40 points

I’m very conflicted about this whole thing. On the one hand, yeah it’s kind of a scandal and people have every right to be booing him every time he touches the ball.

On the other hand, he was convicted, sentenced, did time and is now back in society apparently showing remorse. People are calling for his career to end and various wishes of death on him. Why can’t he continue his life?

Are we supposed to lock up all criminals forever? Kill them? Just not allow them to follow their chosen career after getting out? Or is it just sports they shouldn’t be allowed to participate in?

permalink
report
reply
120 points

apparently showing remorse

He showed no remorse. He called it nonsense. He said he made mistakes as a youth. He has not even bothered to offer anything in the way of an apology.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-7 points

I also saw those statements on his wiki. Also saw some about it being “the worst mistake of his life”. I don’t imagine he would get parole without showing remorse.

permalink
report
parent
reply
32 points

You don’t imagine? Well then that proves it. He’s very sorry he raped a 12-year-old girl over and over even though he’s never said so in public.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points
*

He didn’t even serve his full sentence. You can’t call him reformed that way

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

I agree with you pretty much on all points.

I am also conflicted.

It’s up to courts and parole boards to determine what punishments are appropriate, given the context of the crimes.

I don’t like the guy, and of course his crime was repugnant, but I can still acknowledge that he’s one of the best volleyball players in the world. These two opinions are incongruous and yet, they exist at the same time.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points
*

For me, there’s a difference between rehabilitation and letting someone represent your country at the olympics. Athletes don’t have to be perfect but to a certain extent they are ambassadors of their country and role models.

This paired with him not staying in prison for long because the Dutch legal system is fucking abysmal is reason enough for me to celebrate that he’s out.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

My thought is more along the lines of, “Regardless of his talent level, is this really the kind of person that his country wants representing them on the world stage?”

Like, okay even if he’s the absolute best by an order of magnitude…if he were from my country, I’d rather lose every match than win on the talents of someone like that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

First of all, not all crimes are the same nor should be treated equally.

Secondly, he raped a 12 year old, and that’s unredeemable in a lot of people’s book.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

That doesn’t answer their question though. Those people don’t have to be friends with the guy, but wishing him death or homelessness etc is not only horrible but solves nothing other than making them feel like they’re “better”.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

How about “not put them representing your country, where other people might understand that as an endorsement as see him as a role model”.

There is shades of grey between “killing him” and “send him to the Olympics”.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

he can continue his life, but get the fuck out of public positions like this if youre a fucking pedo rapist

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

On the other hand, he was convicted, sentenced, did time and is now back in society apparently showing remorse.

He hardly did any time at all. Frankly you do more time for a parking ticket. Also when did he show remorse like whenever has he ever shown any remorse at all?

permalink
report
parent
reply
31 points
*

did time and is now back in society apparently showing remorse.

Nope, neither of those.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

What do you mean? He served 13 months and got out on parole. He’s publicly expressed remorse, but that isn’t exactly conclusive. I assume there would have been some genuine remorse inside, otherwise there would be no parole.

My point is, if you stop anyone who has been to jail returning to normal society at all, then why let them out at all? You might as well just put every criminal in jail for life, or just kill them straight away.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

You might as well just put every criminal in jail for life, or just kill them straight away.

Just the child rapists is fine with me. There’s no reforming that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
-8 points

“I can’t reverse it, so I have to carry the consequences. It’s the biggest mistake of my life.”

Source: The article linked in the OP

If that’s not remorse, I don’t know what is.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Remorse: “I am sorry for what I did and the impact it had on the victim. I made stupid choices that hurt another person, and while I can never take that back, I will seek to do better so no one needs to suffer from my actions again.”

Not sorry you did it, just sorry you got caught: “I can’t reverse it, so I have to carry the consequences. It’s the biggest mistake of my life.”

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points
*

Never apologiest and he only ever talks about how it is bad for him. Remorse it is not.

permalink
report
parent
reply
75 points

He did barely a year of prison… I personally don’t quite think it’s enough for raping a kid, but hey that’s just my opinion

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Enough for what? Your sense of vengeance? I don’t know, only you can tell… Enough for rehabilitation? I don’t know, but it is possible. Time needed for rehabilitation varies widely. It’s quite possible the year was enough. One thing we do know is that the Netherlands is heavily in favour of rehabilitation over punishment, since rehabilitation actually forwards society

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

This is exactly the point I’m trying to make, but am getting downvoted because I apparently sound like a “child rape apologist”.

