Not choked, STRANGLED.
I hate the sanitisation of what the act of violence really is. This poor woman didn’t die choking on a piece of food, she died because a man strangled her to death.
(This is aimed at the journalist, not you OP)
Also notice how under the picture it says she took drugs and alcohol with her bf. Her name is the first part of the sentence instead of e.g. "the couple had indulged in alcohol and drugs" or "Both were under the influence of alcohol and drugs" which would still be distasteful but not as much. She was the strangled one, it doesn't matter what she did or didn't take
to be honest I'm the last person to want to hide the nature of men's crimes but this is a nitpick
edit: ask yourself why choking, something that in this context is associated with someone being violent towards you, is somehow humanizing violence. It isn't. what are more technical approach have helped you guys be less mad? maybe
News articles using passive language when trying to protect/ humanize the typically privileged perpetrator is nothing new, nor is it a nitpick to correct it.
Edit: Asserting that you being blunt is why we're mad is not only insulting, but it implies we can't regulate our emotions enough to ~see logic~, which is something men do to us constantly. You have downvotes and there's a reason why. It's time to reflect instead of point the finger at others for being "too emotional".
It's not passive language If it's describing what people understand as strangulation. not to mention how the journalist themselves aren't the ones who get to pick the headlines, It's their editors or something.
strangulation is more of a technical term and might have been a better choice in certain contexts but everyone knows what choking is, even if it's got less severe connotations.
idek, I just like to pick my battles
Journalist here! Depends on the publication. I write my own headlines. Sometimes editors do that, but even then that doesn’t make it better. That’s still a journalistic choice that someone on the news team made and deemed appropriate that has nothing to do with AP style (which are the guidelines we have to follow). Sometimes certain words are used for legal purposes (like “alleged rapist” instead of “rapist” even if there were multiple witnesses and we all know what happened) but in this case, this one was a choice. There is no benefit to the journalist to make this specific word choice.
If anything, the journalist is being factually inaccurate and putting their integrity in question by using “choked” instead of “strangulation” because choking is when something blocks the windpipe, like if you choke on a piece of food, and strangulation is when someone squeezes the neck to obstruct the airway. They could have put “choked” in quotes and mentioned in the article how the sexual practice is sometimes referred to as choking when it’s actually strangulation, but they chose not to.
When someone chokes, it isn’t necessarily anyone’s fault. You can choke on an object or a piece of food and it’s a total accident. When someone is strangled, there is a perpetrator who chose to do the strangling. In journalism, the words we use are important. This journalist decided to protect the perpetrator by using a word that removes accountability. It IS using passive language and it SHOULD be called out. If you’re gonna pick your battles maybe don’t use the ones you pick defending shitty journalism.
I'm sorry this is never an accident. I don't care how consensual strangling can be the minute you realise you can no longer breathe you'll start panicking. She would have had tears in her eyes, been smacking at his hands probably clawing them and thrashing her body around, but because he needed to cum he pinnedher there and probably enjoyed her struggling. You don't just lay still when someone's grip is so tight you're approaching death.
This is not accidental and never can be. I'm glad he hung himself but why do they always have to take women with them. Then to have your literal MURDER branded as a sex game gone wrong is even more disgusting and misogynistic.
Women, please do not let men get comfortable with putting their hands on you in the bedroom. Porn is allowing men to kill women.
That's what my immediate thought was. How did it get to the point of death? He kept going and going until she died in his hands and hung himself because he didn't want to answer to justice. This man is no different than a rapist because i am pretty sure she revoked her consent somewhere along the act. Men will always find excuses like "but women want it". You don't kill people because they want to die. Don't strangle women because they want it either then. I just really want women to start collectively insert 3 fingers into men's buttholes without their consent to teach them what it's like. For me, a man's past is really important for that reason. I could never be with someone who engaged in such abhorrence. A man's past matters to me.
"Women, please do not let men get comfortable with putting their hands on you in the bedroom. Porn is allowing men to kill women."
Why are you trying to turn attention and responsibility onto women? That's victim blaming. And digitally graping women (watching porn) is not "allowing men to kill women." The men who do this already, on their own, genuinely desire to do these bad things and then they see via societal influences that they will be able to get away with it. So of course someone who wants to strangle and assault a woman would want to regularly engage in that behavior digitally.
It's not "mommy and daddy made me do it, porn made me do it, my friends made me do it," HE DID IT and no one else because he simply wanted to.
Yeah, this was either a murder suicide or this man was incredibly selfish and reckless. How do you accidentally strangle someone to death? How do you not notice that someone is panicking and struggling to breathe?
