International Skeptics Forum

International Skeptics Forum (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumindex.php)
-   USA Politics (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   Senator Al Franken Kissed and Groped Me Without My Consent, And There’s Nothing Funny (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=324808)

Marcus 10th December 2017 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger (Post 12109411)
It does not surprise me that the forum right wingers who want Franken to be guilty can't imagine any case where a person misinterprets or has a false memory about a photo hug.

You cannot misinterpret some guy whipping out his penis, you can misinterpret where an arm is in a photo hug.

BTW, do you think the Moore accusers are liars?

What about those of us who are not right wingers? I'm more in the position you were at the beginning of this episode. One or two accusers could be lying or mistaken. With eight, not so much.

Despite your protestations, I'm quite sure that if a Republican senator had eight accusers you wouldn't be defending him.

kellyb 10th December 2017 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcus (Post 12109431)
What about those of us who are not right wingers? I'm more in the position you were at the beginning of this episode. One or two accusers could be lying or mistaken. With eight, not so much.

Despite your protestations, I'm quite sure that if a Republican senator had eight accusers you wouldn't be defending him.

That's been my "journey" with this whole thing, too. When it's that many people, it takes serious mental gymnastics to see it as "flimsy accusations" and "possible/probable misinterpretations." Add in the vague non-denial denial and....

Which saddens me greatly, for real.

Skeptic Ginger 10th December 2017 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcus (Post 12109431)
What about those of us who are not right wingers? I'm more in the position you were at the beginning of this episode. One or two accusers could be lying or mistaken. With eight, not so much.

Despite your protestations, I'm quite sure that if a Republican senator had eight accusers you wouldn't be defending him.

You'd be wrong. I am able to tell the difference between the accusations against these men. Seems most people here are just counting the numbers.

Marcus 10th December 2017 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kellyb (Post 12109450)
That's been my "journey" with this whole thing, too. When it's that many people, it takes serious mental gymnastics to see it as "flimsy accusations" and "possible/probable misinterpretations." Add in the vague non-denial denial and....

Which saddens me greatly, for real.

Yes, Franken really does seem like a nice guy, not a pig like the various rapists. There comes a point, though, where you can't just give him a pass because you like his politics.

Skeptic Ginger 10th December 2017 06:53 PM

An attorney is making an excellent case on MSNBC that the allegations needed to go through the Ethics Committee and shouldn't be dealt with without due process.

His name was Alderman but I missed what his position in this was.

Jayapal, a WA State Congressperson, came on after and said no, because the system failed in the past we should just condemn all these men. Guess I'll be sending her an email.

Cl1mh4224rd 10th December 2017 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnny karate (Post 12108457)
No group can account for the behavior of all their members, all the time. All they can do is adhere to their collective principles when bad behavior of certain members reveals itself.

You know, the exact opposite of what the Republicans are doing.


Oh, I don't know... I suspect the Republicans are adhering to their collective principles; many of them are just in denial about what those principles truly are.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger (Post 12108563)
Again this assertion is repeated without addressing: how do you do defend yourself without accusing the accusers of lying?


"It's hard to deny that my actions could be perceived in that way, and for that I sincerely apologize to Ms. Accuser for any discomfort or pain I have caused her. Understanding that I can not prove this in any way that will satisfy certain parties, I can only assure everyone that was not my intention."

Skeptic Ginger 10th December 2017 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcus (Post 12109465)
Yes, Franken really does seem like a nice guy, not a pig like the various rapists. There comes a point, though, where you can't just give him a pass because you like his politics.

And once again all points made are dismissed with this dishonest hand-wave.

Not to mention you said you weren't right-wing before, got any posts supporting that because IIRC you are not a liberal.

Are you a Libertarian right-winger?

Skeptic Ginger 10th December 2017 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cl1mh4224rd (Post 12109471)
...
"It's hard to deny that my actions could be perceived in that way, and for that I sincerely apologize to Ms. Accuser for any discomfort or pain I have caused her. Understanding that I can not prove this in any way that will satisfy certain parties, I can only assure everyone that was not my intention."

Sounds good, here's what Franken said about one of the alleged butt grabs:
Quote:

Franken’s response: In a statement to CNN, Franken said: “I take thousands of photos at the state fair surrounded by hundreds of people, and I certainly don’t remember taking this picture. I feel badly that Ms. Menz came away from our interaction feeling disrespected.”
Re three more of the accusations:
Quote:

Franken’s response: Franken told the Huffinton Post: “It’s difficult to respond to anonymous accusers, and I don’t remember those campaign events.”

