No touching! - sexual impropriety thread

Post Reply
User avatar
Mo
Posts: 21274
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:08

Re: No touching! - sexual impropriety thread

Post by Mo » 16 Nov 2017, 23:07

Eric the .5b wrote:
16 Nov 2017, 22:35
The "minor" being the only part Clinton wasn't accused of.
That's not a minor detail.
his voice is so soothing, but why do conspiracy nuts always sound like Batman and Robin solving one of Riddler's puzzles out loud? - fod

no one ever yells worldstar when a pet gets fucked up - dhex

User avatar
Mo
Posts: 21274
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:08

Re: No touching! - sexual impropriety thread

Post by Mo » 16 Nov 2017, 23:11

Eric the .5b wrote:
16 Nov 2017, 22:37
When it's all sexual harassment is horrible and deplorable and anyone who does it should be hounded away from civilized people right up until a politician they support does it?
Did Drum say that?
his voice is so soothing, but why do conspiracy nuts always sound like Batman and Robin solving one of Riddler's puzzles out loud? - fod

no one ever yells worldstar when a pet gets fucked up - dhex

User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 11109
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: No touching! - sexual impropriety thread

Post by Eric the .5b » 16 Nov 2017, 23:27

Mo wrote:
16 Nov 2017, 23:07
Eric the .5b wrote:
16 Nov 2017, 22:35
The "minor" being the only part Clinton wasn't accused of.
That's not a minor detail.
For fuck's sake.

You know what, Mo? I sure as Hell didn't say it was. But, if you seriously want to score pointless internet points about which rape attempts were worse, you don't have to die on that hill. You can have that hill. I will leave you to enjoy it.

Between this and the Blues, I need to go do something else.
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
"Cyberpunk never really gave the government enough credit for their ability to secure a favorable prenup during the Corporate-State wedding." - Shem

User avatar
Mo
Posts: 21274
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:08

Re: No touching! - sexual impropriety thread

Post by Mo » 17 Nov 2017, 00:07

Eric the .5b wrote:
16 Nov 2017, 23:27
Mo wrote:
16 Nov 2017, 23:07
Eric the .5b wrote:
16 Nov 2017, 22:35
The "minor" being the only part Clinton wasn't accused of.
That's not a minor detail.
For fuck's sake.

You know what, Mo? I sure as Hell didn't say it was. But, if you seriously want to score pointless internet points about which rape attempts were worse, you don't have to die on that hill. You can have that hill. I will leave you to enjoy it.

Between this and the Blues, I need to go do something else.
Physician heal thyself. You're the one taking offense that someone on the internet differentiated between rape and groping.
his voice is so soothing, but why do conspiracy nuts always sound like Batman and Robin solving one of Riddler's puzzles out loud? - fod

no one ever yells worldstar when a pet gets fucked up - dhex

User avatar
Aresen
Posts: 13186
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 20:18
Location: Great White Pacific Northwest

Re: No touching! - sexual impropriety thread

Post by Aresen » 17 Nov 2017, 00:34

There is a difference between the two, but neither Team Red nor Team Blue seems ready to differentiate when it comes to tarring the opposition.
If Trump supporters wanted a tough guy, why did they elect such a whiny bitch? - Mo

Those who know history are doomed to deja vu. - the innominate one

Most people don't realize Stephen King downplayed the horror that is Maine. - Jennifer

User avatar
Shem
Posts: 6647
Joined: 27 Apr 2010, 00:27

Re: No touching! - sexual impropriety thread

Post by Shem » 17 Nov 2017, 01:09

Eric the .5b wrote:
16 Nov 2017, 22:35
Moore may actually lose or face expulsion from the Senate even if he does win,
Nah. Well, he might well lose, but he won't be expelled if he doesn't. The GOP won't paint that target on their back.
"VOTE SHEMOCRACY! You will only have to do it once!" -Loyalty Officer Aresen

User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 24562
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: No touching! - sexual impropriety thread

Post by thoreau » 17 Nov 2017, 02:43

And now my irony meter has broken:



It is simultaneously true that Franken deserves substantial criticism and that Trump needs to keep his damn mouth shut on the subject of sexual harassment.
"The first rule of Grylliade club is 'Why are we talking about Grylliade club?'"
--Jake

User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 24562
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: No touching! - sexual impropriety thread

Post by thoreau » 17 Nov 2017, 02:51

I don't wholly endorse every implication of the last sentence this tweet, but I think she has a very important observation.

