|
I concede that "post better" may have been a clearer mod suggestion.
Somebody fucked around with this message at 02:09 on Jun 10, 2021 |
#
?
Jun 9, 2021 19:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 17:45 |
|
|
Pentecoastal Elites posted:only having done one reported* rape means he's objectively the good guy here and not at all like that awful evil trump who did tons of rapes who... uh... who he's defending... for some reason... even though he hates doing it oooh that trump is just so bad! I feel like your theories are flawed because people manage to convince each other on these forums all the time. Indeed, that's one of the things that draws many people to D&D: the chance to gain new insights and knowledge and to test the mettle of their arguments and opinions against those of others via debate and discourse. But the two must go together, and in order for that to happen you have to be humble and receptive to opposing viewpoints. If you're arguing with people solely to refine your own positions, with no expectation that you might convince the other side or vice versa, that's the very definition of (I hate to even use the term) bad faith because it means you are in it purely for yourself, often at the expense of not just other posters and the community (because you're being abrasive and toxic) but also the causes you purportedly support (because it will push the other side further away). You are correct that sometimes the issues are so controversial and their implications so foundational that it's not possible to convince the other side right away, and the best that can be hoped for is gradual change. Even then though, humility and empathy go a long way. For example, you snarkily dismissed my post as "tone argument" but perhaps you shouldn't have, because tone does play a big role in argumentation. We are humans, not robots — if you are asking people to question and doubt their very identity, then you better make sure you apply not just the correct rhetorical devices but also the right tone. Viciously attacking them by blaming them of hypocrisy or double-standards and trying to guilt them is not going to work, especially not in the long term because people may forget what you said but tend to remember how you made them feel. And toxic bullying (your words, not mine) tends to induce unpleasant feelings.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2021 19:42
|
|
|
Thorn Wishes Talon posted:I feel like your theories are flawed because people manage to convince each other on these forums all the time. Indeed, that's one of the things that draws many people to D&D: the chance to gain new insights and knowledge and to test the mettle of their arguments and opinions against those of others via debate and discourse. But the two must go together, and in order for that to happen you have to be humble and receptive to opposing viewpoints. If you're arguing with people solely to refine your own positions, with no expectation that you might convince the other side or vice versa, that's the very definition of (I hate to even use the term) bad faith because it means you are in it purely for yourself, often at the expense of not just other posters and the community (because you're being abrasive and toxic) but also the causes you purportedly support (because it will push the other side further away). Debates are intrinsically public affairs. The audience is assumed; it is larger than you and one other guy each trying to convince the other - after all, this is not happening via private message. Hence why complaining about how the tone makes you personally upset is so odious. His posts are not for you; they are for anyone who reads them. If he believes that expressing his sincere anger is more likely to buttress his point among the audience, who are you to chastise him? Moreover, this doesn't even touch on the fact that the issue we're discussing is utterly heinous. To insist people not be angry about sexual harassment and assault is absurd, as if politics doesn't have an emotional component; the personal is political. You allude to this with "humans, not robots"... and somehow conclude that the human who isn't you should just be quietly accepting framing they find utterly amoral.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2021 20:04
|
|
|
Lester Shy posted:Also this is just a really bizarre criterion for believably. Tara Reade would have more credibility if other women had come forward after her? In this case, she's the one coming forward after other women had already spoken about Biden's inappropriate behavior. There's other sexual assault allegations against Biden?