Regarding the second woman’s allegations, Franken told Huffington Post: “I can categorically say that I did not proposition anyone to join me in any bathroom.”
What is he supposed to say short of "they're lying"?

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. We can all give our opinions on the best way to deny the accusations, but nothing Franken said included, "sorry for the butt grabs."

He has essentially denied everything while trying to remain respectful, exactly the kind of thing a man that respects women would do.

But go ahead, join the rest claiming he must be guilty because he's not denying things to those persons' satisfaction.

xjx388 10th December 2017 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger (Post 12109411)
It does not surprise me that the forum right wingers who want Franken to be guilty

Well poisoning. This isn’t about your perception of my political affiliation.
Quote:

can't imagine any case where a person misinterprets or has a false memory about a photo hug.
As a male who wants to avoid making women uncomfortable, you are right; I cannot imagine that. But please, help me out. Give me a situation in which a man placing his hand on the butt of a female stranger is innocent.

I can see it being an accident. In that case you apologize and move your hand. When the guy leaves his hand there, it’s purposeful and inappropriate; no misinterpretation is possible.

False memories? How would such a false memory of a man cupping your ass get implanted?
Quote:

You cannot misinterpret some guy whipping out his penis, you can misinterpret where an arm is in a photo hug.
But you could have a “false memory,” of penis-whipping, no?* You can’t misinterpret a hand on your ass. I think a woman knows when her ass is being grabbed.



Quote:

BTW, do you think the Moore accusers are liars?
Irrelevant and already the subject of a mod box.




*That was sarcasm, BTW. I’m not buying the false memory idea.

The Big Dog 10th December 2017 08:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger (Post 12109473)
And once again all points made are dismissed with this dishonest hand-wave.

Not to mention you said you weren't right-wing before, got any posts supporting that because IIRC you are not a liberal.

Are you a Libertarian right-winger?

:rolleyes:

How’s the move on petition going?

Move on petition, the same as doing nothing, but worse.

:D

Bob001 10th December 2017 09:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcus (Post 12109431)
What about those of us who are not right wingers? I'm more in the position you were at the beginning of this episode. One or two accusers could be lying or mistaken. With eight, not so much.

Despite your protestations, I'm quite sure that if a Republican senator had eight accusers you wouldn't be defending him.

The question is: Accused of what, and what is the right response? I'm willing to believe all of the women who have spoken against Franken: Two claimed he kissed or tried to kiss them against their will, and the others claim that he squeezed their asses or elsewhere during photo shoots in front of other people. None of them worked for him; he had no authority of any kind over any of them. They aren't claiming that they were threatened or intimidated. They were all free to tell him off on the spot, and some did.

Franken behaved like a jerk, one who had spent a big part of his life as a comedian reaching for a cheap laugh. He acknowledged the women's accounts and their pain, and he apologized.

So what's the right response? Can this really be compared to forcibly assaulting teen-age girls, or exposing himself, or threatening to ruin young actresses' livelihoods, etc., etc., etc.? Does Franken deserve to have his career wrecked, while pussy-grabbing Trump sits in the White House?

I think an argument could be made that Franken should have been allowed to wait for the results of the Senate investigation. A committee might have recommended a "censure," where the guy stands in the well of the Senate and gets yelled at, then goes back to work. I suspect 20+ Democratic senators wouldn't have been so eager to boot Franken out if it meant that a Republican governor would be able to appoint a Republican successor.

Skeptic Ginger 10th December 2017 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob001 (Post 12109569)
The question is: Accused of what, and what is the right response? I'm willing to believe all of the women who have spoken against Franken: Two claimed he kissed or tried to kiss them against their will, and the others claim that he squeezed their asses or elsewhere during photo shoots in front of other people. None of them worked for him; he had no authority of any kind over any of them. They aren't claiming that they were threatened or intimidated. They were all free to tell him off on the spot, and some did.

Franken behaved like a jerk, one who had spent a big part of his life as a comedian reaching for a cheap laugh. He acknowledged the women's accounts and their pain, and he apologized.