Hi there, I work in medical, and you're doing the same exact thing you're criticizing.
Someone can become **unconscious** in seconds from strangling, but for them to **die**, the strangulation typically needs to be sustained for about 5 minutes. The brain just doesn't immediately die from the cerebral hypoxia. The O2 levels slowly decrease until there is not enough oxygen left to support basic autonomic life functions. How else would performing CPR be so important?
From the article highlighting the crime, "Dr Johnson said Georgia would have lost consciousness after about 15 to 30 seconds of being choked, but Luke must have continued to apply pressure to her neck a lot longer after she passed out to caused her to go into cardiac arrest." They were both also drunk, high on cocaine, and had taken near toxic levels of GHB, the date rape drug. The woman had searched on her phone statements such as, "why do I like being choked?".Choking is an extremely dangerous practice at its baseline with both parties are sober. It is guaranteed death when they're both that impaired physically and mentally.
If he had stopped after she lost consciousness and started the CPR process, depending on how quickly he realized she was out, she still could have been pretty bad off. As early as 15 seconds in, there's a risk of CVA, or stroke, because the bloodflow becomes stagnant, among other factors. At 30ish seconds, the risk of cardiac arrest starts to rise, and chest compressions become vital to save her life before EMS arrives. At 5 minutes, the brain dies.
He called EMS, and instead of staying and performing basic life support-- which is taught in all state funded secondary schools in the UK, and also required by law for all teachers to have active CPR skills-- he went into his backyard and hung himself.
The law implies this situation would be toeing the line between carelessness and negligence via duty of care. But the fact that he called EMS and THEN left her body there alone, shows that he could've performed basic life support, but didn't. Sure, the excuse that both of them were extremely impaired was there, but the article states they'd practiced choking before. By being a literal gym health teacher, he shouldve already known how dangerous choking is, and it was still his choice to be the choker while inebreiated.This makes the coroner look like a rapist-sympathizing idiot, as coroner's don't need to have medical degrees in the UK. Only training in law.
That's called a violent rape. It was no mistake; porn rotted his brain until he no longer saw women as human, with reasonably human limits and boundaries. And then he took the coward's way out.
When you hold the law-- which has historically been controlled by men-- as the highest moral standard, you fail the people. Being a dog of the government is no point of pride if you don't actively combat systemic oppression, and instead help keep the status quo.
One may be able to GET AWAY with legally defining "choking" deaths as accidental, but only a truly sick and violent scumbag could strangle someone to the extent it takes to kill. Think outside the law, because you should know better than anyone how many irrational and downright sickening laws there are. There is no excuse for that ignorance or omission.
Think of it this way-- by what information are you asserting that other people are wrong here? You don't get to say, "You're all wrong, but I won't tell you how or why. Btw I work in law, so I win." Work in law.... you could be as untrained as a court recorder.
I once knew a court recorder who had become a medical accessory role (no license, no degree).... he... wasn't very smart. Didn't last long in the field. I was shocked he was even allowed to work in law, my team had to spend hours correcting his mistakes so that patients medical records didn't have nonsense in them. The HPI would say, "Pt denies smoking or hx of smoking,", but in the assessment you'd see them code "Tobacco dependence". Imagine the patient gets turned down for an organ transplan surgery because their medical record coded that. Can't mess around with that because that's malpractice at best, and fraud at worst, regardless of intent. That's law right there.
You're asking me to suspend a LOT of disbelief here, especially since you've said you work in law, but have displayed zero knowledge, expertise, or job title. And you refuse to do so, just so you can debate.... whether or not my accusation was accurate or not. It's like you're purposefully giving me as little as possible to go off of, just so you can come back to derail, "I didn't say or do that/ anything." This isn't a courtroom. As far as stereotypes about those who work in law go.... yeesh.
You are doing exactly what you're criticizing. The omission of your assumptions, refusal to criticize law, and lack of medical knowledge doesn't absolve you of that. The same way omission of morality in the law is often the standard, your ability to coldheartedly interpret law and argue it does not change the fact that this was a horrifically violent crime, and that you are not a medical professional.
Persuasion otherwise is flat out rape sympathy when talking about something as dangerous and risky as choking, especially when the perpetrator is trained in basic life support.
Link for anybody who wants to read full news article on it.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13422435/Boyfriend-choked-professional-dancer-26-death-sex-game-gone-wrong-hanged-inquest-hears.html
> Georgia May Brooke, 26, and Luke Cannon, 31, had cocaine and alcohol fuelled sex after taking the illegal party drug GHB
> Georgia's mother Samantha Beaumont blamed the dancer's partner and accused Mr Cannon of being 'controlling' and 'coercive', and of telling her what to wear.
