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)

xjx388 16th November 2017 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheL8Elvis (Post 12079344)
Can you explain how this photo would humiliated her ? I mean, she's an innocent victim ? She should be humiliated because she went to sleep, fully dressed ?

Also (anyone can answer) why hasn't this photo been circulated until she circulated it, if it was for humiliation purposes ?

Doesn't cause much humiliation hidden away from public sight does it ?

Seems like the only one humiliated here is franken ?



If a female coworker of mine falls asleep and I take a picture of me faux-grabbing her boobs and share that picture with male coworkers but not the general public, is she not then humiliated?

PhantomWolf 16th November 2017 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger (Post 12079387)
Maybe Franken needs jail time. :rolleyes:

Strawman much?

TheL8Elvis 16th November 2017 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xjx388 (Post 12079391)
Not at all. There’s an actual picture of Franken sexually harassing a woman.

:rolleyes:

Sad !

The Big Dog 16th November 2017 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger (Post 12079383)
I purposefully did not slut shame. But I can see why that is confusing to people. I repeat: "You would think she had a gazillion worse complaints to be made."

"I most certainly don't believe if you are a model or waitress at Hooters it is expected of you to be groped."

Link to NSFW photo spread, state that her history as playboy model and hooters waitress is "Relevant, I hate to go for the history thing, it's not always fair. But this does seem at least a little relevant."

But not attempting to slut shame, just finds it relevant, plus she probably got groped all the time, plus one little groping and forcing a tongue down her throat is not a "pattern" and thus not a "real complaint."

wow...

Dr. Keith 16th November 2017 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger (Post 12079307)
You do have to wonder how this stands out in her mind as the quintessential sexual harassment when clearly it must have been common in her life. You would think she had a gazillion worse complaints to be made.

Link is NSFW.

Actually, I've been to photo shoots with similarly clad models and the level of respect the talent is shown on such shoots was off the charts. The photographer wouldn't let anyone on the set he didn't approve and it was clear that anything that distracted the model in any way would not be tolerated. It may have helped that the photographer was an amateur body builder, but still I think your view of how models are treated may be off a bit.

Still she likely has to put up with the same amount of ******** that all women have to put up with. Maybe this is the worst she has had to deal with, or maybe this is the worse she has had to deal with from someone she didn't feel comfortable slapping across the face.

TheL8Elvis 16th November 2017 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xjx388 (Post 12079395)
If a female coworker of mine falls asleep and I take a picture of me faux-grabbing her boobs and share that picture with male coworkers but not the general public, is she not then humiliated?

IDK, no ?

I'm asking why it's humiliating. Not for you to describe the same thing and tell me again, it's humiliating.

But, I give you credit for a more accurate description of " faux-grabbing "

dudalb 16th November 2017 03:47 PM

There are a number of people on this thread I will rank as hypocrites because they have blasted...quite rightly...Moore for his actions, but are making excuses for Al Franken.
BTW the Dems in Congress seem to be playing this very well so far.

The Big Dog 16th November 2017 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xjx388 (Post 12079395)
If a female coworker of mine falls asleep and I take a picture of me faux-grabbing her boobs and share that picture with male coworkers but not the general public, is she not then humiliated?

Not if she worked at Hooters, and it has to be a pattern, so you seem to be good.

Reelect Al Franken

Travis 16th November 2017 03:48 PM

Franken called for an ethics probe of himself.

I really think that sort of ends this for now. He, at least, seems to think that at worst this was a one off incident.

Lost in all this is that as a politician he has been firmly on the side of women. That counts for something. Is a politician who has one incident but will protect women's issues better than a politician with no incidents but will definitely make birth control and abortion illegal? That's the rub in the larger picture.

applecorped 16th November 2017 03:49 PM

I am sure women will be glad to hear that men have developed a sliding scale of sexual assault

dudalb 16th November 2017 03:50 PM

Sorry, but this "Franken is a Liberal so I will give him a Pass" B.S. won't wash......

Skeptic Ginger 16th November 2017 03:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhantomWolf (Post 12079392)
...
And if there are, then they would be just as wrong.

It's as common as dirt. It's what people do when they live together in groups. They joke around.

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhantomWolf (Post 12079392)
...

