Quote:
|
Quote:
The fact is that with the Scandals and victims coming forward in Hollywood and on TV, there are a lot of stories of women coming to terms with their abuse and seeing that people will believe them. Yes it';s a sudden rush, but it's not suspicious, it's quite understandable. All it needed were a few brave ones to stand up and say "I was abused" and others suddenly can see that "it wasn't just me" and "I'm not alone" and they are granted the courage to stand up as well. We saw the same thing happen in the UK with the Jimmy Savile case. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Bringing up the fact that the victim posed nude in Playboy (as L8E did, and as SG approvingly cited) seems designed to discredit her. It seems quite a stretch to claim that it was just some attempt to solicit the names of more of the woman's abusers, since it was assumed she must have had many. Why? Is there some fantasy that perhaps she is withholding a few Republican names? Where is the call for all of Harvey Weinstein's accusers (most of them extremely good-looking women) to mention every other perv they've encountered? |
It is equally probable that she was spurred into revealing the kiss and grope by someone looking to mitigate the Moore disaster as it is that she was just emboldened by all the other revelations recently.
It doesn't really matter why she did it since it really did happen to her. She always had the right to reveal it whenever she so choose. |
I find her career in modelling et al totally irrelevant but not her political connections nor the advance warning to Roger Stone - of all disgusting rat****ers in politics. Franken apologized for the photo but did not confirm the kissing incident and submitted to ethics investigation. I think the rational position is to wait for the result of that.
|
Quote:
Quote:
1) She worked in the scantily clad modelling industry 2) The modelling industry is rife with abuse 3) She must have been abused a lot because 1) & 2) 4) Claiming that the lower level abuse of Franken ruined her life while ignoring all the other abuses on her is suspicious. The pictures merely established point 1), that "She worked in the scantily clad modelling industry." Of course the assumption that the second point is true is very questionable. While abuse does happen in the modelling industry, I don't believe it is as rife as SG indicates. Of course point 3 is illogical regardless of the truth of points 1 and 2, as even in a highly abusive modelling industry she may have never actually been targeted herself. Which leads to point 4 being shown to just be wrong logically and the argument defeated. There is no need to create strawmen over it, especially when no-one other then those claiming the strawmen seem to be actually claiming that the images discredit her in anyway. |
Quote:
She's just a confident, empowered, beautiful woman (beautiful like all confident, empowered women, regardless of body shape). She's even comfortable with publicizing her nude photos on Fox alongside trusted colleagues. It's OK if co-workers have seen her naked. It's not like anyone buys Playboy for impure reasons -- except for sexual deviants like Franken. |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
If you level standards - and punishments - like that, please report me, for my transgressiona are too numerous for the ISF to bear, and don't ever vote for any male, for chances are too big he has laughed at a sexist joke in a woman's presence at some point in life. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
You repeat one bit, but it has already been pointed out that it's false: no, the reference to her modelling career was not designed to discredit her. Not at all. That is not in SG's teyt. Not at all. It seems to be in your head. I agree with the rest: the argument SG does in fact make is poorly constructed, for it assumes facts not in evidence, and makes demands of harrassment victims that are none of her business to make. But it is not the argument TBD strawmans. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
While it's clear to me that this is brought out in order to mitigate the Moore-disaster, and it might well be exaggerated, the optics of it are very bad for Franken. There should be some form of censure (very public) awaiting the ethics investigation, and if that shows that what he did could be considered unethical or even illegal, he should resign or be kicked out.
Democrats need to own this issue and show that there's nothing partisan about combating sexual assault. |
Quote:
But calling the bad behaviours that really are sexual assaults just pranks, we allow sexual assaults and harassment to be acceptable, whether it's grabbing a woman's breasts or anyone's butt, or poking a classmate in the butt with a broom handle. It's not acceptable behaviour and we need to stop justifying it and giving those that do it a pass. |
Quote:
We can have bonding and interactions with each other without taking advantage of each other in a non-consensual and sexual manner. It's really simply, if you want to touch or even pretend to touch, someone in a sexual manner, then ask their permission first before doing it. If they say no, don't do it. And especially don't do it without permission and then just claim it was a prank or a joke. |
Quote:
That doesn't make it right though, it still reduces her to a pair of breasts that are there just for these men's entertainment as their playthings. It is treating her as a object, not as a person, and that is the essence of what makes Sexual Harassment and Assault so bad, it devalues the person that is victimised by it and discounts their humanity. It's clear that he thought it was a joke and a prank, but it's not, it's turning her into his toy to be played with, a thing for his entertainment, and that is why it is so wrong. |
Quote:
Who’s equating the two? I'm pointing about two very different messages from the same source. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
We should be able to simply shrug off and accept miscommunication will happen in regards to sexual relationships. (And before people try to build straw pyramids I am of course not using "miscommunication" to mean anything like rape, sexual assault and harassment etc.) |
Quote:
|
Remember men, consent can be implied, even when the woman is asleep:rolleyes:
|
Quote:
Quote:
What would your reaction have been of he had say drawn a moustache on her (using this as a slightly less extreme example of something people mentioned earlier)? What would your reaction have been if it was a bloke he was pretending to reach for? |
Quote:
....(And before people try to build straw pyramids I am of course not using "miscommunication" to mean anything like rape, sexual assault and harassment etc.).... |
Quote:
Because they run in precisely opposite directions. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Miscommunications can be avoided by opening your mouth and speaking. However at the end of the day thins isn't what was being discussed anyways. What was being talked about was where jokes and pranks cross an inappropriate and non-consensual touching line. |
Quote:
One of them says sexual assault is a serious problem which needs to be fixed. The other says it's fun to pretend to sexually assault someone without their consent. You really don't see the incongruity here? |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
I really don't think in such circumstances there is any fault by the kisser, if the other person pulls away, gives you a what-the-heck etc. it should be a simply "Sorry, lets carry on dancing". It is not a sexual assault. Quote:
As a sort of general disclaimer. I hate being touched unexpectedly, I hate people putting a hand on my shoulder saying "hello mate", any kind of unexpected touch I find distressing. However all I do in those circumstances I either ignore it or ask them not to do that again. I do not feel as if I would be right to call those unexpected touches assault of any kind, they are part of the usual social human behaviours. Now if someone repeatedly touched me - no matter how slight or innocuous after I've asked them not to then it moves into potential harassment and perhaps even assault. Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Depending on how he used the picture, it could be harassment, but judging by just the picture it's not assault. However, it's pretty stupid for a senator to engage in something like this, and such behaviour should be strongly discouraged. |
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:14 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2015-24, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.