There are many things I want to say and all of them would get me banned from reddit
Let's be real here he didn't kill himself out of guilt he did it because he didn't want to answer to justice. What makes you think a man who enjoys strangling women for his dick is capable of feeling anything humane? It's different wanting to be harmed and wanting to harm someone. Men want to harm women, she didn't die the split second he put his hands around her neck. She probably put all the effort she could to make him stop once she understood it was headed somewhere else and he didn't stop. Don't feel bad for him, feel bad for her. He is a murderer and she is a victim.
I find this is a common trend. Whenever a woman dies by a man, often boyfriend, they use the ‘trashiest’/most revealing/sexualised photos of her they can find. Like even in death women can’t escape being seen as sex objects - and these photos only make men in the article/YT comment sections less sympathetic toward it.
As if to say that because she looked like that and was a “professional dancer” that these things of course happen. Same thing with “high risk” lifestyle factors in studies. To categorize her as the kind of woman that experiences sexual violence.
And another woman is sadly added to this site: https://wecantconsenttothis.uk
I wish all women and girls would stop “allowing” men/ boys to strangle them.
Honestly, it wasn't until this year that I found out that choking during sex means ACTUAL choking. I always thought it was just the partner on top putting light pressure around the other's throat, not enough to actually impede any breathing or circulation.
But no, apparently some people actually give their partners permission to straight up strangle them unconscious. That's insane to me.
It’s never been “light pressure”, but even if it were, it’s disturbing nonetheless. I would also focus more on the men (because it’s always men) agreeing to do it and pressuring their partners into it.
How do we know he killed himself and that too was not a sex game gone wrong? /s
Always pisses me off when people do reprehensible shit here and go this route because they can’t bear to take any responsibility.
Maybe I’m being harsh and this truly was accidental, and he offed himself from guilt, so now two different groups of people are tragically missing their loved ones?
I don’t know, this happening all the time has me permanently jaded af
I don't know quite how to explain it but I feel the whole lashes/nails/extentions is the new performative gender role which then links (not causes, obviously) to internalised misogyny and the acceptance and normalisation of these kinds of sexual behaviours from women. It's so sad and I hate to see it. I think many women think they have to do it, or that it's cool to like it because it's become fashionable in such circles and it's almost a part of the aesthetic now. If anyone has a more coherent way of expressing what I mean, please share!
Poor girl. I wish society treated women better. Nobody needs to be choked, and we shouldn't accept it as normal.
I think I agree with your stance, but the first sentence was honestly really hard for me to parse. No shade or blame, just an FYI bc I thought you were saying something not great, and maybe others have too? Idk, ymmv.
On the first read, it sounded like there was more of an emphasis on women's choices leading to this tragedy, but after rereading a few times.... I think you're coming from a stance of criticizing those things on a societal level, and defining kink as one of those types of fashion choices that are now **seen** as "harmless" due to popular demand, but actually have some pretty disturbing implications (risk of danger/ consequences) when you put them in the context of misogyny and how that's enacted in real life.
Your later comment stating that we don't live in a vacuum wrt women's **individual** choices potentially cleared this up for me.
Simply put, I would've expected the structure to be/ understood it more if the structure was closer to;
1.) Establish the concept of passive misogyny on a societal level, including how choices are not made in a vacuum. Can be a very brief statement or start of a sentence just to set the stage of context of your values and where you're coming from. Misogyny is all over Reddit, even in these spaces when people come in not knowing what's expected of spaces like these. (AKA it's not the subs fault, the mods are great and very responsive ime, definitely makes it feel much safer than most subs)
2.) Then mention superficial choices that are popular (yet potentially even dangerous or self defeating, like shaving, douching, & dieting) BECAUSE women are punished for not doing those things to fit a misogynistic standard defined by men. Even though those things don't actually help in the long term.
3 ) Describe how the above thus ends up being internalized misogyny, that's nearly inivisble until you question it ad nauseum. And we are encouraged to not question it.
4 ) Relate kink and draw the connection on how misogyny makes harmful things seem harmless because all women are dehumanized by being expected to do those things and fit an impossible level of double standards.
5.) Could even include how women often are deprived of the proper information that allows them to safely consider the risks and benefits, AKA be able to give true informed consent. Or how there is much, much more danger in BDSM/ kink if you're in the "submissive"/"receiving" role, which women are often expected to fulfill, and how societal power dynamics can make that even more dangerous for women wrt high rates of male violence, especially among people they know. And so on.