I totally disagree, in fact I say it's the exact opposite. If you say, "oh that was just messing around," to the small stuff, then it's too easy to slide the scale of "messing around" upwards. Where does "messing around" become "assault"? When you give licence to the little stuff, then you devalue the bigger stuff because people slowly get immune to it. Pretending to grope is okay goes to actual groping being okay, then pulling off tops being okay, and so on. When you say, zero tolerance, then the "messing around" is not okay and by extend anything worse is darn well not okay.

Think about this for a moment. If it wasn't for the whole "locker-room talk" thing with Trump, do you think there would even be a question as it if felling up a 14-year old was acceptable currently?

The way to stamp this out is to not be accepting of any of it, regardless of how "just messing around" it might be.

'Grabbing pussy because they let you' is not 'locker room talk'. That was Trump's excuse for his behavior, denying it was true.

I'm sorry, I just can't agree that every little offense taken is on that scale you speak of.

Don't get on an elevator if there is a lone woman on it lest you frighten her.

sir drinks-a-lot 16th November 2017 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xjx388 (Post 12079395)
If a female coworker of mine falls asleep and I take a picture of me faux-grabbing her boobs and share that picture with male coworkers but not the general public, is she not then humiliated?

I think you have to include which political party you support to help people decide.

JoeMorgue 16th November 2017 03:52 PM

Alright pop quiz.

You are a member of Side A. Someone from Side A has been accused of doing something "bad" by someone from Side B. Please choose the appropriate response.

A. Immediately list off everything you can think of that anyone from Side B has ever done wrong.

B. Argue that whatever this person from Side A did it's not as bad as some of the stuff people from Side B have done.

C. Figure out what insult that people from Side B like to use against Side A and use this against them, regardless of it makes any sense in context.

D. Ask them if they are worried about this why weren't they worried about some unrelated "bad" thing that someone from their side did.

E. Go find any example of someone from Side B doing the same or similar "bad" thing.

F. Actually discuss the actual issue in any meaningful way on any meaningful level.

The Big Dog 16th November 2017 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Travis (Post 12079408)
Franken called for an ethics probe of himself.

I really think that sort of ends this for now. He, at least, seems to think that at worst this was a one off incident.

Lost in all this is that as a politician he has been firmly on the side of women. That counts for something. Is a politician who has one incident but will protect women's issues better than a politician with no incidents but will definitely make birth control and abortion illegal? That's the rub in the larger picture.

Is a politician who has one incident but will protect women's issues better than a politician with no incidents but will protect women's issues?

Trick question! the person with one incident does not have any incidents because it has to be a pattern.

Now for something else relevant, here is a picture of the woman in a bikini:

Makes you think, huh?

Skeptic Ginger 16th November 2017 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhantomWolf (Post 12079396)
Strawman much?

It was hyperbole to point out your assertion Franken shouldn't be in a leadership role was as absurdly severe.

JoeMorgue 16th November 2017 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot (Post 12079419)
I think you have to include which political party you support to help people decide.

Seriously the number of people who can't fire off a neuron until they have the proper context as to how this effects the "Us V Them" political scoresheet tab they have open in their heads every waking second would be funny if it wasn't so damaging to both our discourse and our society.

dudalb 16th November 2017 03:54 PM

I think that what Franken is accused of doing is NOT as bad as what Moore did.
But it's bad enough so that his political career should end.

TheL8Elvis 16th November 2017 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dudalb (Post 12079427)
I think that what Franken is accused of doing is NOT as bad as what Moore did.
But it's bad enough so that his political career should end.

And a reasonable person can't disagree that his political career should end ?

dudalb 16th November 2017 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeBentley (Post 12079426)
Seriously the number of people who can't fire off a neuron until they have the proper context as to how this effects the "Us V Them" political scoresheet tab they have open in their heads every waking second would be funny if it wasn't so damaging to both our discourse and our society.

I am pretty damn disappointed at the number of people who are basically saying "If he is on our side, let's give him a pass" in this thread.
No better then the people they condemn on the other side for doing the same thing.

PhantomWolf 16th November 2017 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheL8Elvis (Post 12079390)
Well, I'm glad you weren't making the false equivalency then. :D

I just have a standard of zero tolerance towards sexual abuse and harassment.

