|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:I'm making analogy how morality is viewed throughout the ages. You seem to have trouble understanding basic analogies and different threads of conversation. That analogy has nothing to do with what happened and you continue to misrepresent (lie?) about what did happen. She did not complain about a skit she agreed to that she regretted afterwards, she complained that he shoved his tongue in her mouth without her consent during a rehearsal. Sticking your tongue down another actor's throat while you grab her head so she can't get away is not part of a skit. E: Crosby B. Alfred posted:If we can't tell the difference between an actual criminal sex act vs. someone crossing another persons personal boundaries with something like a inappropriate lewd joke we are in a ton of trouble as a society. Grabbing someone and shoving his tongue in her is not "a lewd joke", stop lying about what happened VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 22:02 on Apr 11, 2021 |
#
?
Apr 11, 2021 22:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 04:10 |
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Grabbing someone and shoving his tongue in her is not "a lewd joke", stop lying about what happened quote:Witnesses Cast Doubt on Tweeden’s Claims Franken Wrote a Kissing Scene Just for Her Not true. Kissing was a part of the skit but I will say that Franken took it way too far but again is it a a criminal sexual act? I don't believe so. Gucci Loafers fucked around with this message at 22:09 on Apr 11, 2021 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2021 22:05
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:Not true. Kissing was a part of the skit but I will say that Franken took it way too far but again is it a a criminal sexual act? I don't believe so. He grabbed her by the back of the head and shoved his tongue down her throat in a rehearsal. idk if that's criminal but why do you keep eliding that accusation and claiming it was just lewd jokes, that's not what the victim alleged I have quoted her own words to you already
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2021 22:27
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:Sure, it doesn't necessarily mean that but from what I have read and watched with regards to Northam specially it appears they have made that decision. I could very well be wrong but haven't come across anything persuasive enough to suggest otherwise. The relevant question here is "why do you default to the position that the party (/politicians who are members of it) aren't bad?" This isn't reasonable in light of the history of the party (for the exact same reason it doesn't make sense to assume the best about Republicans). Even though you obviously don't believe this is the case, imagine for a moment, hypothetically, that the Democratic Party is actually not good and wants to prevent left-wing policy, and that people like Manchin (or Lieberman, etc) are just used as an excuse. How would your reasoning respond to such a situation? You've essentially adopted a perspective that is begging to be fooled as long as the party is willing to make even the most lazy attempt at doing so. The actual relevant discussion to have here is "what should people assume about the Democratic Party," because this question determines what the burden of proof should be for situations like this. My position is that nearly everything about the party's history means that you should believe they're on the wrong side of issues like the topic of this thread, and that there should be a strong burden of proof to show that this has changed. So in the case of Cuomo, it doesn't make sense to assume they're actually serious about removing him from office unless significant actions are taken towards that end (and continue to be taken after the story mostly left the news cycle). This applies to most disagreements on this subforum - one side assumes the party is good by default and the other assumes its bad, so you end up with different ideas of what sort of evidence is needed to back up assertions about the politicians in question. Everyone unavoidably has assumptions that influence their opinions about people/issues/etc. But the problem is when people don't acknowledge those assumptions and believe that their reasoning is just some sort of obvious logical truth. This is how you end up with liberals essentially treating the Democratic Party in the same way Blue Lives Matter people treat the police - every individual event is completely isolated from any historical context and should be viewed in a way that gives the benefit of the doubt to the politician/cop in question. Just like policing organizations in the US, the Democratic Party also has a long history of mostly doing a bunch of terrible things and directly opposing the left, so it makes no sense to give its politicians the benefit of the doubt.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2021 22:29
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:Pretty much everything they ever said about BernieBros was always projection. That's obviously not to say that lovely behavior from some Leftists should be used to disqualify Leftism or a political candidate who shows no signs of abuse, assault, and any examples of sexism are at worst implicit bias that is not rare of a man. But in a thread this is implicitly about partisanship blinding people to the actions of men in power, I feel like your post can hand wave actual things that have happened. Timeless Appeal fucked around with this message at 22:35 on Apr 11, 2021 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2021 22:29
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:He grabbed her by the back of the head and shoved his tongue down her throat in a rehearsal. Kissing was a part of the skit to which Tweeden choose to participate. I don't know if anyone has ever kissed you before sometimes people kiss with tongue and grab their partners head. Obviously, Franken took this way too far and but it doesn't appear he was intentionally trying to violate her boundaries but made a really stupid mistake one that he should have absolutely have known better especially for such an experienced actor. They literally teach "Sex Consent Courses" in acting school for this very reason so they everyone is aware of other people's boundaries. I don't believe accidentally crossing those boundaries rises to a criminal sex act but it still isn't acceptable conduct. At this point I feel there's little value continuing this discussion and I've explained my view more than once. If you disagree with it by all means then do so. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) Gucci Loafers fucked around with this message at 22:44 on Apr 11, 2021 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2021 22:34