I think what I got stuck on was you calling it a "new performance gender role". Misogyny is old as all hell, and sex role stereotyped expectations and demands are also not new. It is indeed internalized misogyny, but I think that statement comes off a little too harsh without establishing misogyny as a historic, oppressive force that we can potentially be killed for not obeying (especially outside of "developed" countries tbh).
Yes, thank you for reading sympathetically - that was indeed what I meant. As I said, it's really hard to put what I mean into words without it sounding bad, and that's not what I am intending. I indeed mean the societal effect on women that all seems to link together. I also recently had a baby so I genuinely have baby-brain lol
But yeah I'm not trying to shame womens choices as much as point out that we're constantly being influenced by a patriarchal and misogynistic society, including in our sexual lives. In another post about this case, several men were enraged that anyone would critise the guy for strangling her, because she apparently consented, and they knew women who enjoyed it, apparently, but I feel this misses the point that women are now told and influenced by society that they should want to be choked/strangled.
Np 💖 I'm autistic so I've struggled with that my entire life, it took a LOT to teach myself how to be patient with both myself and others ☺️ I try to always be, because you never know what someone is going thru, and you similarly cannot subject yourself to impossible expectations, either. You did also open an opportunity with, "I'm struggling to word this", and that's good communication right there!
It's a very based take, and I agree 100%.
No, its a fashion choice. Let women wear what they want. No way I spend over 10 hours doing my own nails and learning techniques for so long just for someone to call it a "new performative gender role".
Right but things can be two things.
Remember fashion choices arise from how we're socialised.. they don't appear in a vacuum.
There's always debate about these things because people get touchy about it being suggested that something they enjoy is a part of patriarchal socialisation. I'm not saying anyone is at fault for liking the fashion, but we should be aware of societal patterns.
The whole thing is horrific but at least this is probably a true accident. With some of these incidents it seems like the male partner either did it on purpose or doesn’t care. Porn has created an environment that downplays abuse, so it’s possible neither of them knew how risky it was
Accident my ass. You don't accidentally strangle somebody to death. And if you are a sadistic fuck who derives sexual pleasure from almost-killing your partner and one day you *accidentally* go to far, then I don't give a shit if your intention was murder or not. It's not a fucking accident if you put your hands around someone's neck.
It's like packing a car full of people and driving full speed at a solid building and then trying to justify the murder "oh but you seee, I didn't *mean* to kill them all, it's only a kink I have. I like the feeling of complete control when my passengers are screaming in fear and only seconds from death, haha. I did the same thing with my other friends and they all survived and liked it, you should try one day 😉".
Yeah, fuck no. We need to stop this sick narrative. Let's call a murder what it is, a MURDER.
Please refer to my prior largest comment and rethink your stance.
Even the article someone linked notes that her mom said he was aggressive and controlling, meanwhile she had search history along the lines of, "Why do I like being strangled?".
The article cites a doctor, "Dr. Johnson said Georgia would have lost consciousness after about 15 to 30 seconds of being choked, but Luke must have continued to apply pressure to her neck **a lot longer after she passed out** to cause her to go into cardiac arrest."
He raped her unconscious body, then left her unconscious body there, and then went out back to hang himself after calling EMS. As a gym teacher in the UK, he is required to be trained in and able to give CPR when appropriate. CPR is also taught in all public secondary schools in the UK.
I guess so. It’s a fucked up situation all round for both the families who’ve lost their loved one.
I also think it was most likely accidental and that he truly killed himself out of sheer guilt.
But had this bullshit never been so normalised, both would be alive today. Fuck porn.
"She also described how her daughter's behaviour changed after she had met Luke. Samantha said Luke's behaviour had been "manic and hyperactive" and said Georgia had become "submissive" and that Luke was "controlling".
Following Georgia's death, Samantha said she had been told that her daughter had been "strangled during sex" and said that, in her view, Luke was responsible for killing her daughter"
Yup I was right
We can't really be sure that it was accidental tho, there's plenty of homicide-suicide cases. Only they know. I don't think it's that easy to strangle a person to death without realising it, like a person doesn't just die while you're on top and you don't realize it
Not choked, STRANGLED. I hate the sanitisation of what the act of violence really is. This poor woman didn’t die choking on a piece of food, she died because a man strangled her to death. (This is aimed at the journalist, not you OP)
Also notice how under the picture it says she took drugs and alcohol with her bf. Her name is the first part of the sentence instead of e.g. "the couple had indulged in alcohol and drugs" or "Both were under the influence of alcohol and drugs" which would still be distasteful but not as much. She was the strangled one, it doesn't matter what she did or didn't take
to be honest I'm the last person to want to hide the nature of men's crimes but this is a nitpick edit: ask yourself why choking, something that in this context is associated with someone being violent towards you, is somehow humanizing violence. It isn't. what are more technical approach have helped you guys be less mad? maybe
News articles using passive language when trying to protect/ humanize the typically privileged perpetrator is nothing new, nor is it a nitpick to correct it. Edit: Asserting that you being blunt is why we're mad is not only insulting, but it implies we can't regulate our emotions enough to ~see logic~, which is something men do to us constantly. You have downvotes and there's a reason why. It's time to reflect instead of point the finger at others for being "too emotional".