So what's the right response? Can this really be compared to forcibly assaulting teen-age girls, or exposing himself, or threatening to ruin young actresses' livelihoods, etc., etc., etc.? Does Franken deserve to have his career wrecked, while pussy-grabbing Trump sits in the White House?

I think an argument could be made that Franken should have been allowed to wait for the results of the Senate investigation. A committee might have recommended a "censure," where the guy stands in the well of the Senate and gets yelled at, then goes back to work. I suspect 20+ Democratic senators wouldn't have been so eager to boot Franken out if it meant that a Republican governor would be able to appoint a Republican successor.

While I have an even more generous view of Franken, this seems to me to be the worst possible conclusion about what could have happened. And even given this worst case scenario, he deserved an ethics committee hearing.

Foolmewunz 10th December 2017 11:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger (Post 12109594)
While I have an even more generous view of Franken, this seems to me to be the worst possible conclusion about what could have happened. And even given this worst case scenario, he deserved an ethics committee hearing.

Agreed. But, as I said, he's going to wind up taking one for the good team. It was going to happen; it's just a shame it's a guy I like and whose humor and repartee I find both funny and focused.

There will probably be another casualty along the lines somewhere before it comes full cycle.

I don't think we need to fire or have the offending digits amputated over boorish behavior. I do think we have to voice opprobrium more strongly and that's why I say that he's taking one for the team. I think (and truly hope) he'll bounce bank. He can manage to be in the public eye for an election cycle and have this whole thing explained away. I don't know how many of the Dems who were pressing for his resignation were seriously equating butt-pinching with statutory rape, but I suspect it's not as large as the number who are thinking that we lose the high moral ground in electoral politics if THEY are able to point at Franken when we criticize Moore or Trump.

kellyb 11th December 2017 12:39 AM

Quote:

I think (and truly hope) he'll bounce bank.
Me, too. If he bounces back in a really powerful way, being the highly intellectual person he is, and a dood of moral fortitude, like what drove him to run for office in the first place, he can do a world of good.

I think he can be a voice of reason in the Western world with this horribly awkward stuff, speaking from a personal shifted perspective. I'm not banking on it, but I can hope.

WilliamSeger 11th December 2017 02:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Foolmewunz (Post 12109611)
Agreed. But, as I said, he's going to wind up taking one for the good team. It was going to happen; it's just a shame it's a guy I like and whose humor and repartee I find both funny and focused.

There will probably be another casualty along the lines somewhere before it comes full cycle.

I don't think we need to fire or have the offending digits amputated over boorish behavior. I do think we have to voice opprobrium more strongly and that's why I say that he's taking one for the team. I think (and truly hope) he'll bounce bank. He can manage to be in the public eye for an election cycle and have this whole thing explained away. I don't know how many of the Dems who were pressing for his resignation were seriously equating butt-pinching with statutory rape, but I suspect it's not as large as the number who are thinking that we lose the high moral ground in electoral politics if THEY are able to point at Franken when we criticize Moore or Trump.

I've come to pretty much the same unhappy conclusion. Under "normal" circumstances (whatever the hell that used to mean), I'd definitely be on the side of "due process" and "let the punishment fit the crime," but these are obviously not normal times. Viewed as a moral issue, I think stepping down but then running for the seat again and let the voters decide would be the right thing to do. Viewed as a purely political issue, the seat won't be filled by a Trump supporter in the interim, and with Republicans so eager to weaponize the Franken issue as a defense and deflection against much bigger issues, winning the "false equivalence" battle isn't worth losing a bigger war.

Foolmewunz 11th December 2017 04:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WilliamSeger (Post 12109682)
I've come to pretty much the same unhappy conclusion. Under "normal" circumstances (whatever the hell that used to mean), I'd definitely be on the side of "due process" and "let the punishment fit the crime," but these are obviously not normal times. Viewed as a moral issue, I think stepping down but then running for the seat again and let the voters decide would be the right thing to do. Viewed as a purely political issue, the seat won't be filled by a Trump supporter in the interim, and with Republicans so eager to weaponize the Franken issue as a defense and deflection against much bigger issues, winning the "false equivalence" battle isn't worth losing a bigger war.

Yep. From a purely political perspective, this is how I see it, too. I'm also looking at it from the socio-political angle. I feel it was going to require showing some "icons" with feet of clay. It's a figurative reign of terror right now and some of the object lessons will never recover. And good on 'em because some of the deeds/charges are utterly reprehensible. But lumping in a butt grabber or the guy behind the Subway counter who always tries to look down your blouse with kiddie diddlers, date rapers and blackmail-rapers is quite unfair. It's like Bane is running the hearings. "Exile or Death?"

