|
Aruan posted:this thread is ostensibly supposed to about wider ranging conversations, but instead its people arguing back and forth about details of court cases.  for a more serious response, this is exactly the point of this thread. there should absolutely be wider ranging considerations about sexual violence in the halls of power, about donors like ed buck murdering people for his sexual gratification and being a known fact for years before anyone cared enough to do something about it, about staffers having dedicated breakdown rooms for when the harassment from senators and house members gets to be too much. but there isn't, because a certain segment of the posting population can't help but ceaselessly nitpick away irrelevant details because the most important thing to them is that they can continue to believe that joe biden is not a rapist. "how do elected politicians feel about tara reade" is information that flows directly from the question "how does the electorate feel about tara reade" and we can see the general sentiment on display right here, in this thread
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 21:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 05:36 |
|
|
DoomTrainPhD posted:
This is what ultimately makes me wish the party would burn and is a big reason I will never donate another dime or any more of my time to it ever again.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 21:06
|
|
|
DoomTrainPhD posted:Anybody could have voted 3rd party. Nobody was forcing them to vote for Biden. I mean, I already posted about this a few pages back: Thorn Wishes Talon posted:You might wonder how that applies to the Biden vs. Reade situation. You might say, "well, TWT, surely you did have a choice, which was to not vote for Biden, and that it wasn't a matter of literal survival?" And you're right: for me personally, it wasn't. I can't say the same about my social circle however. For example, I have multiple friends who are DACA recipients, and I knew that their status would continue to be in question if Trump won another term. Another friend is undergoing leukemia therapy, and Trump had tried, and would continue to try, to take away her healthcare. Yet another friend is Yemeni, and her family, back in Yemen, is being crushed by the Saudis, whom Trump supported unequivocally. And more broadly, I genuinely did not think that the country would survive another four years of Trump. So I held my nose and voted for Biden in the general, despite knowing that there is a non-zero chance he sexually assaulted someone in the past. Similarly, no one I know was happy to have to decide between Biden and Trump (and no, don't give me the "you could have voted for Howie" talk), but at the end of the day they did what they thought was right within the larger calculus of their circumstances and that of their social circles. The bottom line is that everyone's moral calculus is different. For you, Reade's accusations were sufficient to not vote for Biden. For many others, including people who themselves are victims, it wasn't. If you want to treat that as a character flaw, that's your prerogative, but don't be surprised when you get pushback for it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 21:12
|
|
|
Thorn Wishes Talon posted:I mean, I already posted about this a few pages back: And I already said that it wasn't a "Reade's accusations wasn't sufficient to not vote for Biden" situation. It was a failing of the Dems to nominate Biden in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 21:14
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:It is not remotely surprising that people adopt a personal-focused moral approach about things that are very personal to them. I do it all the time and I would be very surprised if you don't as well. I know that consequentialism is the more technically useful way to do it but I experience personal focused ethics more viscerally, especially when it is something that matters a lot to me. Saying people shouldn't do that is as useful as shouting at the tide, people are not obligated to be perfectly cold, calm and collected about things that matter a lot to them. Oh yea, of course I understand the concept of that approach. But the last part of DoomTrainPhD's post could have easily been left off, instead of having the unsaid part of it saying to other people "it's such a low bar, why don't you do it unless you support rape  "DoomTrainPhD posted:My stepdaughter was sexually assaulted, so when people say stuff like this, it makes me feel like you are rolling your eyes at her sexual assault and that if the person who sexually assaulted her ever ran for office, I should ignore what he did. I'm sorry that "don't vote for people who have committed sexual assault" is somehow a slippery slope to you. I'm sincerely sorry about having a stepdaughter who was sexually assaulted. I am not rolling my eyes at anyone who is sexually assaulted or raped. Like I said upthread, the societal issue is so much bigger than voting for a rapist vs throwing your vote away [and leading to the possibility of having a worse outcome]. You don't want to vote for a rapist for president no matter what, that's fine. But inferring that everyone who voted for Biden do not actually care about rape or sexually assault is really lovely. If that wasn't your intention, I'm sorry for the mis-interpretation, but you should also leave off the end of that post I quoted. CYBEReris posted:I think people who voted for a rapist should be held to account for it not out of some sick desire for punishment but in the hope that in having to confront it instead of memory hole it away they're galvanized to prevent such a choice from having to be made again Do you drink LaCroix? If so, why do you love sexual harassers? Do you ever eat at McDonald's? If so, why do you love racial discrimination? Do you buy Coca-Cola products? If so, why do you support death squads in Columbia and stealing water rights from poor people. Do you eat animal products? If so, why do you love murder? Do you drive a car? If so, why do you hate the environment? Real answer: I have no problem voting for a rapist this past November given the circumstances that existed, gently caress your shaming statement.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 21:15