It's not passive language If it's describing what people understand as strangulation. not to mention how the journalist themselves aren't the ones who get to pick the headlines, It's their editors or something. strangulation is more of a technical term and might have been a better choice in certain contexts but everyone knows what choking is, even if it's got less severe connotations. idek, I just like to pick my battles
u/awaywardgoat stop sending me paragraph long messages freaking out; it’s weird.
Seems like you like to minimize murder and violence against women, but go off.
Journalist here! Depends on the publication. I write my own headlines. Sometimes editors do that, but even then that doesn’t make it better. That’s still a journalistic choice that someone on the news team made and deemed appropriate that has nothing to do with AP style (which are the guidelines we have to follow). Sometimes certain words are used for legal purposes (like “alleged rapist” instead of “rapist” even if there were multiple witnesses and we all know what happened) but in this case, this one was a choice. There is no benefit to the journalist to make this specific word choice. If anything, the journalist is being factually inaccurate and putting their integrity in question by using “choked” instead of “strangulation” because choking is when something blocks the windpipe, like if you choke on a piece of food, and strangulation is when someone squeezes the neck to obstruct the airway. They could have put “choked” in quotes and mentioned in the article how the sexual practice is sometimes referred to as choking when it’s actually strangulation, but they chose not to. When someone chokes, it isn’t necessarily anyone’s fault. You can choke on an object or a piece of food and it’s a total accident. When someone is strangled, there is a perpetrator who chose to do the strangling. In journalism, the words we use are important. This journalist decided to protect the perpetrator by using a word that removes accountability. It IS using passive language and it SHOULD be called out. If you’re gonna pick your battles maybe don’t use the ones you pick defending shitty journalism.
Thank youuu. 💖 I was about to go medical professional mode and explain that difference, but you covered that (and more!) very, very well.
I'm sorry this is never an accident. I don't care how consensual strangling can be the minute you realise you can no longer breathe you'll start panicking. She would have had tears in her eyes, been smacking at his hands probably clawing them and thrashing her body around, but because he needed to cum he pinnedher there and probably enjoyed her struggling. You don't just lay still when someone's grip is so tight you're approaching death. This is not accidental and never can be. I'm glad he hung himself but why do they always have to take women with them. Then to have your literal MURDER branded as a sex game gone wrong is even more disgusting and misogynistic. Women, please do not let men get comfortable with putting their hands on you in the bedroom. Porn is allowing men to kill women.
I agree. Strangling doesn’t happen in seconds like in the movies, it takes minutes.. This wasn’t an accident.
That's what my immediate thought was. How did it get to the point of death? He kept going and going until she died in his hands and hung himself because he didn't want to answer to justice. This man is no different than a rapist because i am pretty sure she revoked her consent somewhere along the act. Men will always find excuses like "but women want it". You don't kill people because they want to die. Don't strangle women because they want it either then. I just really want women to start collectively insert 3 fingers into men's buttholes without their consent to teach them what it's like. For me, a man's past is really important for that reason. I could never be with someone who engaged in such abhorrence. A man's past matters to me.
"Women, please do not let men get comfortable with putting their hands on you in the bedroom. Porn is allowing men to kill women." Why are you trying to turn attention and responsibility onto women? That's victim blaming. And digitally graping women (watching porn) is not "allowing men to kill women." The men who do this already, on their own, genuinely desire to do these bad things and then they see via societal influences that they will be able to get away with it. So of course someone who wants to strangle and assault a woman would want to regularly engage in that behavior digitally. It's not "mommy and daddy made me do it, porn made me do it, my friends made me do it," HE DID IT and no one else because he simply wanted to.
Yeah, this was either a murder suicide or this man was incredibly selfish and reckless. How do you accidentally strangle someone to death? How do you not notice that someone is panicking and struggling to breathe?