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:The relevant question here is "why do you default to the position that the party (/politicians who are members of it) aren't bad?" This isn't reasonable in light of the history of the party (for the exact same reason it doesn't make sense to assume the best about Republicans). This is the Tara Reade sexual harassment thread. If you want to start a larger conversation about the Democratic Party by all means feel free to do so as I'd be glad to participate.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2021 22:39
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:I feel like this is a vague enough statement that it's worth noting that the Sanders campaign did not only have an issue with sexual harassment and violence, but dealt with it in a lovely way. This is by Bernie's own admission and he apologized for it. Ijeoma Oluo has a good chapter in Mediocre about real harassment that was felt from women political commentators from mostly male Bernie supporters. I've seen in real life Leftist males use their perceived moral righteousness as a license to act horrible to others. Are there any links or further reading on this incident?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2021 22:40
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:Kissing was a part of the skit. I don't know if anyone has ever kissed you before sometimes people kiss with tongue and grab their partners head. Obviously, Franken took this way too far and but it doesn't appear he was intentionally trying to violate her boundaries but made a really stupid mistake one that he should have absolutely have known better especially for such an experienced actor. They literally teach "Sex Consent Courses" in acting school for this very reason so they everyone is aware of other people's boundaries. I don't believe accidentally crossing those boundaries rises to a criminal sex act but it still isn't acceptable conduct. You're infantilizing a grown man and that is part of the problem of how we deal with these issues in general.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2021 22:48
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:I feel like this is a vague enough statement that it's worth noting that the Sanders campaign did not only have an issue with sexual harassment and violence, but dealt with it in a lovely way. This is by Bernie's own admission and he apologized for it. Ijeoma Oluo has a good chapter in Mediocre about real harassment that was felt from women political commentators from mostly male Bernie supporters Do you have any links or anything about this? Because I am absolutely not going to read that book
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2021 22:51
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:Kissing was a part of the skit to which Tweeden choose to participate. I don't know if anyone has ever kissed you before sometimes people kiss with tongue and grab their partners head. Obviously, Franken took this way too far and but it doesn't appear he was intentionally trying to violate her boundaries but made a really stupid mistake one that he should have absolutely have known better especially for such an experienced actor. They literally teach "Sex Consent Courses" in acting school for this very reason so they everyone is aware of other people's boundaries. I don't believe accidentally crossing those boundaries rises to a criminal sex act but it still isn't acceptable conduct. Oh my god dude yes please stop, you're being such a weird little debate pedant about sexual harassment and keep doing these lovely little "well I'm sorry if you were offended" non-acknowledgments and just exemplifying everything awful about men on the internet who want to get really deep into the details of a sexual assault, really drill down and decide how she actually felt and acted and so on
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2021 22:54
|
|
|
some plague rats posted:Do you have any links or anything about this? Because I am absolutely not going to read that book The reference to sexual violence was in a letter sent to the 2020 Campaign and Sanders. There was no specific allegation, but the letter implicitly states its existence. Mediocre's good though, but not going to dig to check her sources on that atm. The first article talks about how some Bernie supporters defamed her and told her she was making poo poo up. EDIT: To be clear, the 2016 campaign by all accounts was bad at dealing with it. Bernie and the 2020 campaign were much better. Timeless Appeal fucked around with this message at 23:01 on Apr 11, 2021 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2021 22:57
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:Dude, your point of view is like REALLY BAD. Do you think it rises to the point of criminality because that is the crux of it and the point of this debate. I do think it's out of line, inappropriate but the point here I am disputing other posters that it rises to the level of a crime and I don't believe that to be the case. Do you? If so, why? Timeless Appeal posted:I don't even agree with everyone on every detail who is arguing with you. But of course a middle aged man knows to not shove his tongue into the mouth of a lady for a kiss for a stupid comedy sketch. Everyone knows that. They weren't performing Portrait of a Lady on Fire or Sleep No More. Sex Consent Courses are great, but because actors actually appear nude, do indeed make-out, and touch each other intimately in performance. If you watch when characters kiss on like SNL, most of the time it's a stilted fake kiss because as much as she enjoys her craft, Kate McKinnon doesn't need to makeout with the host for a dumb sketch. As we've seen over the last few decades not everyone does not know that. Al Franken started working at SNL in 1975. Kate McKinnon didn't start until 2012. 1980s Culture was absolutely bizarre in retrospect with things like managers openly dating their subordinates to unsolicited sexual comments. Back then, people didn't think much of it but I am glad they sure as hell do now. Edit - I can't find it offhand but Maureen Dowd has an excellent article on office culture. Timeless Appeal posted:You're infantilizing a grown man and that is part of the problem of how we deal with these issues in general. My intent is not to infantilize a grown man. People are turning the Al Franken sandal from a molehill into a mountain. Gucci Loafers fucked around with this message at 23:15 on Apr 11, 2021 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2021 23:03