|
|
|
The party itself should not have put people in that position. Simple as that. There was 100% an option for them to say "hey this guy isn't going to be allowed to run under our banner" and be done with it but the DNC never did. Higher ups in the party could have said "we anti endorse this person" but they did not. Instead they chose to mentally abuse people / whip them into voting for someone who is a deeply awful human being for alot of reasons.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 21:15
|
|
|
Thorn Wishes Talon posted:I mean, I already posted about this a few pages back: What is the strategy that is advanced by giving rape apologia a pass. You have made it clear you believe calling out rape apologia is a strategic misstep. What is it a misstep on the road towards. What is the goal that is harmed, when someone confronts your hypothetical third party with the fact he is spouting hateful lies in the defense of a rapist.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 21:18
|
|
|
If you're a Democrat who believes that voting Biden was a suboptimal but necessary thing, what are you doing to ensure that your party does not place you in such a position again?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 21:19
|
|
|
Kalit posted:I'm sincerely sorry about having a stepdaughter who was sexually assaulted. I am not rolling my eyes at anyone who is sexually assaulted or raped. Like I said upthread, the societal issue is so much bigger than voting for a rapist vs throwing your vote away [and leading to the possibility of having a worse outcome]. You don't want to vote for a rapist for president no matter what, that's fine. But inferring that everyone who voted for Biden do not actually care about rape or sexually assault is really lovely. If that wasn't your intention, I'm sorry for the mis-interpretation, but you should also leave off the end of that post I quoted. Kalit posted:Real answer: I have no problem voting for a rapist this past November given the circumstances that existed, gently caress your shaming statement. That's your prerogative, but don't act like you are high and mighty because you were able to ignore sexual assault allegations just because he was on your side.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 21:19
|
|
|
Insanite posted:If you're a Democrat who believes that voting Biden was a suboptimal but necessary thing, what are you doing to ensure that your party does not place you in such a position again? Giving the rapist the highest political position in the nation and making them one of the most powerful people on earth seems like a good start.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 21:20
|
|
|
Kalit posted:Oh yea, of course I understand the concept of that approach. But the last part of DoomTrainPhD's post could have easily been left off, instead of having the unsaid part of it saying to other people "it's such a low bar, why don't you do it unless you support rape I also think that is entirely understandable given the common position of basically "well it's him or trump so let's not think about this any further" As I said, that doesn't finish the train of thought, it invites the question of why that was the choice, and I think there are certainly people out there who do not feel sufficiently uncomfortable about making the decision to ask that question, and they could do with being made uncomfortable. As I said earlier there is a mix of opposition to Reade that is comprised of people who don't get it, people who don't want to get it, and people who on some level get it but are still faltering when it comes to actually following through with that understanding, so it is quite difficult to adopt a single personal attitude that doesn't make one of those groups feel like they're being unfairly maligned. And personally I am more inclined to give people who have the right basic idea the greater leeway.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 21:20
|
|
|
Insanite posted:If you're a Democrat who believes that voting Biden was a suboptimal but necessary thing, what are you doing to ensure that your party does not place you in such a position again? Yeah this is where I stand
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 21:22
|
|
|
you cannot discuss tara reade in a vacuum because you can't discuss biden in a vacuum and you can't discuss the election in a vacuum and... vote shaming is stupid because voting is the least impactful thing anyone can do, and the inverse is also true: getting mad at vote shaming is stupid because its an admission that you are too deeply invested in an entirely aesthetic choice
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 21:22
|
|
|
DoomTrainPhD posted:Now who is shaming who? You are saying that my vote was worthless because I refused to vote for a rapist? Fair enough, I'm sorry. I meant "vote for one of two realistic candidates, both of whom are rapists". But I'm not trying to act high and mighty nor did I mean to portray it that way. As I said, I'm sorry for using the phrasing of throwing a vote away. But also, where did I "ignore sexual assault allegations"? I accepted it and still was able to make a decision based on the given circumstances. Kalit fucked around with this message at 21:26 on Feb 8, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 21:23
|
|
|
Kalit posted:Fair enough, I'm sorry. I meant "vote for one of two realistic candidates, both of whom are rapists". But I'm not trying to act high and mighty nor did I mean to portray it that way. As I said, I'm sorry for using the phrasing of throwing a vote away. By accepting them and voting for Biden I feel as if survivors of sexual assault are being ignored "for the greater good."