Quote:

I think you will find the set of people who think franken should step down due to this coincides 100% with the group that thinks trump shouldn't be president because of what he did.
I think there is a small intersection between the groups. I don't think 100% of Franken should step down people think that Trump should have, nor that 100% of those that think trump should have, think that Franken should.

Quote:

The problem is the group of people who think franken needs to go, but trump is ok.
I think that these is a lot of hypocrisy in this, and it's not the first time I have seen it on this board, and in general. Yes there are a number of people saying Franken should go, but what Trump did was fine (and even supporting Moore with a "but we don't know it's true) but there are also though defending Franken with "Boys will be boys" and "It's just backstage messing about" while they are extremely critical of the whole "It's locker room talk" thing. Being in a place of zero tolerance, both situations need to be called out and dealt with, you just don't ignore the actions of your side because they aren't as bad as the other side's actions.

Quote:

Franken said he will accept and participate in an ethics investigation - that sounds like the right thing.

They can investigate the charges there ... because that sounds like the right thing too. I'm not quite ready to just willy-nilly take anyones word for things that have big consequences with no investigation.
It's a good first step. As to the taking anyone's word thing, it's the picture that I find the issue. The kiss is a he said - she said unless he admits doing it, the photo speaks for itself, and that showed what I consider to be unacceptable behaviour for someone in a leadership position.

dudalb 16th November 2017 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheL8Elvis (Post 12079430)
And a reasonable person can't disagree that his political career should end ?

Not if you think Moore's should end........

If you give one a pass, you need to give both a pass.

Travis 16th November 2017 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dudalb (Post 12079431)
I am pretty damn disappointed at the number of people who are basically saying "If he is on our side, let's give him a pass" in this thread.
No better then the people they condemn on the other side for doing the same thing.

Actually name someone that has done that.

I think you are overreacting to people not immediately picking up the torches and pitchforks.

dudalb 16th November 2017 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Civet (Post 12079372)
Man's got to know his limitations.

One of my favorite Dirty Harry lines....

Minoosh 16th November 2017 04:01 PM

There is such an easy way to not have crap like this blow up in your face 10 years later.

Don't do crap like this.

I don't blame her for being angry but I sincerely do not know what the remedy should be. Maybe that should be up to her. A swift kick to the testicles with an Army boot might be appropriate.

Travis 16th November 2017 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dudalb (Post 12079435)
Not if you think Moore's should end........

If you give one a pass, you need to give both a pass.

You don't see any difference in the accusations?

dudalb 16th November 2017 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Travis (Post 12079438)
Actually name someone that has done that.

I think you are overreacting to people not immediately picking up the torches and pitchforks.

Thing is they were certainly picking them up instantly in the case of Roy Moore.

Don't get me wrong:I think Moore is totally Reprehensible. I just don't like double standards.

TheL8Elvis 16th November 2017 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dudalb (Post 12079431)
I am pretty damn disappointed at the number of people who are basically saying "If he is on our side, let's give him a pass" in this thread.
No better then the people they condemn on the other side for doing the same thing.

Who ? Quotes please.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dudalb (Post 12079435)
Not if you think Moore's should end........

If you give one a pass, you need to give both a pass.

That's not a very useful discussion. Why ? Please expand your thoughts...

Is it OK to say Moore is un1electable, but if elected, the senate can conduct an ethics investigation ?

There's way more grey area, IMHO, than this binary moore bad/franken bad.

ETA: I've already said - ethics investigation and investigation of the incident is a good start.

dudalb 16th November 2017 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Travis (Post 12079441)
You don't see any difference in the accusations?

Yes, but both render a man unfit for the honor of serving in the US Senate.
Just take off the damn ideological blinders for once....

RecoveringYuppy 16th November 2017 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Travis (Post 12079438)
Actually name someone that has done that.

I think you are overreacting to people not immediately picking up the torches and pitchforks.

Skeptic Ginger is and slut shaming on top of that. Pretty disgusting.

PhantomWolf 16th November 2017 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger (Post 12079424)
It was hyperbole to point out your assertion Franken shouldn't be in a leadership role was as absurdly severe.