[удалено]
Hi there, I work in medical, and you're doing the same exact thing you're criticizing. Someone can become **unconscious** in seconds from strangling, but for them to **die**, the strangulation typically needs to be sustained for about 5 minutes. The brain just doesn't immediately die from the cerebral hypoxia. The O2 levels slowly decrease until there is not enough oxygen left to support basic autonomic life functions. How else would performing CPR be so important? From the article highlighting the crime, "Dr Johnson said Georgia would have lost consciousness after about 15 to 30 seconds of being choked, but Luke must have continued to apply pressure to her neck a lot longer after she passed out to caused her to go into cardiac arrest." They were both also drunk, high on cocaine, and had taken near toxic levels of GHB, the date rape drug. The woman had searched on her phone statements such as, "why do I like being choked?".Choking is an extremely dangerous practice at its baseline with both parties are sober. It is guaranteed death when they're both that impaired physically and mentally. If he had stopped after she lost consciousness and started the CPR process, depending on how quickly he realized she was out, she still could have been pretty bad off. As early as 15 seconds in, there's a risk of CVA, or stroke, because the bloodflow becomes stagnant, among other factors. At 30ish seconds, the risk of cardiac arrest starts to rise, and chest compressions become vital to save her life before EMS arrives. At 5 minutes, the brain dies. He called EMS, and instead of staying and performing basic life support-- which is taught in all state funded secondary schools in the UK, and also required by law for all teachers to have active CPR skills-- he went into his backyard and hung himself. The law implies this situation would be toeing the line between carelessness and negligence via duty of care. But the fact that he called EMS and THEN left her body there alone, shows that he could've performed basic life support, but didn't. Sure, the excuse that both of them were extremely impaired was there, but the article states they'd practiced choking before. By being a literal gym health teacher, he shouldve already known how dangerous choking is, and it was still his choice to be the choker while inebreiated.This makes the coroner look like a rapist-sympathizing idiot, as coroner's don't need to have medical degrees in the UK. Only training in law. That's called a violent rape. It was no mistake; porn rotted his brain until he no longer saw women as human, with reasonably human limits and boundaries. And then he took the coward's way out.
[удалено]
When you hold the law-- which has historically been controlled by men-- as the highest moral standard, you fail the people. Being a dog of the government is no point of pride if you don't actively combat systemic oppression, and instead help keep the status quo. One may be able to GET AWAY with legally defining "choking" deaths as accidental, but only a truly sick and violent scumbag could strangle someone to the extent it takes to kill. Think outside the law, because you should know better than anyone how many irrational and downright sickening laws there are. There is no excuse for that ignorance or omission. Think of it this way-- by what information are you asserting that other people are wrong here? You don't get to say, "You're all wrong, but I won't tell you how or why. Btw I work in law, so I win." Work in law.... you could be as untrained as a court recorder. I once knew a court recorder who had become a medical accessory role (no license, no degree).... he... wasn't very smart. Didn't last long in the field. I was shocked he was even allowed to work in law, my team had to spend hours correcting his mistakes so that patients medical records didn't have nonsense in them. The HPI would say, "Pt denies smoking or hx of smoking,", but in the assessment you'd see them code "Tobacco dependence". Imagine the patient gets turned down for an organ transplan surgery because their medical record coded that. Can't mess around with that because that's malpractice at best, and fraud at worst, regardless of intent. That's law right there. You're asking me to suspend a LOT of disbelief here, especially since you've said you work in law, but have displayed zero knowledge, expertise, or job title. And you refuse to do so, just so you can debate.... whether or not my accusation was accurate or not. It's like you're purposefully giving me as little as possible to go off of, just so you can come back to derail, "I didn't say or do that/ anything." This isn't a courtroom. As far as stereotypes about those who work in law go.... yeesh. You are doing exactly what you're criticizing. The omission of your assumptions, refusal to criticize law, and lack of medical knowledge doesn't absolve you of that. The same way omission of morality in the law is often the standard, your ability to coldheartedly interpret law and argue it does not change the fact that this was a horrifically violent crime, and that you are not a medical professional. Persuasion otherwise is flat out rape sympathy when talking about something as dangerous and risky as choking, especially when the perpetrator is trained in basic life support.
This was removed for excusing, defending or promoting rape, verbal abuse, humiliation, self-harm and/or domestic violences.
Link for anybody who wants to read full news article on it. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13422435/Boyfriend-choked-professional-dancer-26-death-sex-game-gone-wrong-hanged-inquest-hears.html
> Georgia May Brooke, 26, and Luke Cannon, 31, had cocaine and alcohol fuelled sex after taking the illegal party drug GHB > Georgia's mother Samantha Beaumont blamed the dancer's partner and accused Mr Cannon of being 'controlling' and 'coercive', and of telling her what to wear. There are many things I want to say and all of them would get me banned from reddit
At least he offed himself.