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:At this point I feel there's little value continuing this discussion and I've explained my view more than once. If you disagree with it by all means then do so. Agreed on this; to wrap this up, for posterity I'll quote the things you've said in this thread. I deeply hope that you aren't ever in a conversation with a survivor and end up lecturing them on the nuances of "actual sexual harassment" and "actual criminal acts" and how the lack of meeting that bar causes "mob rule". Crosby B. Alfred posted:Franken was in tour in Iraq motivating the troops and this was supposed to have been joke. Granted, it's still harassment, poor taste, etc. but remember this the perfect combination of young men, a former comedian and in the early 2000s. And to top it off, Tweeden had done similar raunchy skits. She even accepted Franken's apology. Crosby B. Alfred posted:I'm not surprised a former SNL comedian made a really dumb decision to make a crude joke to a bunch of young soldiers in a war zone in the 2000s. Crosby B. Alfred posted:Given the circumstances surrounding the story I don't think he should have been pushed out by Democratic leaders. Crosby B. Alfred posted:... someone acting inappropriately during lewd comedy skit that's then shared delivered via highly partisan conservative talk radio might generate some skepticism. Crosby B. Alfred posted:There's a difference between actual sexual harassment vs. actors participating a raunchy skit that went past someone's personal boundaries. Is it stupid and offensive? Yes. Is it a criminal act? I don't believe so. Crosby B. Alfred posted:If we can't tell the difference between an actual criminal sex act vs. someone crossing another persons personal boundaries with something like a inappropriate lewd joke we are in a ton of trouble as a society. Crosby B. Alfred posted:Not true. Kissing was a part of the skit but I will say that Franken took it way too far but again is it a a criminal sexual act? I don't believe so. Crosby B. Alfred posted:Kissing was a part of the skit to which Tweeden choose to participate. I don't know if anyone has ever kissed you before sometimes people kiss with tongue and grab their partners head. Obviously, Franken took this way too far and but it doesn't appear he was intentionally trying to violate her boundaries but made a really stupid mistake one that he should have absolutely have known better especially for such an experienced actor. They literally teach "Sex Consent Courses" in acting school for this very reason so they everyone is aware of other people's boundaries. I don't believe accidentally crossing those boundaries rises to a criminal sex act but it still isn't acceptable conduct. Crosby B. Alfred posted:People are turning the Al Franken sandal from a molehill into a mountain. And to be clear, here's the actual reality that you're talking about : quote:A Los Angeles radio anchor accuses Franken of forcibly kissing her while they were rehearsing during a 2006 USO tour. KABC anchor Leeann Tweeden also made public a photo that shows Franken smiling, with his hands over her chest as if to grope her, as she slept. Franken, who was a comedian at the time, released a statement saying he remembered the alleged kiss differently and he felt “disgusted with myself” over the photo. quote:Lindsay Menz told CNN that Franken put his hand on her buttocks in 2010 while posing for a picture at the Minnesota State Fair. Franken was a senator at the time. He told CNN in a statement that he didn’t remember taking the photo, but he feels badly that she felt disrespected. quote:Two women who remained anonymous allege that Franken touched their buttocks during events for his first campaign for Senate. The women told the Huffington Post that the events happened in Minneapolis in 2007 and 2008. Franken says in a statement: “It’s difficult to respond to anonymous accusers, and I don’t remember those campaign events.” quote:A fifth woman comes forward with an allegation. Army veteran Stephanie Kemplin, of Maineville, Ohio, tells CNN that Franken groped her during a USO Christmas tour in the Middle East in 2003. Kemplin, who was deployed to Kuwait at the time, said Franken cupped her right breast when she stood next to him for a photo. Franken’s office released a statement saying the senator takes thousands of photos and has never intentionally engaged in this kind of conduct. quote:A woman identified only as a former elected official in New England tells Jezebel that Franken attempted to give her a “wet, open-mouthed kiss” onstage at an event in 2006. The woman said she appeared on Franken’s radio show Air America and after the interview, she tried to shake his hand but he took it and leaned in for a kiss. She said she turned her head and he kissed her on the cheek. quote:A seventh woman accuses Franken of sexual misconduct. According to Politico, the woman, a former Democratic congressional aide, said Franken tried to kiss her after a taping of his radio show in 2006. The woman, who wasn’t identified, says that after her boss left and she was collecting her belongings, Franken tried to kiss her, saying: “It’s my right as an entertainer.” Franken categorically denies the allegation, saying the idea he would claim such conduct as a right as an entertainer was “preposterous.”