I understand the crime is emotionally charged, but that doesn’t mean anyone convicted of it should just be thrown in the oubliette.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-18 points

This site is full of left wing fakers who blow their cover when it comes to stuff like this.

permalink
report
parent
reply
34 points

I am European and heavily against punitive justice. But I think one year of prison for a crime almost universally considered among the worst is not enough for rehabilitation, and I find this opinion validated by the lack of understanding or even remorse shown by the guy in public statements

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*

While I agree this seems extremely small. The netherlands is not the US. The specifics of court cases are not made public. We have no idea about them. It might be a very ambiguous case that barely fit the definition of rape or whatever.

Not trying to defend rape or rapists, but we may need more context before we can judge the length of a sentence.

Edit: I just read a less opinionated in depth article on him, and from the details I see, man he fucked up bad, in my opinion he deserved more than 13 months. He got sentenced to 4 years at first but that got cut short.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

I agree, it seems like a small amount on the face of it.

But at the same time, I’m more inclined to trust the judgement of the prison system (at least in The Netherlands) as to whether he is ready to return to society.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-21 points
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

It’s not the prison system of the Netherlands that you should be considering, It’s the legitimacy of the politicians that decided to release him. Clearly it was a political move do you believe that somebody else in his position would have been released so early?

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

It seems like a lot of criminals who “did their time” really didn’t do much at all.

Compare that to a lifetime of hurt caused to the victim(s) and their families, and it just doesn’t seem good enough.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

I’m not conflicted. I’m not saying he should be in jail forever. But I’m also saying it’s clear that he shouldn’t be representing his country on the world stage. That’s a privilege you should lose forever when you rape a child. Cause remember, going to the Olympics is a privilege, not a right. It’s like yeah he served your time, would you let him babysit your daughter now then? Or let him hang out at schools? You gotta forgive, but you’re stupid if you forget

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

There’s a system in place for that. It’s called ‘verklaring omtrent gedrag’. For many jobs and positions you need this certificate of conduct in order to apply. The ministry of justice will not hand out the certificate if your crime is related to the position you apply for. This means he would probably never be allowed to work at a school for instance.

permalink
report
parent
reply
33 points

It’s a good thing the court of public opinion still has a voice and doesn’t approve of child rapists quite so heartily as the Dutch government. What “time” did he do - like 11months? And he was never remorseful in the slightest. If his only real punishment is going to be him and his country getting booed by the world at the Olympics, I’m happy there’s at least that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

It’s simple really.

His judgement, sentencing and punishment satisfy the needs of the law. the law has done it’s part (arguably terribly in this case) and is at rest.

This is vastly different than the judgement bright forth by the court of public opinion. They are not so forgiving.

Perhaps that’s something the dude should have thought about before doing what he did

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

Why can’t he continue his life?

Because he raped a child. The only olympic event he should have been allowed to participate in was competitive shooting, as a target.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

On the other hand, he was convicted, sentenced, did time and is now back in society apparently showing remorse.

He flew to England, raped a 12 yo, got convicted by the English for 4 years. He was deported back to Netherlands, they dropped it to 1 year.

This isn’t justice.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-20 points

I’m on the fence on that. He raped a minor which is not excusable, he possibly ruined her life. How can a person like that be redeemed? Or does he not deserve redemption? He was 19. When I was 19, I was an irresponsible child. There is no proof that he is a pedophile.

permalink
report
reply
4 points

he raped a minor

no proof that he’s a pedophile

Are you stupid?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

If you go by medical definition, that would be hebephilia. Pedophilia is only used with children younger than 11.

The reason in this case could also have been because she was an easy target, the age must not necessarily be the reason.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Repeatedly telling people he’s not technically a pedophile is really not in any way helpful. He raped a 12-year-old multiple times. Who is it hurting to call him a pedophile?

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points
*

Did you know most child rapists don’t fit pedophilia diagnostic critia?