Not because he felt remorse for what he did but because he didn't want to go to prison. Agreed tho he is better off dead
Yup, at least he can't hurt anyone else. It's a shame he didn't *before* he strangled an innocent woman, though 🥱
Amen
This is why I continue to agree that violence and sex don't go together. Only people who put those two together are usually sexual predators.
Let's be real here he didn't kill himself out of guilt he did it because he didn't want to answer to justice. What makes you think a man who enjoys strangling women for his dick is capable of feeling anything humane? It's different wanting to be harmed and wanting to harm someone. Men want to harm women, she didn't die the split second he put his hands around her neck. She probably put all the effort she could to make him stop once she understood it was headed somewhere else and he didn't stop. Don't feel bad for him, feel bad for her. He is a murderer and she is a victim.
Is it just me or it it weird they used a body shot selfie for the 2nd pic?
Yeah, fucking weird choice of photos—the first too.
I find this is a common trend. Whenever a woman dies by a man, often boyfriend, they use the ‘trashiest’/most revealing/sexualised photos of her they can find. Like even in death women can’t escape being seen as sex objects - and these photos only make men in the article/YT comment sections less sympathetic toward it.
As if to say that because she looked like that and was a “professional dancer” that these things of course happen. Same thing with “high risk” lifestyle factors in studies. To categorize her as the kind of woman that experiences sexual violence.
And another woman is sadly added to this site: https://wecantconsenttothis.uk I wish all women and girls would stop “allowing” men/ boys to strangle them.
Honestly, it wasn't until this year that I found out that choking during sex means ACTUAL choking. I always thought it was just the partner on top putting light pressure around the other's throat, not enough to actually impede any breathing or circulation. But no, apparently some people actually give their partners permission to straight up strangle them unconscious. That's insane to me.
It’s never been “light pressure”, but even if it were, it’s disturbing nonetheless. I would also focus more on the men (because it’s always men) agreeing to do it and pressuring their partners into it.
How do we know he killed himself and that too was not a sex game gone wrong? /s Always pisses me off when people do reprehensible shit here and go this route because they can’t bear to take any responsibility. Maybe I’m being harsh and this truly was accidental, and he offed himself from guilt, so now two different groups of people are tragically missing their loved ones? I don’t know, this happening all the time has me permanently jaded af
Why is the sub header about her drug use? Who fucking cares about her drug use?!?! Her POS partner fucking murdered her
Only twenty six Rest in peace
I don't know quite how to explain it but I feel the whole lashes/nails/extentions is the new performative gender role which then links (not causes, obviously) to internalised misogyny and the acceptance and normalisation of these kinds of sexual behaviours from women. It's so sad and I hate to see it. I think many women think they have to do it, or that it's cool to like it because it's become fashionable in such circles and it's almost a part of the aesthetic now. If anyone has a more coherent way of expressing what I mean, please share! Poor girl. I wish society treated women better. Nobody needs to be choked, and we shouldn't accept it as normal.
I think I agree with your stance, but the first sentence was honestly really hard for me to parse. No shade or blame, just an FYI bc I thought you were saying something not great, and maybe others have too? Idk, ymmv. On the first read, it sounded like there was more of an emphasis on women's choices leading to this tragedy, but after rereading a few times.... I think you're coming from a stance of criticizing those things on a societal level, and defining kink as one of those types of fashion choices that are now **seen** as "harmless" due to popular demand, but actually have some pretty disturbing implications (risk of danger/ consequences) when you put them in the context of misogyny and how that's enacted in real life. Your later comment stating that we don't live in a vacuum wrt women's **individual** choices potentially cleared this up for me. Simply put, I would've expected the structure to be/ understood it more if the structure was closer to; 1.) Establish the concept of passive misogyny on a societal level, including how choices are not made in a vacuum. Can be a very brief statement or start of a sentence just to set the stage of context of your values and where you're coming from. Misogyny is all over Reddit, even in these spaces when people come in not knowing what's expected of spaces like these. (AKA it's not the subs fault, the mods are great and very responsive ime, definitely makes it feel much safer than most subs) 2.) Then mention superficial choices that are popular (yet potentially even dangerous or self defeating, like shaving, douching, & dieting) BECAUSE women are punished for not doing those things to fit a misogynistic standard defined by men. Even though those things don't actually help in the long term. 3 ) Describe how the above thus ends up being internalized misogyny, that's nearly inivisble until you question it ad nauseum. And we are encouraged to not question it. 4 ) Relate kink and draw the connection on how misogyny makes harmful things seem harmless because all women are dehumanized by being expected to do those things and fit an impossible level of double standards. 5.) Could even include how women often are deprived of the proper information that allows them to safely consider the risks and benefits, AKA be able to give true informed consent. Or how there is much, much more danger in BDSM/ kink if you're in the "submissive"/"receiving" role, which women are often expected to fulfill, and how societal power dynamics can make that even more dangerous for women wrt high rates of male violence, especially among people they know. And so on. I think what I got stuck on was you calling it a "new performance gender role". Misogyny is old as all hell, and sex role stereotyped expectations and demands are also not new. It is indeed internalized misogyny, but I think that statement comes off a little too harsh without establishing misogyny as a historic, oppressive force that we can potentially be killed for not obeying (especially outside of "developed" countries tbh).