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2021 23:14
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:Kissing was a part of the skit to which Tweeden choose to participate. I don't know if anyone has ever kissed you before sometimes people kiss with tongue and grab their partners head. Obviously, Franken took this way too far and but it doesn't appear he was intentionally trying to violate her boundaries but made a really stupid mistake one that he should have absolutely have known better especially for such an experienced actor. They literally teach "Sex Consent Courses" in acting school for this very reason so they everyone is aware of other people's boundaries. I don't believe accidentally crossing those boundaries rises to a criminal sex act but it still isn't acceptable conduct. Sticking your tongue in another actor's mouth is not part of a stage kiss, and of course it's intentional! This is actually a big problem in film and theater, where actresses are assaulted during scenes and the response is pretty much what you're doing here: by agreeing to take part in a kissing/sex scene she was basically asking to be tongued or groped because that's what people do in real sex blah blah blah. I will give you the benefit of the doubt here and assume you're just not familiar with the difference between stage kissing and a real-life hot and heavy petting session, but think about what you're saying here and what it means for women in the business who have to worry a male costar will just start tongueing them while they're working together. This logic would never apply to say, a man, whose co-actor deliberately kicked him in the balls during a choreographed fight scene. You never hear "oh well that happens in fights, shouldn't have agreed to do a stage fight if you didn't want the other guy to take advantage of the opportunity to beat you up for real"
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2021 23:15
|
|
|
Cloaked posted:I deeply hope that you aren't ever in a conversation with a survivor and end up lecturing them on the nuances of "actual sexual harassment" and "actual criminal acts" and how the lack of meeting that bar causes "mob rule". I mean he's been doing exactly that for about three pages now, so,
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2021 23:16
|
|
|
some plague rats posted:I mean he's been doing exactly that for about three pages now, so, True; that's a misstep on my part, apologies.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2021 23:18
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:Here's a really good first person narrative from the main person who spoke out. Gotcha. The original point was that the "bernie bros" narrative was horseshit, and in that intercept article she specifically says that her case should not be used to prop up the entirely false berniebro smear. It seems like there were absolutely problems on the campaign that were handled poorly, but the idea that there were great swathes of lovely men pretending to be Bernie supporters because it gave them an excuse to do misogyny is ridiculous on the face of it Cloaked posted:True; that's a misstep on my part, apologies. No need for apologies, that wasn't a jab at you
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2021 23:20
|
|
|
Cloaked posted:Agreed on this; to wrap this up, for posterity I'll quote the things you've said in this thread. I deeply hope that you aren't ever in a conversation with a survivor and end up lecturing them on the nuances of "actual sexual harassment" and "actual criminal acts" and how the lack of meeting that bar causes "mob rule". I wouldn't have the same conversation I am having here with a survivor of sexual because the context and circumstance would be entirely different. And I wouldn't bring up that conversation on a online comedy forum even in the debate section either nor it is nuance. You simply aren't following the conversation at hand either and it appears you are coming right at the end of it. I responded specifically to a poster that said I am evil because I believe we should have some kind of process to determine if a sex politician scandal is true and if it rises to the level of them being removed from office along with additional changes to governance of the office and potential criminal charges. EDIT - And yes, it turns out Al Franken has done many other terrible things but the topic at hand wasn't those things but solely the events at the USO Tour. Gucci Loafers fucked around with this message at 23:26 on Apr 11, 2021 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2021 23:21
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Sticking your tongue in another actor's mouth is not part of a stage kiss, and of course it's intentional! This is actually a big problem in film and theater, where actresses are assaulted during scenes and the response is pretty much what you're doing here: by agreeing to take part in a kissing/sex scene she was basically asking to be tongued or groped because that's what people do in real sex blah blah blah. I will give you the benefit of the doubt here and assume you're just not familiar with the difference between stage kissing and a real-life hot and heavy petting session, but think about what you're saying here and what it means for women in the business who have to worry a male costar will just start tongueing them while they're working together. No, for the dozenth time that is not what I am arguing. She didn't consent to kiss Franken in this way and he violated her but it doesn't rise to level of a criminal sex act. At this point I feel like your purposefully dis-interrupting my argument.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2021 23:29