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 21:28
|
|
|
DoomTrainPhD posted:By accepting them and voting for Biden I feel as if survivors of sexual assault are being ignored "for the greater good." What about Biden voters who themselves are survivors?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 21:30
|
|
|
DoomTrainPhD posted:By accepting them and voting for Biden I feel as if survivors of sexual assault are being ignored "for the greater good." It looks like you’re appealing to a reality that doesn’t exist though. No one wanted to vote for Biden. But what was the meaningful alternative? Left-leaning folks couldn’t even get Bernie close to the ballot and you’re saying democratic supporters should have done more to overcome the full weight of the DNC to prevent them from choosing their good ol’ boy like everyone alleged they would from the start.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 21:31
|
|
|
Thorn Wishes Talon posted:What about Biden voters who themselves are survivors? As discussed earlier, the DNC should not have put them in that position to begin with.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 21:31
|
|
|
DoomTrainPhD posted:As discussed earlier, the DNC should not have put them in that position to begin with. That has nothing to do with the fact that you said I, and by extension I presume all Biden voters, ignored sexual assault survivors because we voted for Biden.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 21:34
|
|
|
DoomTrainPhD posted:As discussed earlier, the DNC should not have put them in that position to begin with. I get that, I'm asking in response to your statement that you feel as if voting for Biden means survivors of sexual assault are being ignored. What about survivors themselves? Were they ignoring their own experiences when voting for Biden, when they could simply have voted third party, or not voted at all?
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 21:34
|
|
|
Thorn Wishes Talon posted:I get that, I'm asking in response to your statement that you feel as if voting for Biden means survivors of sexual assault are being ignored. What about survivors themselves? Were they ignoring their own experiences when voting for Biden, when they could simply have voted third party, or not voted at all? I would say that a lot of them did, yes. Which is a pretty terrible thing for the DNC to do!
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 21:36
|
|
|
Putting him in the office is, materially, saying that it doesn't matter. Like that is what it does, I don't see how it is possible to say that it isn't what it does because he is now president and has all the powers and privileges attendant to the office. That it is entirely possible to say that the alternative was worse and even that you are not making the wrong decision by voting for the lesser evil, does not make that not true, it is necessary to keep reminding people that it is true because if you don't it's going to be 2024 and there will be another presidential race and that uncomfortable knowledge will be buried under new and old arguments and progress will not be made.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 21:38
|
|
|
I feel like arguing about individual voting behavior is - extremely played out - unlikely to have any positive results - tangential and distracting both to the original thrust of this thread and the potentially more constructive angles people have suggested so let's table that, thanks.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 21:39
|
|
|
silicone thrills posted:The party itself should not have put people in that position. Simple as that. There was 100% an option for them to say "hey this guy isn't going to be allowed to run under our banner" and be done with it but the DNC never did. This is my view as well. Part of being a Dem should be saying "we hold ourselves to a higher moral standard even if that means we lose sometimes." It is not enough to simply be less bad than the GOP. (And given the eventual margins of the election I think electability arguments kind of fall flat in hindsight)
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 21:41
|
|
|
Insanite posted:If you're a Democrat who believes that voting Biden was a suboptimal but necessary thing, what are you doing to ensure that your party does not place you in such a position again? I'm a victim of sexual assault who did the moral calculus and voted for Biden. I have: * Written my federal reps (all Dems) to express my displeasure * Pulled my donations to the DNC and Democrats * Actively encouraged my employer to pull their political donations to Reps and Dems alike * Organized multiple grassroots fundraising efforts expressly for female candidates * Increased my donations to charities that help victims of sexual assaults I also made a personal moral decision that I will never again vote for a solo male representative or a ticket that does not have a woman on it, as I feel that frankly most men with a long career in politics will have engaged in some shady behavior towards a woman at some point in their past whether we hear about it or not. I'm sure for some posters in this thread this does not absolve the eternal stain on my soul for voting for Biden. I invite those people to bite me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 21:42
|
|
|
I don't think that anyone ITT is going to come at you for that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 21:47