While we're nailing Cosby's hide to the wall and nailing his career coffin shut, the great big broad #MeToo brush is going to slather some results over people who probably deserve no more than a serious talking to.

Marcus 11th December 2017 07:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob001 (Post 12109569)
The question is: Accused of what, and what is the right response? I'm willing to believe all of the women who have spoken against Franken: Two claimed he kissed or tried to kiss them against their will, and the others claim that he squeezed their asses or elsewhere during photo shoots in front of other people. None of them worked for him; he had no authority of any kind over any of them. They aren't claiming that they were threatened or intimidated. They were all free to tell him off on the spot, and some did.

Franken behaved like a jerk, one who had spent a big part of his life as a comedian reaching for a cheap laugh. He acknowledged the women's accounts and their pain, and he apologized.

So what's the right response? Can this really be compared to forcibly assaulting teen-age girls, or exposing himself, or threatening to ruin young actresses' livelihoods, etc., etc., etc.? Does Franken deserve to have his career wrecked, while pussy-grabbing Trump sits in the White House?

I think an argument could be made that Franken should have been allowed to wait for the results of the Senate investigation. A committee might have recommended a "censure," where the guy stands in the well of the Senate and gets yelled at, then goes back to work. I suspect 20+ Democratic senators wouldn't have been so eager to boot Franken out if it meant that a Republican governor would be able to appoint a Republican successor.

What about Trump? What about Moore? I'm sure those guys could find someone worse than them to whatabout, so that line of reasoning doesn't lead anywhere.

I agree with you that he could have waited until after an investigation. That's what he seemed to have in mind, he was forced out by his Dem colleagues though.

Bob001 11th December 2017 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcus (Post 12109889)
What about Trump? What about Moore? I'm sure those guys could find someone worse than them to whatabout, so that line of reasoning doesn't lead anywhere.
.....

Sure it does. It leads to a graduated scale of punishments/consequences for differing offenses. Rapists go to prison; a lecherous boss might get slapped with a civil suit; a jerk waving mistletoe at a Christmas party might get slapped. I contend that what Trump, Moore etc. did is farther along the scale than what Franken did, and deserves harsher punishment. If Franken is unfit to hold office, then Trump, Moore (and Conyers, et al.) sure as hell are, not to mention private citizens Cosby, Weinstein, Rose, Lauer, Spacey etc. whose careers have been shattered.

LTC8K6 11th December 2017 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob001 (Post 12110139)
Sure it does. It leads to a graduated scale of punishments/consequences for differing offenses. Rapists go to prison; a lecherous boss might get slapped with a civil suit; a jerk waving mistletoe at a Christmas party might get slapped. I contend that what Trump, Moore etc. did is farther along the scale than what Franken did, and deserves harsher punishment. If Franken is unfit to hold office, then Trump, Moore (and Conyers, et al.) sure as hell are, not to mention private citizens Cosby, Weinstein, Rose, Lauer, Spacey etc. whose careers have been shattered.

Without due process, none of the public servants should be forced out, imo.
(Except maybe the people who came up with, and used, the sexual harassment slush fund)

If they choose to resign, so be it.

Moore is in a bit of a unique spot, having not been elected yet, but those already in office have a process for such accusations. Moore will have to be up to the voters first, and then if elected, subject to investigation. I don't see any other way to handle Moore.

Let the investigations begin and let the facts fall where they may, I say.

Private companies of course, are under their own rules about letting someone go based on accusations.

kellyb 11th December 2017 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Foolmewunz (Post 12109734)
But lumping in a butt grabber or the guy behind the Subway counter who always tries to look down your blouse with kiddie diddlers, date rapers and blackmail-rapers is quite unfair.

Do you feel like any of the left-leaning folks here on this forum are doing that?

Because, I think the Cosby's and Weinstein's deserve the state's monopoly on violence unleashed upon them. I do.

I don't think the "ha-ha" butt grabbers/pinchers belong in jail, even though it is technically assault, tho just barely, but the harm done isn't the sort of thing people routinely need therapy to cope with after it happens, or whatever.