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2021 20:10
|
|
|
World War Mammories posted:Debates are intrinsically public affairs. The audience is assumed; it is larger than you and one other guy each trying to convince the other - after all, this is not happening via private message. Hence why complaining about how the tone makes you personally upset is so odious. His posts are not for you; they are for anyone who reads them. If he believes that expressing his sincere anger is more likely to buttress his point among the audience, who are you to chastise him? I didn't say don't be angry. Like I said, I have a personal interest in this topic, and I am angry. I said maybe don't be a toxic bully who attacks others for not sharing the same opinion. Regarding your point about audience, there are actually two audiences here. The first consists of people who are on the "Biden is a rapist monster" camp. The second consists of everyone else, including those who may be on the fence. Anger might score a lot of points with the former, but probably not the latter. But then maybe I'm wrong, and loads of lurkers are being converted every hour and we just don't know it. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2021 20:18
|
|
|
Rust Martialis posted:There's other sexual assault allegations against Biden? The OP didn't specify "sexual assault," just inappropriate behavior. There are several accusations of inappropriate behavior and inappropriate touching: https://www.businessinsider.com/joe-biden-allegations-women-2020-campaign-2019-6 https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/04/joe-biden-inappropriate-touching-accusations-list.html It's something for which he's been criticized for many years (this daily show segment is from 2015 I believe) https://www.salon.com/2015/02/25/you_have_one_fking_job_jon_stewart_mocks_joe_bidens_groping/  This behavior had previously just been hand-waved as Biden being an "old fashioned" and "tactile" politician until Tara Reade's (credible) allegation was made public.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2021 20:21
|
|
|
Rust Martialis posted:There's other sexual assault allegations against Biden? Various anonymous ones, can't remember the exact count - given the response to Reade, I am not surprised they haven't come forward. There was also that longstanding thing since at least 2014 of him enjoying swimming naked in front of female secret service - it's certainly a big watch it for that kind of mindset.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2021 20:22
|
|
|
tmfc posted:The OP didn't specify "sexual assault," just inappropriate behavior. Oh, it's not like Handsy Uncle Joe was a secret, just that Reade was the only one I'd heard of who credibly alleged sexual assault.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2021 20:23
|
|
|
I told myself I was going to stop looking at this thread, posting in this thread, thinking about this thread because it makes me so incredibly upset and angry every time I see someone do some loving rape math or seriously imply that action is being taken against the people in the democratic party who have been accused about harassment or rape when there isn't. It's all time wasters. It's because they need to it get boring and fall off the docket of the news because that way people won't actually have any idea what these people have done. I guarantee you someone like one of the Cuomos is going to run for president in our life time and the fact that he was "investigated but it went nowhere" will absolutely be used as points towards why he will be a good candidate because he can survive a scandal! It's like a prerequisite for being president in the last 40 years. Did you survive your sex scandal? Did you get away with rape? How many women did you harass with no consequence? This thread is never going to change the minds of people who don't believe women. It's not going to change the minds of people who make excuses like "They're just a hands on politician" but for people who are earnestly thinking about this and caring about this - How can we make it so politicians and powerful people actually get truly investigated and shoved out of politics if not in jail. I don't even have faith that it can happen at all but its literally the only thing I see that can actually happen. Pushing this thread into its own little hidden containment zones was bad because essentially this is exactly what the news does to people. It stops being front page and in the main conversation so everyone can slowly forget that the candidate is a sexual harasser or rapist. When was the last time any of us saw andrew cuomos accusers on the news outside of the deep buried politics section? When was the last time any of us saw Tara Reade being discussed in a serious manner - that didn't automatically dismiss her? It's not hot news. The only people that can keep it on peoples minds is us. So don't loving probe people when they color everything Joe Biden does with "well he is a rapist" because that's the absolute only loving way we continue to remind people that he is a loving rapist. It's not bad faith to remind people that yes, he's a horrible person to reference when it comes to women's issues because HES A RAPIST. He's a horrible untrustworthy person period, because he's a loving rapist. Any people say "Well what do you expect me to do about that, what does reminding people that he's a rapist going to do?" - well maybe if we drill it into peoples heads long enough they won't just blindly vote for him. They wont say stupid bullshit like "oh that's just the russians trying to make him lose" or some other looney stupid poo poo like that. And yes this is an incredibly emotional subject and expecting people to do a "beep boop, facts - beep boop did not get charged with a crime beep boop" poo poo isn't ok. I shared my experience with being raped earlier in this thread and how many years it took me to talk about it and how many years it took me to feel ok talking about it and even 20 years later it still gives me the shakes. Holding any rape victim to the impossible task of going to the police when they by default don't believe you and by default will always believe the person in power means women don't report it. The act itself is emotional. Talking about it is emotional. Remembering and thinking about it is emotional.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2021 20:28