Edit: I read an article on him and he has a 2 year old son. I really hope he isn’t a pedophile.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

The majority of child molesters are not pedophiles. It is more about power dynamics / them being an easy target.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Get help before you hurt someone.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points
*

I was stupid at 19 too, but for me that meant letting my at-the-time boyfriend finish inside even though I didn’t know him nearly well enough. Turned out he was slutting out it with randos and never got tested before our relationship. That’s around the stupid I expect at 19.

Rape is a bit fucking beyond that, don’t you think?

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

Bro she was like 12. I was also an irresponsible child at 19, but I wasn’t raping 12 year olds, nor did it cross my mind.

Playing devil’s advocate on pedophilia is not it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points

You should check the definition of pedophilia.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Well actually-ing pedophilia is not a good look.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-10 points
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

The fact that your reply has fewer points than that rape apologist’s is infuriating, wtf is wrong with people??

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

No. People who don’t even bother offering anything in the way of apology for their atrocities do not deserve redemption.

permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points
*

Dunno about you, but when I was 19 the thought of raping a child never crossed my mind. He’s spent less than a year in prison, and hasn’t repented for what he did. Redemption has to at the very least come with an understanding that what he did was wrong.

Edit: slightly more than a year; 13 months

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I bet “raping a child” did neither cross his mind, when he did it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

He groomed the child for YEARS before he raped her. It’s wild you’re defending this

Edit: I can’t find the article I thought I read about him first meeting the child when they were 10

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

There’s a pretty obvious difference between a kid who’s 12, and someone you could reasonably mistake for being an adult (UK age of consent is 16).

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

He’s spent more than a year in prison.

Also, we can’t take his words for gospel, but atleast he acts as if he’s repented:

“I can’t reverse it, so I have to carry the consequences. It’s the biggest mistake of my life.”

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

Yes, a whole 13 months. What a punishment for raping a 12-year-old girl over and over.

And that isn’t repenting. Repenting includes an apology for what he did.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

There is no proof that he is a pedophile.

Not entirely sure where you’re going with this. He’s not an irredeemable asshole because he might be a pedophile, he’s an irredeemable asshole because he raped a child and that’s indisputable.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Hi, friend. I’m sure you have well-meaning intentions by making this comment. As someone who was a survivor of a similar situation such as this, and who also grew into a 19 year old, I can tell you that from a non-clinical perspective, if you are attracted to a child of early puberty age as a 19 year old adult, I don’t think making this assumption is too far off the table. I’m sick and tired of coming on here and listening to this discourse about this volleyball player. Thank you for your two sides to every story, attempt at nuance and empathy for a rapist here. As a survivor of CSA, this has never been granted to me or anyone else I know of that has survived something like this. We need a different reaction to people who do these acts to innocent children.

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

Every time a rapist is sad or something bad happens to them, I smile. The worse the event, the happier I am. Death should be their only release from torture. I accept no less and grant no pity, no matter how bad it gets for them.

And it goes double for Trump.

permalink
report
reply
5 points

I agree with your sentiment, but nobody deserves torture, no matter how terrible they are or what they’ve done. I can totally accept an argument that society is better without some people in it, but torture isn’t good for anyone, ever, and we should never, ever endorse its use, even when speaking figuratively.

If our goal is to minimize suffering for everyone, intentionally inflicting needless suffering on others is antithetical to that goal, and makes us no better than those we oppose.

permalink
report
parent
reply
59 points

Fucking finally. Price of shit rapist. Maybe the Dutch will reform their legal system in-time for the next Olympics?

permalink
report
reply
45 points

Im not sure if any legal system would say a felon cant join the olympics. Unless you mean having draconian punishments like the US. Then no, I hope they dont damage their legal system to become that corrupt.

permalink
report
parent
reply
46 points

He got 13 months for rape and only one of those months was actually their choice the other 12 was the UK government’s choice. Essentially they thought that one month of imprisonment for rape was acceptable.

They clearly need some change.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-7 points

The Dutch need a metric fuckton of cultural reform. I’m saying this as a descendant of them in Canada.

Blackface is not an acceptable holiday tradition, and marzipan is concentrated evil. Also fuuuuuuuuck rapists, you get nothing, you fucking LOSE, and you goddamn keep losing as an example to any other idiots, good day sir!