Mikemcc 11th December 2017 05:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger (Post 12109509)
Sounds good, here's what Franken said about one of the alleged butt grabs:

Re three more of the accusations:

What is he supposed to say short of "they're lying"?

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. We can all give our opinions on the best way to deny the accusations, but nothing Franken said included, "sorry for the butt grabs."

He has essentially denied everything while trying to remain respectful, exactly the kind of thing a man that respects women would do.

But go ahead, join the rest claiming he must be guilty because he's not denying things to those persons' satisfaction.

No, it comes across as 'I'm upset that I hurt or mistreated anybody my actions that I now see were unacceptable'

I wish Pussy-Grabber-In-Chief was as honest, especially when he was walking through beauty contestant dressing rooms where there were naked 15 year olds...

http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/...ss-teen-usa-c/

Skeptic Ginger 11th December 2017 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob001 (Post 12110139)
Sure it does. It leads to a graduated scale of punishments/consequences for differing offenses. Rapists go to prison; a lecherous boss might get slapped with a civil suit; a jerk waving mistletoe at a Christmas party might get slapped. I contend that what Trump, Moore etc. did is farther along the scale than what Franken did, and deserves harsher punishment. If Franken is unfit to hold office, then Trump, Moore (and Conyers, et al.) sure as hell are, not to mention private citizens Cosby, Weinstein, Rose, Lauer, Spacey etc. whose careers have been shattered.

I like your scale. :thumbsup:

Skeptic Ginger 11th December 2017 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mikemcc (Post 12110628)
No, it comes across as 'I'm upset that I hurt or mistreated anybody my actions that I now see were unacceptable'...

Are you sure you aren't conflating his apology re the grope joke photo with his actual denials, "I don't recall it that way" and "It's hard to respond to anonymous accusations. I don't recall that at all"?

Because you seem to be. The only time he said what you paraphrase him saying was about the grope joke photo.

LTC8K6 12th December 2017 05:03 AM

Moore should probably have simply said that he doesn't remember things the way his accusers do...

kellyb 12th December 2017 12:28 PM

Matt Taibbi was also accused of all manner of things, but there's absolutely no doubt (except perhaps in wingnut land) about his total innocence in regards to actually inappropriately touching even a single woman.

https://www.pastemagazine.com/articl...tt-taibbi.html

Quote:

Given the current political climate, where there is finally a desire and willingness to hold powerful men accountable for their abuses but uncertainty as to how best to do that, it isn’t hard to understand why, rather than defend his old work, Taibbi chose to issue a public apology. By his own admission, he’s embarrassed by some of the work he did in his twenties, and is not altogether without regrets at some of the “meanness” of the pranks he pulled.

But what are the implications of his apology?

Matt Taibbi has never been accused by any woman of sexual assault or impropriety. The women he is accused of harassing (those who weren’t fictional) based on satirical passages from a book he co-authored nearly two decades ago, have all denounced the allegations. It’s the same with Ames, who actually wrote the passages.




JoeMorgue 13th December 2017 08:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Foolmewunz (Post 12109734)
While we're nailing Cosby's hide to the wall and nailing his career coffin shut, the great big broad #MeToo brush is going to slather some results over people who probably deserve no more than a serious talking to.

Listen there's probably a discussion to be had, and hopefully sooner or later we as a culture will be allowed to have it, as to what... momentum I guess is the best word I can think of although that's probably not 100% right... causes movements against social issues to turn into... fads can have negative consequences. There probably is something in there worth looking at closer.

To put it as bluntly as possible once something crosses that line into a cause that has social level force instead of just personal level force is it possible to... aim it well enough that there is no collateral damage? Probably not.

If there are tens of thousands of women out there that have been given the courage to speak out against men who have harmed them and that's created a ripple effect that is giving more women the courage to come out and so forth are there some women out there using this same momentum for less than noble means, either intentionally or unintentionally? Absolutely, unless someone wants to make the claim that women aren't capable of being petty, spiteful, or vindictive.

And yes I will agree that the broad terminology being used lumps far too many, yes negative across the board but still different in scale, actions under the same umbrella. Yes as noted a wolf whistle is in the street and a brutal gang rape are both bad, but one is crude and the other is horrifying. (Truth be told I'm not even fully onboard with the degree that "sex crime" is treated as a distinct, separate category but that's a complicated nuance that maybe just bugs me and is probably outside the scope of this discussion.)