"The first rule of Grylliade club is 'Why are we talking about Grylliade club?'"
--Jake

User avatar
Warren
Posts: 22001
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: No touching! - sexual impropriety thread

Post by Warren » 17 Nov 2017, 03:25

thoreau wrote:
17 Nov 2017, 02:51
I don't wholly endorse every implication of the last sentence this tweet, but I think she has a very important observation.

It's the wrong observation. Nothing has moved. Horrible person did something untoward, so let's play up how horrible that was to confirm our bias. Fine outstanding person did something untoward, so let's not judge him too harshly because it would undermine the fine outstanding work he's done.

The worst thing about Trump isn't that he's batshit crazy, it's how everybody else moved into the crazy end of the pool to be near him. The right circling the wagons, the left frothing at the mouth. Previously semi rational people taking to facebook consumed with fervor, instantly manning the battlements. The whole world has gone nuts.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 11109
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: No touching! - sexual impropriety thread

Post by Eric the .5b » 17 Nov 2017, 07:21

Mo wrote:
17 Nov 2017, 00:07
Eric the .5b wrote:
16 Nov 2017, 23:27
Mo wrote:
16 Nov 2017, 23:07
Eric the .5b wrote:
16 Nov 2017, 22:35
The "minor" being the only part Clinton wasn't accused of.
That's not a minor detail.
For fuck's sake.

You know what, Mo? I sure as Hell didn't say it was. But, if you seriously want to score pointless internet points about which rape attempts were worse, you don't have to die on that hill. You can have that hill. I will leave you to enjoy it.

Between this and the Blues, I need to go do something else.
Physician heal thyself. You're the one taking offense that someone on the internet differentiated between rape and groping.
Mo, I'm trying not to go off on you because I like you, and I'm sorry I lost my temper previously, but bullshit. I pointed out that the only difference between Moore's worst accusations and Clinton's was that Moore is accused of forcing the mouth of a resisting teenage girl onto his penis, while Clinton was accused of doing the same thing to an adult woman. Then you got bizarrely persnickety about the age not being a minor detail. I don't know how you think groping got into this exchange.

You know what? I'll retract something and say that, yeah, the age is a relatively minor detail in the face of those men trying to rape someone. It's no better to rape an adult woman than to rape a teenage girl. I can buy that it's more traumatic and thus worse to abuse young children, but beyond that, rape is fucking rape.
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
"Cyberpunk never really gave the government enough credit for their ability to secure a favorable prenup during the Corporate-State wedding." - Shem

User avatar
the innominate one
Posts: 11992
Joined: 17 May 2011, 16:17
Location: hypertime continuum

Re: No touching! - sexual impropriety thread

Post by the innominate one » 17 Nov 2017, 08:56

To justify bringing religion into the current discussion:

"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." -E Benn

"No shit, Sherlock." -JsubD

"now is the time to go fuck yourself until you die." -dhex

User avatar
Warren
Posts: 22001
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: No touching! - sexual impropriety thread

Post by Warren » 17 Nov 2017, 10:17

the innominate one wrote:
17 Nov 2017, 08:56
To justify bringing religion into the current discussion:

huh
Blocked by Content Security Policy

This page has a content security policy that prevents it from being loaded in this way.

Firefox prevented this page from loading in this way because the page has a content security policy that disallows it.
Chrome isn't so peevish.