The fact that he's in a leadership position is exactly why the penalty should be severe. If he was a Joe Shmoe that no one knew and did it at an office party, then an apology and a mark on his employment record might be enough, but when he is a leader of the country, the penalty he gets will create a message that goes out to everyone as to if this behaviour is acceptable or not. If he stood down, then that message is a very loud "Hell no it isn't" if he gets a slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket, then it tacitly gives approve to this sort of degrading behaviour, it tells men across the US that it is acceptable to treat women like play things for their own amusement, and the more powerful you are, the more acceptable it is. There is already mixed messages on this with Hollywood trying to do the right thing, while the Republicans are split as to what to say. This isn't the right time to enhance that split message by saying this sort of behaviour is okay.

Travis 16th November 2017 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dudalb (Post 12079442)
Thing is they were certainly picking them up instantly in the case of Roy Moore.

Don't get me wrong:I think Moore is totally Reprehensible. I just don't like double standards.

Well let us see. One case involved four girls. GIRLS. Teenagers. There was a hell of a lot of corroborating evidence. It fit a pattern given Moore's personality and definitely set him up as a serial offender.

On the other side we have one woman. A grown woman. Singular. Who describes a situation that could have been a misunderstanding. Something bolstered by the fact that it happened once and was not repeated.

Pretending they are exactly the same is emblematic of the type of hyperbolic reactions during a moral panic.

JoeMorgue 16th November 2017 04:09 PM

Jesus the people pretending they would be having the discussion the exact same way if the only factor that was different was D at the end of the title was switched to an R is hilarious.

Bias is not in the statements themselves. It's in the "Buts." It's in the "Howevers." It's in the backpeddling. It's in the softening of the language. It's in the exceptions and escape clauses all that.

Bias isn't "X is Y when you do it but not when I do it." It's "X is Y when you do it and when I do it *wink, wink, nudge, nudge*."

dudalb 16th November 2017 04:10 PM

If you want to adapt a "Politics is war and anyting is justified, and I will support somebody on my side no matter what" attitude, fine,but don't get all high and mighty when somebody on the other side adapts the same tactics and attitude.

dudalb 16th November 2017 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Travis (Post 12079457)
Well let us see. One case involved four girls. GIRLS. Teenagers. There was a hell of a lot of corroborating evidence. It fit a pattern given Moore's personality and definitely set him up as a serial offender.

On the other side we have one woman. A grown woman. Singular. Who describes a situation that could have been a misunderstanding. Something bolstered by the fact that it happened once and was not repeated.

Pretending they are exactly the same is emblematic of the type of hyperbolic reactions during a moral panic.

Funny, that sounds an awful lot like what the Moore supporters are saying.....

PhantomWolf 16th November 2017 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dudalb (Post 12079445)
Yes, but both render a man unfit for the honor of serving in the US Senate.

Going to disagree there. Personally I think that nothing someone did in their past renders a person unfit to serve their fellow people. It's up to those people if they want that person to serve for them or not.

If the people of Alabama vote for Moore knowing what he has done, then he should serve until they decide he is unfit. Same with Franken, hence why I say he should stand down, and then stand for re-election, let the people decide if they still want him serving them.

Skeptic Ginger 16th November 2017 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr. Keith (Post 12079404)
Actually, I've been to photo shoots with similarly clad models and the level of respect the talent is shown on such shoots was off the charts. The photographer wouldn't let anyone on the set he didn't approve and it was clear that anything that distracted the model in any way would not be tolerated. It may have helped that the photographer was an amateur body builder, but still I think your view of how models are treated may be off a bit.

And that's as it should be.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr. Keith (Post 12079404)
Still she likely has to put up with the same amount of ******** that all women have to put up with. Maybe this is the worst she has had to deal with, or maybe this is the worse she has had to deal with from someone she didn't feel comfortable slapping across the face.

I'm guessing when she worked at Hooters she endured a lot worse than someone writing a skit she was to kiss them in.

Here's the thing, was this woman a skit actor like Franken? What was her role in the USO show? She had been appearing in USO shows for years, and had a lot of ties to the military including her husband and father. But what was her role, her talent? Being a pinup model for sure. Pretty much all those USO tours take pinup models along because the boys in uniform love to see pretty women when they are stationed in war zones. Bob Hope always took pretty ladies with him, and there were always sexual jokes.

Was it a skit Franken wrote and she didn't like it? She says he wrote it with the ulterior motive and his kiss was unwanted. Is it fair to not consider her perception was the issue? It's not like he grabbed her in the dressing room and forced a kiss on her. It's not like he wasn't a skit writer.