Feet to the fire this is why I have a real hard time with Liberalism;s/Progressivism's focus, near fetish at this point, with framing everything in the context of a "culture" because it basically does seem like a way to frame it that way, that every imperfection is as good as a mortal sin. "If you let a man wolf whistle a woman on the street it's gonna make another man rape a woman later" is a little too close to "If you let little Billy play Doom he's gonna shoot up his school" line of thought for my taste. Thematic similarities are not cause and effect. And in argumentatives it has the ever so pleasant side effect of making it easier to frame everyone who doesn't agree with you 100% across the board about everything, including language, motive, priority, and every single factor of our argument and how you phrase it as "the enemy" which seems to be the goal of every person with a "cause" these days.

All fine, debatable, valid points for discussion that as I said I hope we as a society and as little clustered warring factions of "causes" get over ourselves enough to actually have one day.

None of that makes it okay to doublespeak to the point that by magical coincidence you always have an excuse for your side that you would never accept for the other side.

The problem with nuance is that we desperately need it in our discourse but we can't figure out a way to prevent tribalism from turning it into "Everyone on my side has the benefit of the doubt because of... reasons while no one on the other side ever does"

xjx388 14th December 2017 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeBentley (Post 12113379)
Listen there's probably a discussion to be had, and hopefully sooner or later we as a culture will be allowed to have it, as to what... momentum I guess is the best word I can think of although that's probably not 100% right... causes movements against social issues to turn into... fads can have negative consequences. There probably is something in there worth looking at closer.

To put it as bluntly as possible once something crosses that line into a cause that has social level force instead of just personal level force is it possible to... aim it well enough that there is no collateral damage? Probably not.

If there are tens of thousands of women out there that have been given the courage to speak out against men who have harmed them and that's created a ripple effect that is giving more women the courage to come out and so forth are there some women out there using this same momentum for less than noble means, either intentionally or unintentionally? Absolutely, unless someone wants to make the claim that women aren't capable of being petty, spiteful, or vindictive.

And yes I will agree that the broad terminology being used lumps far too many, yes negative across the board but still different in scale, actions under the same umbrella. Yes as noted a wolf whistle is in the street and a brutal gang rape are both bad, but one is crude and the other is horrifying. (Truth be told I'm not even fully onboard with the degree that "sex crime" is treated as a distinct, separate category but that's a complicated nuance that maybe just bugs me and is probably outside the scope of this discussion.)

Feet to the fire this is why I have a real hard time with Liberalism;s/Progressivism's focus, near fetish at this point, with framing everything in the context of a "culture" because it basically does seem like a way to frame it that way, that every imperfection is as good as a mortal sin. "If you let a man wolf whistle a woman on the street it's gonna make another man rape a woman later" is a little too close to "If you let little Billy play Doom he's gonna shoot up his school" line of thought for my taste. Thematic similarities are not cause and effect. And in argumentatives it has the ever so pleasant side effect of making it easier to frame everyone who doesn't agree with you 100% across the board about everything, including language, motive, priority, and every single factor of our argument and how you phrase it as "the enemy" which seems to be the goal of every person with a "cause" these days.

All fine, debatable, valid points for discussion that as I said I hope we as a society and as little clustered warring factions of "causes" get over ourselves enough to actually have one day.

None of that makes it okay to doublespeak to the point that by magical coincidence you always have an excuse for your side that you would never accept for the other side.

The problem with nuance is that we desperately need it in our discourse but we can't figure out a way to prevent tribalism from turning it into "Everyone on my side has the benefit of the doubt because of... reasons while no one on the other side ever does"

This is also along my lines of thought. I think the line is pretty simple in concept: don't touch, don't coerce and don't harass. The difficulties arise from interpretation and the nuances in human attraction and resultant behavior. A guy might wolf-whistle and one woman finds it flattering and another finds it harassment. A politician might make a pass at one woman who returns the "vibes" while another woman feels that she can't say no because he's powerful.

Not going to be easy to have the discussion but I think we do need to have it as a society.

kellyb 15th December 2017 07:54 AM

Pretty sure Tavis Smiley is actually completely innocent, like Matt Taibbi is. The whole argument saying he's guilty appears to go "PBS wouldn't have fired him if he didn't do it!", and the allegations sound like he dated a secretary or something years ago, which very well might have been against PBS rules, but it ain't #metoo material.

ahhell 15th December 2017 08:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kellyb (Post 12111411)
Matt Taibbi was also accused of all manner of things, but there's absolutely no doubt (except perhaps in wingnut land) about his total innocence in regards to actually inappropriately touching even a single woman.