|
|
|
Insanite posted:I don't think that anyone ITT is going to come at you for that. Yeah, the DNC was really awful putting you in that situation and I am glad you are fighting against their poo poo. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 21:48
|
|
|
There's one part of the discussion here that has been bothering me a lot, which is a belief that MeToo is just dead now among some posters, even as I watched a huge reckoning happen in multiple nerdier communities during last summer after Reade was gone from the news. The belief that MeToo is now over is a self-defeating notion, and speaks more about not noticing where it is being active. I don't expect many of you to be aware of the fact that last summer, in fighting game communities and some esports scenes (I know the most about what happened in Dota 2, but I remember other scenes having some cases as well) multiple big names within those scenes were driven out after being outed as sex pests, including some incredibly popular people. While there were shitheads pushing back against the allegations, most of the accused ended up disappearing from the scenes. And all of it happened because after a couple of people came out, more and more people were willing to open up about the terrible poo poo that some people had been doing. MeToo as a movement doesn't stop just because of a single setback, no matter how notable it is. If you think MeToo is dead because of Tara Reade's accusation not leading up to anything, that's exactly the reaction the people targeted by MeToo would want you to have.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 21:49
|
|
|
Im not angry at individuals who felt like they had to vote for Joe Biden. I'm angry that we have a party that forced this into being. I am angry at individuals who continue to act as if we need to support him or give him an iota of respect or allowance. I will not give him a break. I will not stop hammering him. I will not stop hammering the party.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 21:50
|
|
|
DoomTrainPhD posted:As discussed earlier, the DNC should not have put them in that position to begin with. I feel like this needs to be hammered home, because Biden was tanking hard before the DNC put their thumb on the scale in his favor. They literally could have chose anyone else! But no, it had to be the(very unpopular at the time) Biden for some reason. Like from a pure sociopath standpoint I could understand why they would push Biden if his popularity was overwhelming(though that would not make it right to do so) but he was like one of the worst choices imaginable, why do this for him??? silicone thrills posted:Im not angry at individuals who felt like they had to vote for Joe Biden. This is where I'm at.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 21:56
|
|
|
SpiritOfLenin posted:There's one part of the discussion here that has been bothering me a lot, which is a belief that MeToo is just dead now among some posters, even as I watched a huge reckoning happen in multiple nerdier communities during last summer after Reade was gone from the news. The belief that MeToo is now over is a self-defeating notion, and speaks more about not noticing where it is being active. I don't expect many of you to be aware of the fact that last summer, in fighting game communities and some esports scenes (I know the most about what happened in Dota 2, but I remember other scenes having some cases as well) multiple big names within those scenes were driven out after being outed as sex pests, including some incredibly popular people. While there were shitheads pushing back against the allegations, most of the accused ended up disappearing from the scenes. And all of it happened because after a couple of people came out, more and more people were willing to open up about the terrible poo poo that some people had been doing. Would you agree that Me Too and other movements for accountability seemed to reach their limits as they encountered "big names" who have significant political power? Bill Clinton flew on The Lolita Express, for example, but spoke at last year's Democratic National Convention.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 21:56
|
|
|
I don't think it is particularly surprising that a decentralized movement was not capable of literally overthrowing the US political machine on the first go, especially when part of its prominence was reliant on support from the party under scrutiny. What it suggests is that the combined power of the entire US political system, and its media, is hard to overcome, not that it is inherently a limitation of the desire or even the method to do so. The idea that people can come out and receive support from other people without relying on the favour of some powerful group or person or other to win the right to put the truth out, is a pretty new thing. That it was (as seems clear now) cynically weaponised for partisan purposes and then sabotaged when it threatened the wrong people sucks poo poo, but that's on the people who did that, not on the people who tried to make it work, and I don't think there is necessarily anything wrong with how they did try to make it work either. I hope that if people keep doing it it's gonna change attitudes, the more people are exposed to it and the more people are outed as pieces of poo poo the more I think we'll come to expect those institutional power structures to bend to that collective desire, the more they'll have to be openly hostile to people who want justice rather than just trying to keep it quiet. If people lose trust in outlets that don't cover important stuff like this then that's good, they deserve not to be trusted, that's how you build better networks of information. Every community and every institution that proves vulnerable to that march of truth helps to normalize it, and makes it more likely that one day it might be able to take on the biggest, most corrupt ones. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 22:09 on Feb 8, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 22:07