|
|
|
some plague rats posted:Gotcha. The original point was that the "bernie bros" narrative was horseshit
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2021 23:30
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:I wouldn't have the same conversation I am having here with a survivor of sexual because the context and circumstance would be entirely different. And I wouldn't bring up that conversation on a online comedy forum even in the debate section either nor it is nuance. You simply aren't understanding how endlessly debating what "actual sexual harassment" or "actual criminal" behavior is explicitly damages the process of holding powerful abusers accountable and is almost always performed by people that want to protect those abusers.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2021 23:34
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:I know the mods aren't going to make you stop these sly insinuations about Tweeden because you've been doing it for pages and the only mod action was to punish someone who got fed up with your behavior, so I'm just going to ask you nicely to stop doing it, it's gross. Glad I was wrong about this, thanks Herstory Crosby B. Alfred posted:No, for the dozenth time that is not what I am arguing. She didn't consent to kiss Franken in this way and he violated her but it doesn't rise to level of a criminal sex act. At this point I feel like your purposefully dis-interrupting my argument. Idk if what she alleged is a criminal sex act or not because I'm not a lawyer, or if it's even still within the statute of limitations. My problem with what you're saying is that you're downplaying what actually happened, claiming it wasn't intentional on his part (it was), or that it's somehow relevant that she took the job (it isn't) It seems like the problem is that you think what she alleged is criminal behavior, but instead of making a legal argument why it isn't (or, idk accepting it), you're trying to make it into something it wasn't and making a bunch of insinuations about her (she's a Republican, she's an actress, she's sexual herself, he didn't do it on purpose, etc) E: let me put it another way. If you think Franken shouldn't be in prison (although I don't think anyone has argued that he should, so not sure why you're fixating on it), you should make a legal or moral argument for why his actions aren't or shouldn't be a crime even if everything Tweeden alleged is completely accurate*, not try to cast doubt on her credibility or mitigate what he did by appealing to the behavior of young men (he was in his 40s) etc *(because let's face it, it is. half a dozen other women confirmed he groped them too, he didn't do it to only them and not Tweeden and Tweeded is coincidentally somehow mistaken). VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 02:01 on Apr 12, 2021 |
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2021 00:03
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:I think calling it all projection can be read as that there were not actually cases of misogyny, harassment, and most likely assault based on the language from the letter within the Bernie Campaign and amongst his supporters. That is clearly not true, but as Oluo alludes, it speaks to greater culture issues and specifically with men. If that's what they meant then you're absolutely right. That's not how I read it, but I can't speak for whoever posted it
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2021 00:09
|
|
|
some plague rats posted:If that's what they meant then you're absolutely right. That's not how I read it, but I can't speak for whoever posted it
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2021 00:17
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:No, for the dozenth time that is not what I am arguing. She didn't consent to kiss Franken in this way and he violated her but it doesn't rise to level of a criminal sex act. At this point I feel like your purposefully dis-interrupting my argument. At what point in this debate did you introduce criminality as the standard? Seems like everyone, including yourself, has been talking about Franken deserving to lose his job, and now you’re trying to weasel your way out. If you want your argument to be “Franken shouldn’t be imprisoned without due process” then you first have to cede that your original arguments were complete dogshit. Once you’ve done that, then we can move onto the criminality argument. Here’s a preview of the response you’ll get: 
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2021 04:15
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:I don't think the OP's intention is to undermine the women I'm citing at all and I assume they're on those women's sides. Regardless of intention though, people were actually harassed, likely assaulted based on the language of the letter, or dismissed by Sanders supporters or members of the campaign. They should not have their experiences wrapped up as just projection because some people weaponize their experiences in a bad faith manner. To my mind the projection is question is not dismissing the women mentioned in the letter, the projection is by the dem partisans who concocted the entire Bernie Bro smear, who accused all his supporters of being white men who love misogyny and all the women were just trying to impress boys and so on who then went immediately to the mat to dismiss the crimes of Biden, Cuomo, etc