That denial is a bit strong isn't it, even if he's totally innocent of the current charges, its hard for me to image a straight man that isn't guilty of innappropriately touching at least one women in his life. But that's really just a nitpick with such certainty being expressed on a skeptics forum rather than any substantive criticism.


Its unsurprising that there are a few innocents swept up in the current fervor. That's sort of the nature of mankind isn't it? Especially the media and other organizations whose livelihood depends on reputation. I hope we calm done a bit with out the pendulum swinging too far back towards ignoring a guy with a bond villainesque look on his door controlled from his desk. I wonder if if the button started some old fashioned R&B and dropped a disco ball from the ceiling.

kellyb 15th December 2017 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ahhell (Post 12114882)
That denial is a bit strong isn't it, even if he's totally innocent of the current charges, its hard for me to image a straight man that isn't guilty of innappropriately touching at least one women in his life. But that's really just a nitpick with such certainty being expressed on a skeptics forum rather than any substantive criticism.


Its unsurprising that there are a few innocents swept up in the current fervor. That's sort of the nature of mankind isn't it? Especially the media and other organizations whose livelihood depends on reputation. I hope we calm done a bit with out the pendulum swinging too far back towards ignoring a guy with a bond villainesque look on his door controlled from his desk. I wonder if if the button started some old fashioned R&B and dropped a disco ball from the ceiling.

Well put, and all good points.

All of this is a lot for all of us to digest. On a completely personal level, my intuition with true weirdos has always served me well. This is just a temporary hit for the non-creeps getting swept up in the fervor. I do worry about Tavis's career, tho, especially with Net Neutrality going away at the same time. The idiotbox will now be totally purged of a regular tune in voice of reason. I suppose we'll go back to gathering around our radios? Sigh.

bluesjnr 16th December 2017 02:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ahhell (Post 12114882)
...snip... its hard for me to image a straight man that isn't guilty of innappropriately touching at least one women in his life...snip...

Try to avoid judging us all by your own standards.

mgidm86 16th December 2017 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob001 (Post 12109569)
The question is: Accused of what, and what is the right response? I'm willing to believe all of the women who have spoken against Franken: Two claimed he kissed or tried to kiss them against their will, and the others claim that he squeezed their asses or elsewhere during photo shoots in front of other people. None of them worked for him; he had no authority of any kind over any of them. They aren't claiming that they were threatened or intimidated. They were all free to tell him off on the spot, and some did.

Franken behaved like a jerk, one who had spent a big part of his life as a comedian reaching for a cheap laugh. He acknowledged the women's accounts and their pain, and he apologized.

So what's the right response? Can this really be compared to forcibly assaulting teen-age girls, or exposing himself, or threatening to ruin young actresses' livelihoods, etc., etc., etc.? Does Franken deserve to have his career wrecked, while pussy-grabbing Trump sits in the White House?

I think an argument could be made that Franken should have been allowed to wait for the results of the Senate investigation. A committee might have recommended a "censure," where the guy stands in the well of the Senate and gets yelled at, then goes back to work. I suspect 20+ Democratic senators wouldn't have been so eager to boot Franken out if it meant that a Republican governor would be able to appoint a Republican successor.

Trump's turn is coming. We are just laying the groundwork with the moral high-ground. Taking a few for the team. My prediction.

quadraginta 16th December 2017 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mgidm86 (Post 12116109)
Trump's turn is coming. We are just laying the groundwork with the moral high-ground. Taking a few for the team. My prediction.


I can only admire the sheer energy of your wishful thinking. If only it could be harnessed somehow it could power a city.

Sadly, I suspect it is wasted.

What behavior have you seen from Republicans in recent decades that makes you think they have any concern about any moral high ground at all? All we have seen is an increasingly rapid descent into pure power-grabbing.

Any interest in even the most vanishingly small of even the appearance of propriety has been cheerfully, blatantly, utterly abandoned.

My two boys are in their thirties and they can have no memory of Republicans actually caring about the moral high ground at the expense of their grasp on power.

Hell, I'm in my sixties and I barely can.