|
|
|
^^^  Rust Martialis posted:Oh, it's not like Handsy Uncle Joe was a secret, just that Reade was the only one I'd heard of who credibly alleged sexual assault. Could we not dismiss the violation of women's physical boundaries as being "Handsy Uncle Joe," please? eta: This is the second time I've asked you to not do this itt. I even explained why. Willa Rogers fucked around with this message at 20:42 on Jun 9, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2021 20:30
|
|
|
silicone thrills posted:I guarantee you someone like one of the Cuomos is going to run for president in our life time and the fact that he was "investigated but it went nowhere" will absolutely be used as points towards why he will be a good candidate because he can survive a scandal! So much of the posting in this thread is "if you don't agree with me, you're definitely going to do [x] in the future" and if you don't understand why that kind of posting pisses people off I don't know what to tell you.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2021 20:43
|
|
|
World War Mammories posted:If he believes that expressing his sincere anger is more likely to buttress his point among the audience, who are you to chastise him? Thorn Wishes Talon posted:Regarding your point about audience, there are actually two audiences here. The first consists of people who are on the "Biden is a rapist monster" camp. The second consists of everyone else, including those who may be on the fence. Anger might score a lot of points with the former, but probably not the latter. But then maybe I'm wrong, and loads of lurkers are being converted every hour and we just don't know it. The original poster was criticized for failing to ingratiate themselves with their opponent, in this debate. You've acknowledged the possibility of an audience, but then make the same argument again, by framing the audience as functionally identical to yourself.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2021 20:45
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:Could we not dismiss the violation of women's physical boundaries as being "Handsy Uncle Joe," please? If it makes you happier, he's a creepy, touchy-feely, wildly-inappropriate-at-a-minimum, hair-sniffing old weirdo. Quite possibly committed at least one sexual assault. Good old Handsy Uncle Joe. I dismissed nothing, incidentally, you seem a little too hyper-ready to jump to attack people who actually substantively agree with you, friend. gently caress Handsy Uncle Joe. Ed: in neither case was I referring to Reade's allegations as Biden being "handsy". Biden does, generally, have a reputation for being "handsy", however. I don't think that's really a contentious point, surely? I am able to differentiate Biden's public persona from private allegations, and frankly "Handsy Uncle Joe" seems quite apt as regards the former. You may, in future, assume that is the frame of reference in which I am using the term. I will try to remember to talk about the sexual assault allegations as "Rapey Uncle Joe" in a gesture of solidarity henceforth. I hope this can be reciprocated in comradely good-fellowship, friend. A compromise has been put forth. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) Rust Martialis fucked around with this message at 21:06 on Jun 9, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2021 20:46
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:So much of the posting in this thread is "if you don't agree with me, you're definitely going to do [x] in the future" and if you don't understand why that kind of posting pisses people off I don't know what to tell you. Im glad that's all you took out of my entire post. Really proves my point. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2021 20:46
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:^^^ Oh my god that av You got someone real good and mad
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2021 20:46
|
|
|
silicone thrills posted:This thread is never going to change the minds of people who don't believe women. You helped to change mine. Thanks, for what it's worth.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2021 20:48
|
|
|
Harvey Mantaco posted:You helped to change mine. Thanks, for what it's worth.  It's nice to hear but it isn't something I think any of us can expect on the internet. Or even in person.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2021 20:51
|
|
|
silicone thrills posted:Im glad that's all you took out of my entire post. Really proves my point. Thanks. e: Since you deserve a less flip response to this and you have been very honest and forthright in this thread: People do not want to feel personally culpable for the rape culture of this country. Frankly, I don't know if Biden is guilty of what he's been accused of, I will never know. But I got put in this position: Vote for this guy, who disagrees with you politically on 100% of issues, who is credibly accused rapist, or vote for this guy, who disagrees with you politically on maybe 75% of issues, who is a credibly accused rapist. I didn't loving ask to be put in that situation, and what I decided to do with it doesn't reflect on me the way you are insisting that it does. We're all just trying to do our best. There are a lot of people who have been helped because of Joe Biden winning the 2020 election, and presumably more who will be helped in the future. How does the value of that help weigh against the value of me voting for Hawkins or La Riva or staying home and becoming a minute, imperceptible datapoint of public dissatisfaction with political candidates accused of sexual violence? Everybody has to come to their own conclusion on this, and if people want to take the route of sitting out, especially if they are dealing with related trauma, that's fine and that's good and I encourage it. I decided to handle it differently. I don't deserve to be treated like I'm a monster and browbeaten for doing so, any more than you deserve to be accused of "supporting Trump". Mellow Seas fucked around with this message at 21:08 on Jun 9, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2021 20:59
|
|
|
