’ etc. She has no right to say no.
As far as ‘blabbing’ I guess this means that she has no right to talk about it at all then?