VitalSigns posted:

https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/935881865269055489

Condiv posted:

yeah, everyone on the forums just misunderstands your best friend JC

moller posted:

All of the replies stating that Rice did this as a cynical ploy to undermine Pelosi are, uh, interesting.

Nevvy Z posted:

That wasn't what I was referring to but also applicable!

Condiv posted:

yeah i was curious about that. is there any history of her doing anything like this? why are these people accusing her of trying to steal pelosi's job or acting insincerely (other than they have to defend dems at all costs)

Grapplejack posted:

She doesn't have the pull or connections Pelosi does, there's zero chance of her actually trying to undermine her to stage a soft coup.

Condiv posted:

ah, so you were defending the rapey prarie home companion jackass? exactly who was lying about what nevvy z? also, love that you felt compelled to defend JC still even after what an intolerable shithead he's been recently.

Nevvy Z posted:

Nope, I don't give a gently caress about that guy. You seem to really want to get mad about this

Nevvy Z posted:

This is gonna sound crazy, but even when someone has done bad things I don't think it's productive or helpful to lie about other things they've done and pointing out when that is happening isn't a defense of the person.

Condiv posted:

You care enough to defend him whenever peeps are dogpiling him, and you even said some of it was unjustified

stone cold posted:

which pig are you obliquely referring to nevvy z and who was lying

Nevvy Z posted:

I mean, that photo isn't a grope no matter how much you insist it is...

It wasn't actually about anything in this thread, some random argument I saw in the Trump thread, I just like it because it applies so well to 90% of arguments I see in D&D. Like obviously Franken is gross the photo was gross and whether or not it's a "grope" is irrelevant to those things.

Cambridge Dictionary posted:

infml Someone who gropes someone else touches that person’s body without permission.

Oxford Dictionary posted:

informal with object Fondle (someone) for sexual pleasure roughly or clumsily, or without the person's consent.
‘I don't want strangers groping me’
‘they groped each other wildly in the taxi’

10 U.S. Code § 920 - Art. 120. Rape and sexual assault generally posted:

(b)Sexual Assault.—Any person subject to this chapter who—
(1) commits a sexual act upon another person by—
(A) threatening or placing that other person in fear;
(B) causing bodily harm to that other person;
(C) making a fraudulent representation that the sexual act serves a professional purpose; or
(D) inducing a belief by any artifice, pretense, or concealment that the person is another person;
(2) commits a sexual act upon another person when the person knows or reasonably should know that the other person is asleep, unconscious, or otherwise unaware that the sexual act is occurring; or
(3) commits a sexual act upon another person when the other person is incapable of consenting to the sexual act due to—
(A) impairment by any drug, intoxicant, or other similar substance, and that condition is known or reasonably should be known by the person; or
(B) a mental disease or defect, or physical disability, and that condition is known or reasonably should be known by the person;
is guilty of sexual assault and shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.
(c)Aggravated Sexual Contact.—
Any person subject to this chapter who commits or causes sexual contact upon or by another person, if to do so would violate subsection (a) (rape) had the sexual contact been a sexual act, is guilty of aggravated sexual contact and shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.
(d)Abusive Sexual Contact.—
Any person subject to this chapter who commits or causes sexual contact upon or by another person, if to do so would violate subsection (b) (sexual assault) had the sexual contact been a sexual act, is guilty of abusive sexual contact and shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.
(e)Proof of Threat.—
In a prosecution under this section, in proving that a person made a threat, it need not be proven that the person actually intended to carry out the threat or had the ability to carry out the threat.
(f)Defenses.—
An accused may raise any applicable defenses available under this chapter or the Rules for Court-Martial. Marriage is not a defense for any conduct in issue in any prosecution under this section.
(g)Definitions.—In this section:
(1)Sexual act.—The term “sexual act” means—
(A) contact between the penis and the vulva or anus or mouth, and for purposes of this subparagraph contact involving the penis occurs upon penetration, however slight; or
(B) the penetration, however slight, of the vulva or anus or mouth, of another by any part of the body or by any object, with an intent to abuse, humiliate, harass, or degrade any person or to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person.
(2)Sexual contact.—The term “sexual contact” means—
(A) touching, or causing another person to touch, either directly or through the clothing, the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks of any person, with an intent to abuse, humiliate, or degrade any person; or
(B) any touching, or causing another person to touch, either directly or through the clothing, any body part of any person, if done with an intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person.
Touching may be accomplished by any part of the body.