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

What was their reasoning for not punishing the guy? I haven’t heard about that yet. And frankly a year for rape also sounds anomalous

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

I think having a child rapist not be in the Olympics isn’t draconian. The Dutch sound a little too lax with their “formication” laws

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

People seem to be more outraged that a rapist is allowed to play sportsball than rapists being allowed to become president.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

How is there no mechanism to remove him? I mean, ideally he shouldn’t have been selected in the first place but under the insanely charitable assumption that it was sloppiness and not active negligence that recruited him.

permalink
report
reply
12 points

On what grounds would he be removed though? Is there a reason countries shouldn’t select athletes that have been to prison?

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

The fact that he’s a fucking child rapist. No need to be an apologist for the pedophile, he’s a shit person and it’s ok to call him that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Yeah but that’s not really what my question was about.

Why shouldn’t the Dutch delegation select him? And what rules would prevent a selection of any convicted criminal?

Or are we talking about the IOC specifically banning people convicted of child rape offences?

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

All Olympic athletes sign a declaration saying they’ll strive to be a role model or something similar. I’d say a convicted rapist shouldn’t be considered a role model and therefore shouldn’t be allowed to compete.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

I get your point, but a convicted criminal who is rehabilitated could also be considered a good role model. Not saying he is, but not really a means to disqualify him.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

On the grounds that the Olympic Games is mostly a propaganda event and he’s absolutely terrible propaganda?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Well on that same vein, the IOC unilaterally disqualifying a country’s chosen athlete is likely to be even more politically problematic.

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points

It’s not the Olympic organizers’ job to disqualify someone based on how immoral, criminal, of poor character or despicable a person is (on who’s laws anyway?). This is a major failure on the country’s olympic committee selecting these people to represent themselves to the world.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

Yet they’re more than happy to disqualify and otherwise exclude people based on their biology. Curious… 🤔

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Who have they disqualified?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

On the one hand that’s supposedly to do with competitive advantage. It makes sense to try to even the playing field, which should have nothing to do with objection on ‘moral’grounds. I’d argue this is mostly a good thing given the iffiness of many groups’ morals.

Case in point, your exact examples, which brings me to the other hand. Banning trans athletes on ‘fairness’ grounds is bullshit. In most sports there’s no known competitive advantage. Where there’s an imbalance they tend to show disadvantage. The rare cases with an advantage for trans athletes tend to disappear the moment you correct for size/weight, which is not something we’d exclude cis athletes for. None of your examples should have happened. They do not hold water on fairness grounds, and any moralistic reasons behind it are reprehensible.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Obviously it’s a murky subject on the topic of intersex and transgender athletes participating in the ladies’ competition. However on the whole, the focus is on matters related to achieving a fair competition to a sport rather than someone’s morality. The IOC, with consultation from a multitude of countries, dropped many of the testosterone and sex testing criteria for this year, where before the 2016 olympics, trans and intersex athletes were barred completely without genital surgery.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Sure, but how did they end up selecting him and why can’t they recall him?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

That is a very good question and quite shameful for the Dutch Olympic Committee that they did not.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points
*

Isn’t volleyball a team sport? How are his teammates okay with being on a team with a child molester? How are his opponents okay with playing in a game against him? Even if there’s no official mechanism, couldn’t all the players just be like “Nah, fuck that, he goes or I do”. The only time I’ve every knowingly ran into one I couldn’t have been civil towards them if I wanted to let alone actually work together on something.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

The olympics have athletes competing from countries where being gay is a crime, like the girl from Algeria, it’s not on them to be the world police.

permalink
report
parent
reply

World News

!world@lemmy.world

Create post

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

  • Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:

    • Post news articles only
    • Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
    • Title must match the article headline
    • Not United States Internal News
    • Recent (Past 30 Days)
    • Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
  • Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think “Is this fair use?”, it probably isn’t. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.

  • Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.

  • Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.

  • Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19

  • Rule 5: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

  • Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.

  • Rule 7: We didn’t USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you’re posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Community stats

  • 11K

    Monthly active users

  • 17K

    Posts

  • 284K

    Comments