|
|
|
SpiritOfLenin posted:There's one part of the discussion here that has been bothering me a lot, which is a belief that MeToo is just dead now among some posters, even as I watched a huge reckoning happen in multiple nerdier communities during last summer after Reade was gone from the news. The belief that MeToo is now over is a self-defeating notion, and speaks more about not noticing where it is being active. I don't expect many of you to be aware of the fact that last summer, in fighting game communities and some esports scenes (I know the most about what happened in Dota 2, but I remember other scenes having some cases as well) multiple big names within those scenes were driven out after being outed as sex pests, including some incredibly popular people. While there were shitheads pushing back against the allegations, most of the accused ended up disappearing from the scenes. And all of it happened because after a couple of people came out, more and more people were willing to open up about the terrible poo poo that some people had been doing. It seemed impossible at the time, but former lord and master of the fighting game community and founder of the Evolution championship, MrWizard, met his end after a very lengthy reveal and condemnation of his past actions.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 22:07
|
|
|
Lester Shy posted:This is my view as well. Part of being a Dem should be saying "we hold ourselves to a higher moral standard even if that means we lose sometimes." It is not enough to simply be less bad than the GOP. The question of moral culpability of various parties is interesting. I'm not sure what to think, to be honest. However, it seems that if it is possible for an individual, even a sexual assault survivor, to have done the moral calculus and decided that voting for Biden was worth it for the greater good, it is also possible for the Democratic Party to have done the same calculus about nominating him if they thought that he had the best chance of giving Trump the boot. And if you are of the opinion that it is not reasonable to blame individuals for their decision to vote for Biden, then is it not the consistent stance that blaming the party for nominating him is also unreasonable? After all, the party's job is to nominate the person they think has the best chance of winning the general election based on who they think those voters will vote for. Right? Now, I think what can be successfully argued is that Biden didn't actually have the best chance of winning, but the Democratic Party carefully crafted the narrative that he did, and it became a self-fulfilling prophecy. If that is the case, then holding the party morally responsible is reasonable. But I'm not sure if we can get into that here since it would probably be off-topic.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 22:08
|
|
|
Insanite posted:Would you agree that Me Too and other movements for accountability seemed to reach their limits as they encountered "big names" who have significant political power? I think you're onto something here, but I don't think that means #MeToo is dead so much as it's been compromised by the rich and powerful. "Compromised" doesn't mean dead, though, and something that's been compromised can be retaken, as long as there's a concerted effort by enough people with the right resources. At the risk of saying something incredibly obvious, the fact that 2020 was an election year, and one that involved Trump, clearly worked against holding folks like Biden and Clinton accountable for their actions. I don't see any reason why those of us who believe Reade and want justice can't get organized and renew that campaign, particularly when the pandemic dies down enough (assuming that happens obviously!). Thorn Wishes Talon posted:Now, I think what can be successfully argued is that Biden didn't actually have the best chance of winning, but the Democratic Party carefully crafted the narrative that he did, and it became a self-fulfilling prophecy. If that is the case, then holding the party morally responsible is reasonable. But I'm not sure if we can get into that here since it would probably be off-topic. It probably is, which I hate saying, because I like the way you've worded this. Well-said! Majorian fucked around with this message at 22:16 on Feb 8, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 22:14
|
|
|