Merriam Webster posted:

feel up
claims that her boss tried to grope her

Wiktionary posted:

3. To touch (another person) closely and (especially) sexually.
We've been together two weeks, and have just been kissing and groping, but no sex yet.

4. To intentionally and inappropriately touch another person, in such a manner as to make the contact appear accidental, for the purpose of one's sexual gratification.
That old man groped that girl on the train!

Nevvy Z posted:

I mean, that photo isn't a grope no matter how much you insist it is...

It wasn't actually about that or anything in this thread, but some random argument I saw in the Trump thread. I just like it because it applies so well to 90% of arguments I see in D&D. Obviously Franken is gross the photo was gross and whether or not it's a "grope" is irrelevant to those things.

CassandraSupreme posted:

If you've ever worn flak armor, it's not like she could actually feel anything through that. It's a totemic act of abuse.

Now, you can argue that most forms of abuse are totemic and that's fine.

But what makes a grope a grope?

CassandraSupreme posted:

If you've ever worn flak armor, it's not like she could actually feel anything through that. It's a totemic act of abuse.

Now, you can argue that most forms of abuse are totemic and that's fine.

But what makes a grope a grope?

CassandraSupreme posted:

If you've ever worn flak armor, it's not like she could actually feel anything through that. It's a totemic act of abuse.

Now, you can argue that most forms of abuse are totemic and that's fine.

But what makes a grope a grope?

stone cold posted:

The 2017 Hellscape posted:

I know he touched a woman inappropriately without her consent, but was it really a grope?

Combed Thunderclap posted:

Anyone who’s listened to Garrison Keillor’s Guy Noir skits on Prairie Home Companion, where Keillor basically plays himself and his character creeps on various femme fatale/innocent-type female characters, should be completely unsurprised by this news. Good riddance to one more weird jackass.

BENGHAZI 2 posted:

I mean all that means is he's playing a noir character

BENGHAZI 2 posted:

I mean all that means is he's playing a noir character

stone cold posted:

old noir much like garrison keillor is full of misogynistic creepiness

a good take

BENGHAZI 2 posted:

Unironically what I was saying but also noir can be good and idk I think someone essentially saying no poo poo he's a pest he likes noir is dumb as bricks

It's about half a step removed from horror movies being a reason to suspect someone of murder

stone cold posted:

counterpoint: how many old white dudes who are really into noir are genuinely okay dudes

stone cold posted:

counterpoint: how many old white dudes who are really into noir are genuinely okay dudes

BENGHAZI 2 posted:

Congrats you're literally doing the horror movies is for murderers in waiting argument

stone cold posted:

won’t somebody please think of the powerless old white men? who will speak for them? somebody, please?!?

BENGHAZI 2 posted:

yeah that's exactly what i'm saying, you're not doing that thing where you get a bug in your rear end because you said something dumb and got called on it and now everyone who argues against you is actually pro sex pest or whatever

eat poo poo steve

moller posted:

Penultimate means next to last.

VitalSigns posted:

With this Franken news I'm disappointed that JC is on probation for a month because I'm curious whether we'd get a consistent doubling down that it's bad for him to resign his position of influence and power without a full investigation because now we'll never know exactly how many women he abused thanks to the influence and power of his position...or whether we'll get some doubleplusgood bellyfeel duckspeaking that the Party was always right to demand his resignation without the delay of an ethics investigation.

VitalSigns posted:

With this Franken news I'm disappointed that JC is on probation for a month because I'm curious whether we'd get a consistent doubling down that it's bad for him to resign his position of influence and power without a full investigation because now we'll never know exactly how many women he abused thanks to the influence and power of his position...or whether we'll get some doubleplusgood bellyfeel duckspeaking that the Party was always right to demand his resignation without the delay of an ethics investigation.

MooselanderII posted:

I think ending his "smash the patriarchy!!!" facade by eating a probation for creepily calling KM "bae" is about as peak JC as we're likely to ever see. Although him having the instinctive need to triangulate between the "retire bitch" and "you call that a grope???" positions is pretty up there as well.

VitalSigns posted:

That feeling when you contort yourself into non-euclidean pretzel shapes to explain to those naive idealists why it's impossible, oh just impossible for the Democratic Party to do the right thing without months and months of interminable process and doubletalk until the whole thing falls out of the public eye to be forgotten, and then those damned Democrats go behind your back the very next week and do what the stupid idealists wanted.