ETA
Even weirder, it renders fine in this comment
Last edited by Warren on 17 Nov 2017, 10:30, edited 1 time in total.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

User avatar
nicole
Posts: 7733
Joined: 12 Jan 2013, 16:28

Re: No touching! - sexual impropriety thread

Post by nicole » 17 Nov 2017, 10:25

I'm so glad this (grits teeth) person got to expand her shit Twitter thread into a WaPo column: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pos ... to-resign/
In other words, if we set this precedent in the interest of demonstrating our party’s solidarity with harassed and abused women, we’re only going to drain the swamp of people who, however flawed, still regularly vote to protect women’s rights and freedoms. The legislative branch will remain chockablock with old, white Republican men who regard women chiefly as sex objects and unpaid housekeepers, and we’ll show them how staunchly Democrats oppose their misogynistic attitudes by handing them more power.
"Fucking qualia." -Hugh Akston

"Privilege is having large phones fit into the garments that society expects you to wear." -Dangerman

User avatar
Warren
Posts: 22001
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: No touching! - sexual impropriety thread

Post by Warren » 17 Nov 2017, 10:36

nicole wrote:
17 Nov 2017, 10:25
I'm so glad this (grits teeth) person got to expand her shit Twitter thread into a WaPo column: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pos ... to-resign/
In other words, if we set this precedent in the interest of demonstrating our party’s solidarity with harassed and abused women, we’re only going to drain the swamp of people who, however flawed, still regularly vote to protect women’s rights and freedoms. The legislative branch will remain chockablock with old, white Republican men who regard women chiefly as sex objects and unpaid housekeepers, and we’ll show them how staunchly Democrats oppose their misogynistic attitudes by handing them more power.
O M G
Is there no limit to the demonetization? Can there ever be "enough" vitriol?
He treated a sleeping woman as a comedy prop, no more human than the contents of Carrot Top’s trunk, and I firmly believe he should suffer social and professional consequences for it.
For pity's sake, I implore you. Stop beating up Carrot Top. The man has paid his debt and then some.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

User avatar
the innominate one
Posts: 11992
Joined: 17 May 2011, 16:17
Location: hypertime continuum

Re: No touching! - sexual impropriety thread

Post by the innominate one » 17 Nov 2017, 10:44

WRT what Nicole quoted:

It seems to be an argument of the category "don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good". I think there's a valid point there.
"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." -E Benn

"No shit, Sherlock." -JsubD

"now is the time to go fuck yourself until you die." -dhex

User avatar
Mo
Posts: 21274
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:08

Re: No touching! - sexual impropriety thread

Post by Mo » 17 Nov 2017, 11:01

I don't agree with Chait on all of this, but he makes a defensible case for opposing the Clinton impeachment as it occurred rather than what he should have been impeached for. I was in high school for the majority of this case, so my contemporary knowledge was pretty thin. For example, I did not recall that the Ds wasnted to censure Clinton.
his voice is so soothing, but why do conspiracy nuts always sound like Batman and Robin solving one of Riddler's puzzles out loud? - fod

no one ever yells worldstar when a pet gets fucked up - dhex

User avatar
Sandy
Posts: 9503
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 18:03
Location: In the hearts of little children, clogging their arteries.

Re: No touching! - sexual impropriety thread

Post by Sandy » 17 Nov 2017, 11:31

Looks like astronomy may pick up another notch on the bedpost: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/nosacredco ... d-of-rape/
Hindu is the cricket of religions. You can observe it for years, you can have enthusiasts try to explain it to you, and it's still baffling. - Warren

User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 24562
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: No touching! - sexual impropriety thread

Post by thoreau » 17 Nov 2017, 11:44

Sandy wrote:
17 Nov 2017, 11:31
Looks like astronomy may pick up another notch on the bedpost: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/nosacredco ... d-of-rape/
She's not necessarily the most credible accuser, but that doesn't mean anything. When it's just one person's word against another's, I look for two things:
1) Is the denial heavily caveated? Yeah, yeah, I'm the disclaimer guy, but there's a difference between "To be clear, not only did I not X, I didn't even Y..." and "Well, all I actually did was...and maybe I also...but that doesn't mean..."
2) Does anyone else accuse him?