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2021 04:27
|
|
|
some plague rats posted:To my mind the projection is question is not dismissing the women mentioned in the letter, the projection is by the dem partisans who concocted the entire Bernie Bro smear, who accused all his supporters of being white men who love misogyny and all the women were just trying to impress boys and so on who then went immediately to the mat to dismiss the crimes of Biden, Cuomo, etc
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2021 04:50
|
|
|
some plague rats posted:To my mind the projection is question is not dismissing the women mentioned in the letter, the projection is by the dem partisans who concocted the entire Bernie Bro smear, who accused all his supporters of being white men who love misogyny and all the women were just trying to impress boys and so on who then went immediately to the mat to dismiss the crimes of Biden, Cuomo, etc Yes, this, though also tying it in with the Russiagate narrative and general eagerness to dismiss the accounts of women and minorities and throw them under the bus to prop up almost universally old white male politicians, and being willing to continue to pursue grudges like Tara Reade even when there's no point anymore, Biden won.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2021 06:09
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:and being willing to continue to pursue grudges like Tara Reade even when there's no point anymore, Biden won. That's the worst bit. It's not even enough that they won, we all have to publically and definitively lose
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2021 06:50
|
|
|
It's because liberals aren't satisfied with winning, they have a need to feel morally superior to everyone as well. Conservatives stopped attacking Dr Ford, Stormy Daniels, Trump's accusers, etc almost the instant they beat them. They don't care if their guy did it, they just wanted to win, destroying those women along the way was 'just business'. For liberals, destroying women who accused their man can never be just business, it's a moral crusade. If Paula Jones or Tara Reade are telling the truth, then the people who refused to take them seriously are the bad guys, and liberals can't be the bad guys, so they can never ever let up on these women. Ever.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2021 14:38
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:It's because liberals aren't satisfied with winning, they have a need to feel morally superior to everyone as well. This seems like quite the stretch from a single tweet from some rando.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2021 14:44
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:If Paula Jones or Tara Reade are telling the truth, then the people who refused to take them seriously are the bad guys, and liberals can't be the bad guys, so they can never ever let up on these women. Ever. 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. People who think like this then look at the GOP and, obviously and correctly, see them as evil. Their voters, ultimately responsible for them getting to office, share in that evil. They're bad people who do bad things, they love evil, and so vote for people that do evil. There might be a few exceptions here (lack of education teaching you the good opinions, say) but this is broadly what they believe. If they weren't bad people, they wouldn't put bad people in office to do bad things. Unlike me! I'm, obviously, a good person. Sure, I make the occasional mistake (who doesn't!), but ultimately have the right opinions and believe the right things. I don't think women should be raped, for one -- obviously! -- who could argue with this? I'm a good person, with correct opinions, so I have a moral responsibility to do everything in my power to stop the evil people and their bad voters, so I vote for Democrats. Maybe I even consciously identify as a Democrat or a liberal to really highlight (to myself) the degree to which I am on the side of the angels. But wait a minute, the guy I voted for raped somebody! This isn't good. I can't wash my hands of the vote I cast for him because a) voting is the most important political act I can make, and b) if voting doesn't confer responsibility then I have no mechanism by which to blame the horrible awful chuds for Trump. I might have to do something really uncomfortable like consider class, which would really upset my comfortable worldview and at any rate Marxism is a fake ideology that's not pragmatic and doesn't even actually exist according to Snopes. Well okay, what can I do? First off, I can simply say that whoever is accusing a Democrat of being sexually inappropriate is lying. She didn't get a degree or whatever and look here, she was interviewed by Russia Today. This clearly means that she's a lying fraud who is doing this for clout and because she loves Vladamir Putin, history's greatest monster. She just wants to see our proud democracy brought low. She's the dang joker. Oh wait a minute, there are ten accusers? Okay well look this is obviously bad. We all agree. This is just an unfortunate and painful exception in a party who is otherwise committed to women's safety: look here, they're forming a committee! Who could argue with that? That's Doing Something, for sure. I'm trusting in The Process. I have to, because that's what I voted for, and I don't vote for evil bad