BrooklynBaby 16th December 2017 02:02 PM

Democrats, who I've always felt are closet commies, have now found a way to take down anyone who they want without due process. So, this is the new normal. The only way to survive going forward is to control the government, which will in turn control the press, and leave members of The Party pure as the driven snow while their enemies drop like flies as the two-minute hates take them down one at a time. Well, at least those who they can't just blackmail into submission. The immediate goal, of course, is to take down Trump, and if Franken has to be sacrificed, then so be it. He'll just be replace by the governor with another far-left Senator, so The Party loses nothing.

luchog 16th December 2017 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by quadraginta (Post 12116149)
My two boys are in their thirties and they can have no memory of Republicans actually caring about the moral high ground at the expense of their grasp on power.

Hell, I'm in my sixties and I barely can.


The last truly principled Republican was Theodore Roosevelt.

And, unfortunately, that raw power lust plays right into their powerbase, who feel themselves a sort of elite or "chosen people". They feel that they deserve to have a more powerful role in society than they've been able to achieve, and that their failure to achieve that power is not due to their own shortcomings, it's due to the efforts of some undesirable "other", whether that's Jews, feminists, "PC culture", immigrants, or whatever. So they look to leaders, to demagogues, who they can wield that power through vicariously, who pander to their sense of entitlement.

For those people, there is no conflict between morality and the grab for power, because the two are inextricably linked. For the Religious Right, they're taught from the time they're children that G-D has them destined to rule the world, that they are the "chosen" people. Their particular brand of theology does not emphasize living a moral life and working hard to make the world a better place for everyone, it emphasizes wishful and magical thinking, aka "name it and claim it", that G-D will give them everything they want if they have enough "faith", and that in the "end times", G-D will return and give them absolute power over the entire world. And if what they have "named and claimed" does not immediately manifest for them, it's not because their beliefs are wrong, or that their "faith" is too weak, but due to the influence of "ungodly" and "demonic" forces in the world, forces that are atheist or adherents of some "wrong" religion, forces that are homosexual/transgender, forces that usurp the men's rightful dominant place in society and give that power to women who should rightfully remain subservient.

That unprincipled, unethical, immoral fight for raw, naked power that the Republican Party is currently demonstrating is not violation of Christian principles and common human decency, it is the destiny they believe that their G-D has promised them. And anyone who gets hurt along the way is someone who had it coming to them, for not having the right beliefs, or sufficient faith.

phiwum 20th December 2017 07:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluesjnr (Post 12115856)
Try to avoid judging us all by your own standards.

I think that I'm guilty of inappropriate touch of a woman, back in my drunken undergrad days. Just a touch of the butt, nothing approaching the heinous crimes we often discuss, but certainly nothing of which I'm proud or even okay with.

Perhaps I'm not every man, but I'd guess that as men stumble towards mature sexuality, they often make missteps that are at least a form of harrassment.

phiwum 20th December 2017 07:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mgidm86 (Post 12116109)
Trump's turn is coming. We are just laying the groundwork with the moral high-ground. Taking a few for the team. My prediction.

Sorry, are you saying merely that (1) Trump's behavior will capture more attention or that (2) there will be a serious effort to oust Trump on grounds of sexual harassment?

phiwum 20th December 2017 07:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrooklynBaby (Post 12116219)
Democrats, who I've always felt are closet commies, have now found a way to take down anyone who they want without due process. So, this is the new normal. The only way to survive going forward is to control the government, which will in turn control the press, and leave members of The Party pure as the driven snow while their enemies drop like flies as the two-minute hates take them down one at a time. Well, at least those who they can't just blackmail into submission. The immediate goal, of course, is to take down Trump, and if Franken has to be sacrificed, then so be it. He'll just be replace by the governor with another far-left Senator, so The Party loses nothing.

Parodies of right wing nuts only work if you don't telegraph your intentions.

Elagabalus 20th December 2017 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrooklynBaby (Post 12116219)
Democrats, who I've always felt are closet commies, ... He'll just be replace by the governor with another far-left Senator, so The Party loses nothing.

And gain another seat with Roy Moore's unfortunate loss to Doug Jones. Well played, Al Franken!


Better red than dead, BB ....

applecorped 20th December 2017 12:00 PM

I hope Franken changes his mind and refuses to step down, that would be entertaining


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:28 PM.

Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2015-19, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.