Thorn Wishes Talon posted:I didn't say don't be angry. Like I said, I have a personal interest in this topic, and I am angry. I mean, we have an example of a "convert" on this very page, in addition to the poster sharing how this discourse dismissive of sexual assault has harmed them ("Do you have citations?"). If you don't think that you're being dismissive, then again, those posts aren't for you, but for those who are. Besides, I'm of the opinion that 'don't be a toxic bully' is better achieved by believing women, especially since I largely see toxicity from things like, for example, Kevin Drum calling Reade a "lunatic." Wondering where the toxicity comes from is like the guy in the hot dog suit asking who crashed the hot dog car... Mellow Seas posted:Hmmm. Seems like it also proves mine. ...or someone shrugging at a rape victim sharing their story.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2021 21:03
|
|
|
World War Mammories posted:...or someone shrugging at a rape victim sharing their story.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2021 21:11
|
|
|
I'm temporarily closing this thread while the mods figure out where to go from here. We'll either reopen this thread, create a new one, or something along those lines. Right now the current state of this thread isn't tenable. This is a valid topic that deserves discussion and examination, but right now, that isn't happening. This is also not an invitation to continue this in any other threads or create a new one.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2021 21:14
|
|
|
Hey, this thread has honestly lasted a long longer than I thought it would, and has largely been more productive that I predicted. That said, I think the thread's central focus on Tara Reade's case is causing some stagnation, and I think that it's time for the thread to get rebooted and expanded. If you are interested in writing or contributing to the OP of a new Rape Culture/#metoo thread, PM me. We haven't decided if this thread will remain closed for the entire interim, but the topic does have a place in D&D and it will return soon.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2021 03:18
|
|
|
I haven't heard from anyone yet, so to be clear, I'm looking for a few write-ups: "what is rape culture?", "a brief history of #metoo", and "here's a list of useful sources for further questions". I want it to be clear that, while a lot of the conversation is going to focus on the crimes of famous people, we should keep in mind that those crimes are a manifestation of a larger cultural issue, and let that inform discussion.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2021 15:42
|
|
|
OK, as per discussion in QCS, this thread will be reopening as a general rape culture and metoo thread. It has been closed almost a week now, so please leave behind any non-productive conversations and make an effort to have a respectful and earnest discussion about this extremely serious issue. In particular, the mods will be looking for quality posts on rape culture, metoo, and the contexts that both exist in, and we'll be giving out free avatar changes to people who write them. We'd also like to see reposts of older posts in this thread that you think are interesting or informative. We're going to try to put together a compilation of good posts and useful resources to help with discussion. Remember, famous people aren't the only incarnations of rape culture, it's important to discuss how these issue affect people in every social strata. Please discuss respectful, and remember that even if people haven't shared their stories, they may be victims themselves or be close to people who have been.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2021 00:10
|
|
|
Thanks, FoS. I want to repost this, bc afaik no one replied to it in the thread's earlier incarnation, and bc I think it warrants some discussion: Willa Rogers posted:One of the things I've thought about is how Dem sexual abuse & harassment is usually only covered by rightwing media, which makes it easy for liberals to dismiss such news as "Another rightwing smear job by a discredited hack outlet.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2021 00:14
|
|
"
|
Some really good prior posts:silicone thrills posted:I told myself I was going to stop looking at this thread, posting in this thread, thinking about this thread because it makes me so incredibly upset and angry every time I see someone do some loving rape math or seriously imply that action is being taken against the people in the democratic party who have been accused about harassment or rape when there isn't. It's all time wasters. It's because they need to it get boring and fall off the docket of the news because that way people won't actually have any idea what these people have done. I guarantee you someone like one of the Cuomos is going to run for president in our life time and the fact that he was "investigated but it went nowhere" will absolutely be used as points towards why he will be a good candidate because he can survive a scandal! It's like a prerequisite for being president in the last 40 years. Did you survive your sex scandal? Did you get away with rape? How many women did you harass with no consequence? Pentecoastal Elites posted:This really is it, and why we were treated to pages of "well technically"s and "sure it was inappropriate, but"s: some people understand politics to primarily be the actions undertaken by a government or within a government. Politics is the thing Joe Biden does when he signs an EO or congress passes a bill and everything down the chain: advocates, lobbyists, procedural processes, etc. etc. The only real meaningful interaction any "regular" person can have with this realm is their vote. It's so important because it actually means something and does something, even if it's a small thing, and because of that some part of the actions and responsibilities of the people or parties you vote for is invested in you. They are there because of you, after all.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2021 00:28
|
|
|
I just want to say i'm really glad THIS thread was reopened. I did reach out to D&D mods and explained my position and not sure if it made a difference in this instance but I was glad I was heard. I wasn't expecting it.