Insanite posted:Would you agree that Me Too and other movements for accountability seemed to reach their limits as they encountered "big names" who have significant political power? Only if people start thinking that. Like Weinstein was a megarich fucker who did stuff like host fundraisers for Obama in his own home, and Franken was a senator. There is one massive elephant in the room though - you will occasionally see democratic politicians and powerful people face their comeuppance for poo poo like this, like Al Franken showed. But its less and less likely that republican sex monsters get punished in any way for sexual assault except in the most egregious cases, which also leads to powerful dems having more and more hesitation to punish their own because the monsters on the other side of the aisle just keep ignoring any and all heinous poo poo their people do. Like that's insanely lovely, but fixing that situation is going to take a lot of loving work. But here's the thing - even if powerful politicians right now are hard targets for MeToo, that doesn't mean the movement is dead. Its still important that less prominent sex monsters keep getting forced out whenever and whereever they can be found, because they too victimize lots of people, and it builds up support for the movement. The more people see that "holy poo poo even my corner of the world has this much of this poo poo", the more these people will support MeToo in other situations as well. If there is a wall, it just has to be broken down. Normalizing lovely fuckers losing their place in whatever scene they've wormed their ways into means that people start expecting fuckers to get punished in every situation - including powerful politicians. The powerful people of the world aren't the only predators, and its extremely important that the lower rungs on the totem pole are cleaned up as well. edit: I notice a couple of people posted before me with basically the same message lol
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 22:14
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:i'm in a position where i get irritated with most reade skeptics and everyone who seeks to weaponize her accusations against bidenlikers It's kind of funny that you guys talk about how posters shouldn't assume others are acting in bad faith, when this reasoning is basically 100% dependent upon a completely baseless belief that other people don't actually care about something. It's an almost comical level of hypocrisy. You're literally just accusing other people of virtue signalling. The only way for this to even remotely be a reasonable position is if the same people "weaponizing accusations" also deny accusations when those accusations are aimed at the people they like. But it turns out that only one side is doing this, and it isn't the side of the people who think Biden is a rapist. Hell, even if it was somehow "weaponized," it's not clear to me what the problem is with making people feel bad for liking a rapist. I personally won't hold random low-engagement people who voted for Biden out of some misguided sense of necessity to this standard (I think they're wrong, but I can at least understand the perspective), but it absolutely applies to, as you put it, "bidenlikers" (people who like Biden or at least don't think he's a bad person).
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 22:16
|
|
|
Cards on the table, I'm personally furious at the kind of people who took Tara Reade as a useful justification to push back on #MeToo! Overnight, rape went from something the new democratic party had no tolerance for, to something that the party faithful must be cautious about talking about, for fear we might offend some nebulous pro-rape demographic. People like Kalit, who have reckoned with the moral choice they've made, I disagree with but can see how they got there. But the people who have used Tara Reade as an example of a time and place where MeToo went too far? The ones saying that if we don't allow a little rape apologia to go unchallenged, someone that matters might get hurt? I'm hard pressed to find a word for that behavior, and the philosophy that leads up to it, other than "evil." And it is horrifying to see those people clapping themselves on the back for their rationality, in unilaterally surrendering the expectation that victims can or should be believed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 22:19
|
|
|
metoo is a decentralized "movement" - if you even want to call it a movement - and the degree to which it's been controlled/coopted/no longer relevant is entirely dependent on the particular space and context we're talking about. i would argue that specifically in politics metoo was never particularly authentic from the start and was always a convenient tool for both sides, but there have been real strides made in other areas - like entertainment - where the stakes are lower so there has been more of a real reckoning, and that reckoning continues. i do not think the sole criteria to judge #metoo by is 'to what extent has it existed within political spaces' - that's a component of a much larger whole.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 22:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 05:36 |
|
|
I do want to be clear: Simply accusing somebody of sexual assault should not be grounds for not voting for somebody. If that was the case, then accusations could and would be used as weapons all the time. What SHOULD be done is an investigation by an independent committee into the allegations, including interviews and possibly a trial. What is infuriating is the DNC's silence on the accusations and going forth with Biden's nomination anyways without doing the above.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 22:29
|
|