I looked for other SNL skits with kissing.

Five Rape Jokes Not to Tell (If You Want A Future)
Quote:

5. In 1995, New York Magazine sat in on a "Saturday Night Live" sketch writing session with Al Franken, Norm MacDonald, and Jim Downey as they riffed on "60 Minutes"—-and rape. Republicans dredged up the session again in 2008, during Franken's extended bid for a Minnesota Senate seat (still pending). From an Associated Press story:

Franken and fellow writers Norm MacDonald and Jim Downey kick around fictional Rooney responses to the discovery of the bottle. . . . The article quotes Franken putting an edgy twist on the discussion: "And 'I give the pills to Lesley Stahl. Then when Lesley's passed out, I take her to the closet and rape her.' Or 'That's why you never see Lesley until February.' Or, 'When she passes out I put her in various positions and take pictures of her."

MacDonald takes it a step further, suggesting that the Rooney rape comment be directed at other "60 Minutes" icons Mike Wallace and Ed Bradley. Franken chimes in: "What about 'I drag Mike into my office and rape him. Right here! I guess that makes me bad.'"
Here's one with a long interracial kiss joke.

It's hard to find Franken kissing skits on SNL because the search brings up pages of the current news item only, but here are the hits for kissing skits on SNL. They are very common. So it's not like Franken writing a kissing skit would necessarily be some sneaky underhanded way of kissing and groping Tweeden.

dudalb 16th November 2017 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeBentley (Post 12079458)
Jesus the people pretending they would be having the discussion the exact same way if the only factor that was different was D at the end of the title was switched to an R is hilarious.

Bias is not in the statements themselves. It's in the "Buts." It's in the "Howevers." It's in the backpeddling. It's in the softening of the language. It's in the exceptions and escape clauses all that.

Bias isn't "X is Y when you do it but not when I do it." It's "X is Y when you do it and when I do it *wink, wink, nudge, nudge*."

And what is really sad is that these people have such ideological blinders on they don't see the hypocrisy in what they are doing........

JoeMorgue 16th November 2017 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Travis (Post 12079457)
Well let us see. One case involved four girls. GIRLS. Teenagers. There was a hell of a lot of corroborating evidence. It fit a pattern given Moore's personality and definitely set him up as a serial offender.

On the other side we have one woman. A grown woman. Singular. Who describes a situation that could have been a misunderstanding. Something bolstered by the fact that it happened once and was not repeated.

Pretending they are exactly the same is emblematic of the type of hyperbolic reactions during a moral panic.

Who cares?

We're talking about Franken, not Moore. What Moore did isn't relevant, unless, as noted, making sure each side's slaps on the wrist are properly and accurately tallied for future "Whataboutism" is like super important you.

Why does a worse case somewhere matter outside of ideological point scoring? It doesn't change what what Franken did. We're not grading on a curve.

You might as well go "Well this lady was harassed by let's not forget this other lady that was hit by a meteorite."

Oh right because meteorites aren't partisan. If there was a Republican meteorite you would be doing that.

Be an American, be a Human, be something other than just a Democrat for thirty seconds and care about what happened to this women.

Brainster 16th November 2017 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeBentley (Post 12079420)
Alright pop quiz.

You are a member of Side A. Someone from Side A has been accused of doing something "bad" by someone from Side B. Please choose the appropriate response.

A. Immediately list off everything you can think of that anyone from Side B has ever done wrong.

B. Argue that whatever this person from Side A did it's not as bad as some of the stuff people from Side B have done.

C. Figure out what insult that people from Side B like to use against Side A and use this against them, regardless of it makes any sense in context.

D. Ask them if they are worried about this why weren't they worried about some unrelated "bad" thing that someone from their side did.

E. Go find any example of someone from Side B doing the same or similar "bad" thing.

F. Actually discuss the actual issue in any meaningful way on any meaningful level.

Assuming the accusations are credible (as seems to be the case with the accusation against Moore), most will ignore the thread (as I have with the Moore thread). Even if I were inclined to do so, I don't see any sense in trying diversionary tactics; the guy's toast.

Franken's problem is that the visual evidence of the photograph is very compelling.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:59 AM.

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