silicone thrills fucked around with this message at 00:41 on Jun 16, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2021 00:33
|
|
|
Newly published study lays out what many of us have seen with our lying eyes:quote:New research from Syracuse University Newhouse School of Public Communications reveals a relationship between political biases and attitudes about sexual assault.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2021 00:40
|
|
|
Common sense isn't so common and all that. I think a big part of this whole discussion ends up going back to "How can we get people to stop treating politics like its sports?" because "Its fine if my guy committed a crime because it isn't as bad in my eyes as the crimes that the other team committed" just isn't tenable.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2021 00:50
|
|
|
Isn't this thread really about how both parties are bought and paid for by donors, and will do anything to maintain the status quo. They will virtue signal, but taking actual action requires permission from the billionaires that own them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2021 00:51
|
|
|
doverhog posted:Isn't this thread really about how both parties are bought and paid for by donors, and will do anything to maintain the status quo. They will virtue signal, but taking actual action requires permission from the billionaires that own them. It's about sexual assault and the lack of accountability for the same among powerful people (and just in general). I get the connection you're making but no, that's not the main topic of the thread.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2021 01:03
|
|
|
silicone thrills posted:Common sense isn't so common and all that. If we're being honest I think if people were treating politics like sports I think they would be MORE willing to accept sex crimes committed by "their guy." Politics is a serious matter that a lot of people are treating quite seriously, and because of that seriousness, accepting that "their guy" had sexual assaults to their name would require serious soul searching about how far their own support should go, given the potential serious consequences of giving up that support. Denial springs from the 'need' to avoid that painful soul searching.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2021 01:10
|
|
|
Since the rules of D&D are insanely vague - is it OK to also post about celebrities that get away with rape and harassment and how that informs the general public which allows politicians a pass as well? Also: something i've been pondering on the last few weeks: Sometimes i'll see people use the phrase "separate the art from the artist" and maybe that's ok in some ways. You can appreciate things and then be informed of what the artists did later and you shouldn't feel guilty about enjoying the art medium. But lately i've seen people also apply that to politicians. A few different instances recently i've run across is people who literally say things like "I would rather vote for Ed Murray again (a child molester) than Jenny Durkan because Ed Murray was for progressive causes" rather than acknowledging that both of these people shouldn't be politicians and are net negative/harmful people. - This isn't a strawman by the way, I can dig up the quotes but its a bit strange to do. We have such an obsession with the concept of only having a choice between two evils that i've seen folks make up their minds before a primary is even over that they're ok with voting for a net evil person. In my experience this is what is playing into allowing harassers, rapists, molesters into office. reignonyourparade posted:If we're being honest I think if people were treating politics like sports I think they would be MORE willing to accept sex crimes committed by "their guy." Politics is a serious matter that a lot of people are treating quite seriously, and because of that seriousness, accepting that "their guy" had sexual assaults to their name would require serious soul searching about how far their own support should go, given the potential serious consequences of giving up that support. Denial springs from the 'need' to avoid that painful soul searching. Maybe its because what I went through so I'm more attuned to it but I feel like people have been more aggressive about defending sex crimes in politics than in sports. Like extremely aggressively. Just bringing up that a democrat is a sex monster and I wasn't willing to vote for them in a public democratic group/forum has not resulted in very pleasant experiences for me. silicone thrills fucked around with this message at 01:18 on Jun 16, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2021 01:15
|
|
|