things, I vote for the good things. I'm a Democrat. And besides, in the end it doesn't really matter if some democrats are bad people, we still need them there. We can't just get rid of the rapists. Do you want Trump to come back? Do you want New York to burn to the ground? There's only one way to accomplish anything and that's following the rules exactly. Anyway this is why rapists like Biden or Cuomo or whoever else will continue to thrive in the Democratic Party just as much as they do in the Republican Party because Democrat voters can't blame the party for anything Democrats do. If they start to, the whole thing falls apart. This was probably mostly -- but not completely -- true until Trump, who really is the greatest gift to the Democrats because now he's the enemy at the gates that's going to bring about the fourth reich unless we toe the Democrat line exactly.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2021 15:13
|
|
|
socialsecurity posted:This seems like quite the stretch from a single tweet from some rando. Ahmad is hardly a rando, but just do a twitter search for Reade's name and you'll find plenty of randos and bluecheck liberals continuing to smear her to this day.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2021 15:14
|
|
|
socialsecurity posted:This seems like quite the stretch from a single tweet from some rando. Yeah maybe, the New York Times printed that article attacking her character and smearing her with reports from her landlords and what the gently caress ever, but that was back during the primary, so maybe the character assassination was just business for them. And I should be clear, I'm not talking about literally every Democrat here, plenty of people believed Reade, didn't want Biden to get nominated, and fell in line to beat Trump, so they don't have any psychological need to prove to themselves that Reade is a liar and a Russian agent and a BernieBro etc. A lot of people around here (like you I'm pretty sure) were like "welp he's the nominee, that loving sucks". Just talking about the people and institutions that backed him for the nomination, ignored all his very public harassment of various women, attacked Flores with standard rape-culture arguments like "if she didn't want him smelling her hair why is she giving him the Christian Side Hug in this selfie", attacked Reade as a liar right out the gate, etc.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2021 15:43
|
|
|
Lester Shy posted:Ahmad is hardly a rando, but just do a twitter search for Reade's name and you'll find plenty of randos and bluecheck liberals continuing to smear her to this day. Be angry at those particular blue checkmarks then. It's a normal human impulse to want to extrapolate- the comportment of particular obnoxious individuals must signify the moral attitudes of the much larger groups those individuals represent, right? We have a term for that, prejudice. I understand the anger and disgust but there must be a better, healthier way to channel those feelings than othering and hating a huge swath of the population. My mom is a liberal, she's the sweetest, kindest person I've ever met, she has no ill will toward Tara Reade. e: vvv she has no ill will toward Tara Reid either. Can't think of a single Tara for which she has ill will, in fact indiscriminately fucked around with this message at 15:53 on Apr 12, 2021 |
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2021 15:44
|
|
|
indiscriminately posted:My mom is a liberal, she's the sweetest, kindest person I've ever met, she has no ill will toward Tara Reade. Wait what. What did the actress from American Pie do? E: ah drat it you edited before I hit quote, I am defeated 
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2021 15:45
|
|
|
indiscriminately posted:Be angry at those particular blue checkmarks then. It's a normal human impulse to want to extrapolate- the comportment of particular obnoxious individuals must signify the moral attitudes of the much larger groups those individuals represent, right? We have a term for that, prejudice. I understand the anger and disgust but there must be a better, healthier way to channel those feelings than othering and hating a huge swath of the population. My mom is a liberal, she's the sweetest, kindest person I've ever met, she has no ill will toward Tara Reade. If a party knowingly nominates a rapist, I'm gonna blame the party. Sorry. Being a Democrat is not an immutable aspect of a person's character.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2021 15:50
|
|
|
indiscriminately posted:Be angry at those particular blue checkmarks then. It's a normal human impulse to want to extrapolate- the comportment of particular obnoxious individuals must signify the moral attitudes of the much larger groups those individuals represent, right? We have a term for that, prejudice. I understand the anger and disgust but there must be a better, healthier way to channel those feelings than othering and hating a huge swath of the population. My mom is a liberal, she's the sweetest, kindest person I've ever met, she has no ill will toward Tara Reade. My male friends know I don't hate them because I hate the patriarchy. Criticism of the Democratic power structure and its defensive line should be no different.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2021 16:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 04:10 |
|
|
Biden has 10 accusers? Reade is the only one I've ever heard of.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2021 16:23
|
|