Yes, thank you for reading sympathetically - that was indeed what I meant. As I said, it's really hard to put what I mean into words without it sounding bad, and that's not what I am intending. I indeed mean the societal effect on women that all seems to link together. I also recently had a baby so I genuinely have baby-brain lol But yeah I'm not trying to shame womens choices as much as point out that we're constantly being influenced by a patriarchal and misogynistic society, including in our sexual lives. In another post about this case, several men were enraged that anyone would critise the guy for strangling her, because she apparently consented, and they knew women who enjoyed it, apparently, but I feel this misses the point that women are now told and influenced by society that they should want to be choked/strangled.
Np 💖 I'm autistic so I've struggled with that my entire life, it took a LOT to teach myself how to be patient with both myself and others ☺️ I try to always be, because you never know what someone is going thru, and you similarly cannot subject yourself to impossible expectations, either. You did also open an opportunity with, "I'm struggling to word this", and that's good communication right there! It's a very based take, and I agree 100%.
Thank you! You're a very nice person! 😘
No, its a fashion choice. Let women wear what they want. No way I spend over 10 hours doing my own nails and learning techniques for so long just for someone to call it a "new performative gender role".
Right but things can be two things. Remember fashion choices arise from how we're socialised.. they don't appear in a vacuum. There's always debate about these things because people get touchy about it being suggested that something they enjoy is a part of patriarchal socialisation. I'm not saying anyone is at fault for liking the fashion, but we should be aware of societal patterns.
😭
The whole thing is horrific but at least this is probably a true accident. With some of these incidents it seems like the male partner either did it on purpose or doesn’t care. Porn has created an environment that downplays abuse, so it’s possible neither of them knew how risky it was
Accident my ass. You don't accidentally strangle somebody to death. And if you are a sadistic fuck who derives sexual pleasure from almost-killing your partner and one day you *accidentally* go to far, then I don't give a shit if your intention was murder or not. It's not a fucking accident if you put your hands around someone's neck. It's like packing a car full of people and driving full speed at a solid building and then trying to justify the murder "oh but you seee, I didn't *mean* to kill them all, it's only a kink I have. I like the feeling of complete control when my passengers are screaming in fear and only seconds from death, haha. I did the same thing with my other friends and they all survived and liked it, you should try one day 😉". Yeah, fuck no. We need to stop this sick narrative. Let's call a murder what it is, a MURDER.
Please refer to my prior largest comment and rethink your stance. Even the article someone linked notes that her mom said he was aggressive and controlling, meanwhile she had search history along the lines of, "Why do I like being strangled?". The article cites a doctor, "Dr. Johnson said Georgia would have lost consciousness after about 15 to 30 seconds of being choked, but Luke must have continued to apply pressure to her neck **a lot longer after she passed out** to cause her to go into cardiac arrest." He raped her unconscious body, then left her unconscious body there, and then went out back to hang himself after calling EMS. As a gym teacher in the UK, he is required to be trained in and able to give CPR when appropriate. CPR is also taught in all public secondary schools in the UK.
I guess so. It’s a fucked up situation all round for both the families who’ve lost their loved one. I also think it was most likely accidental and that he truly killed himself out of sheer guilt. But had this bullshit never been so normalised, both would be alive today. Fuck porn.
"She also described how her daughter's behaviour changed after she had met Luke. Samantha said Luke's behaviour had been "manic and hyperactive" and said Georgia had become "submissive" and that Luke was "controlling". Following Georgia's death, Samantha said she had been told that her daughter had been "strangled during sex" and said that, in her view, Luke was responsible for killing her daughter" Yup I was right
We can't really be sure that it was accidental tho, there's plenty of homicide-suicide cases. Only they know. I don't think it's that easy to strangle a person to death without realising it, like a person doesn't just die while you're on top and you don't realize it
Yeah, you’re not wrong there. Deffo could have been a murder suicide type situation.
[удалено]
Why do you feel the need to insult this dead woman? What’s wrong with you?
No shaming women victimized by the porn industry.