Rape/Sexual Assault Culture

you are not aware of many of the facts of the case

There's a thorough discussion of this in the SC thread and the main Trump thread.

I'm guessing you guys aren't keeping up on the thread where we have been talking about this, figuring this was the spot for it. In order to avoid rehashing old stuff, I invite you to the other 2 threads.

 

I think the story is relevant in this thread specifically because of comments like taylor's. "37 years ago!!!!!"
The idea that there should be some temporal limitation on public scrutiny of prior sexual misconduct is a dog whistle for the "boys will be boys " mentality which is the essence of the issues covered in this thread.

 

Too be clear 1)
How the hell is a guy suppose to defend himself? His friend said no he didn't. They were drunk and blurry at age 17!!! Lol

2) pelosi knew about this three months ago. The moment metoo starts to be used as a political football it looses serious legitmacy.
How many crazy Republican women will start to use this "political trick" against Dem Justice nominees?

3) yeah time matters. 35-37 years is rediculous. It is. If she felt this way she had 35 years prior to go public and instead uses this opportunity as a political weapon. It's disgusting that Dems don't see this and it's disgusting that more woman arent outraged.

 

1. She's been talking about this for a few years now...PRIVATELY.
2. You say she's using this as a political weapon...how is that working out for her personally? Try to put yourself in her shoes...how is this affecting her husband and child/children?
3. I knew her back in college. People change, but she wasn't some left wing SJW back then. You're assuming she's a political animal. If she were, given her class status, she'd have a much, much longer record of political donations. Perhaps she's just a crime victim?

 

Abuse of legitimate metoo:
1) pelosi sitings on this till 11th hour. If seriius even under anynomous it should have been immediately reported period.
It was not.

2) why come out now? From a very minimum appearance wise and the type of "aqusation" it is a political operation. A bad one a desperate attempt to postpone nomination to see see if Dems get both houses.

3) I am not at all sorry to say this a woman who is in therapy and wants to accused a public figure of something is slander and nothing more. He has no way to defend himself and only leaves a public stain which the Republican s WILL definitely copy for Dem justices.

Therefore metoo becomes a wedge issue and looses by defenition its apolitical legitimacy.

Edited because my cellphone spell check hates english.

 

That's not sexual assault, either. We can talk about those things, but they belong in a gender issues/sexism thread, not here. In my view.

 

Anyway, the issue isn't how long before you can dismiss her. The issue is whether one believes her or not, and if one does, how much slack do you cut him for "that was then not now."

It isn't and shouldn't be "That was thirty-seven years ago so I'll just ignore it." It might be "he was fourteen he learned better by now." Only there's a bigger difference between 14 and 17 than there is 17 and 25, and he was 17.. The child is father to the man; who do you believe, and how much do you care? And why?

 

Brother Jed and his squadron (Sister Cindy used to travel with him; there was a younger one too whose name I can't remember) were at UVa a couple of times a year during the mid-80s. They always used to draw a crowd of people entertained by engaging with them. When Brother Jed announced that the end of the world was nigh, an acquaintance of mine sensibly asked him "how nigh?"

 

https://www.vox.com/first-person/20...augh-assault-allegation-christine-blasey-ford

Article discussing the elements common in false rape accusations. Most of it, to me, is common sense, but some is not.

Reading it will lead to more informed discussion.

 

Thanks for posting. That is good.

As a side note, this sentence was striking -

I had not seen that before.

 

I guess I am old school and believe a person is only guilty until proven guilty. This douchebag judge cannot defend himself. It’s his word and a witness vs. this woman her THERAPIST notes and husband IN THERAPY.

I am just flabergasted how you guys don’t see it this way..

Edit.. lol OH SEEMS SHE WONT TESTIFY. WHICH HUNT. #metooabuse

 

They don't have your Zeiss lenses, lol

 

When being accused in a court of law, yes.

This isn't a court of law. This is consideration for whether or not to put someone on the Supreme Court. No one is entitled to a position on the Supreme Court.

 

Come on. He went to Georgetown Prep and Yale. He's the best money can buy.

So what if we don't know whose money we're talking about.

 

Yet anyone is entitled to accusation regardless of merit and permanent damage? Why not yell fire in a theater instead?

This is a dangerous rabbit whole you guys are going done. To stain a man, regardless of what a douchebag he is, behavior of a feckless kunt, to quote Bee.

This woman most likely will come out with some serious mental issues and metoo will burn. It is absurd how quickly this douchebag is being put to the tourch.

 

Taylor, the points you’re making are good ones in the abstract. But they rarely fit the facts of this specific case.

Did you read the article I linked?

 

I read it just now.

I swear before I read the article just now I going to write that I bet she is a psychology professor. I was a public policy Prof at a big ten school for a while and the psych profs are some of the THE CRAZIEST profs in the entire (world) academic industry.

I guess in full disclosure I also had an a crazy ass student go to the dean and report "inappropriate behaviour". So there is that.

Obviously it was absolute complete bullshit. It was easily dismissed but there was still a stain on my rep that could not be washed away. What did I do? She wanted to do a PhD after masters and so I invited her to a bar to talk about it just as I did my male PhD candidates. The vox article is not relevant to my situation as it is not relevant to douche bag.


when I see a PSYCH PROF with all these political footballs, pelosi manipulating, it completely deligitamizes metoo. What happens for example if it leaks out that this chick has mental health problems etc.? Has she mademsimiliar accusations about adeother mn? How will it look when a woman abused metoo to advance the agenda of women's rights to protect roe v. Wade? Not only that but we burned a man without due process?

My only hope is that pelosi sat on this so long cause there was something suspussussly about her story.


Either this guy is innocent until PROVEN guilty or do not yell fire in a building. Using this dirty and disgusting to try and take down a douchebag does not advance the metoo movement, instead it critically deligitamizes it. You can't just yell fire in the 11th hour and not expect dramatic consequences.

 

Taylor I concede the point in your fifth paragraph that if things are different they will be different.

What if Spartacus had a Piper Cub? How would that affect his case? Discuss.

But it’s good that you read the article. Now you know false accusations basically never come 35 years later. That’s obvious because false accusations are almost always due to mental issues on the part of the accuser.

I would also suggest there is a vast difference between a woman accusing you of harassment, presumably more or less contemporaneous with the events she alleged, and a woman accusing someone of attempted rape 35 years later, AFTER talking about it with her husband and a therapist. To the point of your analogy being silly.

PS...he wants to be on the Supreme Court. He’s not entitled to due process for that. You are again wrong on the facts of the case.

 

And it was Diane Feinstein, not Nancy Pelosi. Are all these wimming the same to you?

 

Nancy Pelosi is guilty of everything. Everything.