Flying-PCP posted:It's about sexual assault and the lack of accountability for the same among powerful people (and just in general). I get the connection you're making but no, that's not the main topic of the thread. Yes of course, but the main explanation as to why nothing is done about it is there. Power flows down from the top. The reason Medicare for all isn't passed even though it has popular support is the same reason powerful people get away with these kind of things. There is no difference between Bezos or Koch paying Trump or Biden to keep them low taxed and free of regulation, or keeping them and their main lackeys immune to rape charges.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2021 01:22
|
|
|
silicone thrills posted:Since the rules of D&D are insanely vague - is it OK to also post about celebrities that get away with rape and harassment and how that informs the general public which allows politicians a pass as well? I posted about Allen v. Farrow upthread and no one objected to it; I don't see why that would be any different now even (especially!) under the new guidelines.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2021 01:25
|
|
|
silicone thrills posted:Since the rules of D&D are insanely vague - is it OK to also post about celebrities that get away with rape and harassment and how that informs the general public which allows politicians a pass as well? Yeah that's entirely fine and encouraged, apologies that wasn't clear.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2021 01:27
|
|
|
Dnd has literally no rules about what you can or can't talk about as long as you're following the general rules of 'put in effort' 'don't be an rear end in a top hat' and 'if you can't engage in good faith, don't engage' and the like. Obviously that doesn't include hate speech or anything actually illegal etc., but I'm hoping that goes without saying.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2021 01:30
|
|
|
doverhog posted:Isn't this thread really about how both parties are bought and paid for by donors, and will do anything to maintain the status quo. They will virtue signal, but taking actual action requires permission from the billionaires that own them. Not really. Politicians and famous people often get away with it because of their wealth and influence, but in cases affecting poor people, abusers tend to get away with it because nobody with any authority actually gives a poo poo about the accusations and even if they do, they can expect to encounter the same sort legal and cultural barriers that people accusing famous individuals do on a smaller scale. It's a widespread issue and focusing exclusively on politicians or the rich does it a disservice.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2021 01:43
|
|
|
silicone thrills posted:Sometimes i'll see people use the phrase "separate the art from the artist" and maybe that's ok in some ways. You can appreciate things and then be informed of what the artists did later and you shouldn't feel guilty about enjoying the art medium. This is an argument that's never made sense to me, personally. For starters there's the basic fact that there's no piece of art so vital to me that I'd be willing to overlook the crimes of the person who made it, but beyond that, how do you do it? If there's a film or an album or the like that's so grand and influential that keeping it around is worth that price of admission, HOW can you separate it from the person who made it? Their fingerprints are all over it, and their influence looms so large that it changed the culture forever, and we're supposed to just not look over there? The classic example would be Polanski, and I guess woody allen but I'm ignoring him because I hate all of his poo poo. Chinatown is a great movie and all, but how the gently caress are you going to watch it without constantly being aware the director thought that John Huston's character was actually the good guy? How are you going to watch Rosemary's Baby and silence that voice in your head telling you that in real life the director is one of the neighbours? How do you compartmentalise like that? What's with the weird drive to be like oh I know he was a bad guy, but he was such a genius, instead of just watching a different film by someone who isn't a monster, especially among people who at least pretend to be better than that?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2021 02:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 17:45 |
|
|
fool of sound posted:Not really. Politicians and famous people often get away with it because of their wealth and influence, but in cases affecting poor people, abusers tend to get away with it because nobody with any authority actually gives a poo poo about the accusations and even if they do, they can expect to encounter the same sort legal and cultural barriers that people accusing famous individuals do on a smaller scale. It's a widespread issue and focusing exclusively on politicians or the rich does it a disservice. I appreciate the response, and yeah it effects everyone "low status", or just lower status, that would challenge an abuser, whether that be through legal or social means in similar ways, just the details are different. doverhog fucked around with this message at 02:10 on Jun 16, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2021 02:04
|
|