If the accusations stick, the astronomy community's response will probably be ugly to watch.
"The first rule of Grylliade club is 'Why are we talking about Grylliade club?'"
--Jake

User avatar
Jason
Posts: 152
Joined: 15 Jul 2010, 02:17
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA

Re: No touching! - sexual impropriety thread

Post by Jason » 17 Nov 2017, 12:56

Mo wrote:
16 Nov 2017, 15:16
Small business (including law firms and doctors' offices) are also likely a shitshow
True... I know of a small company where most of management are older men and most of the employees are attractive young females that regular has alcohol laden parties with sexual activity between random people and at least one employee has gotten pregnant (although she said it's her boyfriend's). My contact has told me there have been payments made after the parties and one of the managers made inappropriate comments to her.
This message should not be used for any purposes in the development, design, manufacture, or production of nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons.

User avatar
lunchstealer
Posts: 14670
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:25
Location: The Local Fluff in the Local Bubble

Re: No touching! - sexual impropriety thread

Post by lunchstealer » 17 Nov 2017, 13:11

Eric the .5b wrote:
17 Nov 2017, 07:21
I pointed out that the only difference between Moore's worst accusations and Clinton's was that Moore is accused of forcing the mouth of a resisting teenage girl onto his penis, while Clinton was accused of doing the same thing to an adult woman.
I'd quibble with the idea that Clinton did the same thing. The Broaddrick accusation, which is partly backed up by statements she made to people at the time, and observations by people at the time, including a woman who was with Broaddrick at the hotel later that day, and basically found her in the aftermath in her hotel room (some hours later, I think), and at least one other person who she told as an explanation of her bloody lip, although she lied about the bloody lip to her then-husband (who didn't remember the incident anyway). But that was basically full-on PVI rape, which is more than Moore is (currently) accused of. A lot of Team Blue is pointing to 'well she lied under oath about it so it didn't happen' which is funny because if it didn't happen then she didn't lie under oath, and if she lied under oath and is a perjurer then Clinton is a rapist.

WRT Chait - I kind of agree, in that lying under oath is subverting the rule of law, but it was to cover up infidelity in a fishing expedition by Starr. And the Broaddrick thing seemed to be a non-issue at the time of the impeachment. I think good people can disagree on the degree to which lying to cover up an affair is not a big enough deal, vs hey the president should set the example for not lying under oath (especially in relation to sexual harassment which was kind of a thing his administration was trying to make the country stop doing).

But impeaching him on Broaddrick might be appropriate, and certainly giving him a pass on Broaddrick is wholly inappropriate.
"The constitution is more of a BDSM agreement with a safe word." - Sandy

"Neoliberalism. Austerity. Booga booga!!!!" - JasonL

"Repeated headdesk is dangerous yo." - JasonL

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 20597
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: No touching! - sexual impropriety thread

Post by Jennifer » 17 Nov 2017, 13:42

Roy Moore's gun moll of a wife gave a press conference saying that Doug Jones "is against everything we and Alabama believe and stand for." Zod forbid the state turn into the sort of nightmare hellscape where Klansmen can't even bomb a church without being prosecuted for it!
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
Mo
Posts: 21274
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:08

Re: No touching! - sexual impropriety thread

Post by Mo » 17 Nov 2017, 14:27

lunchstealer wrote:
17 Nov 2017, 13:11
And the Broaddrick thing seemed to be a non-issue at the time of the impeachment. I think good people can disagree on the degree to which lying to cover up an affair is not a big enough deal, vs hey the president should set the example for not lying under oath (especially in relation to sexual harassment which was kind of a thing his administration was trying to make the country stop doing).

But impeaching him on Broaddrick might be appropriate, and certainly giving him a pass on Broaddrick is wholly inappropriate.
I believe the Broaddrick claims came after the trial as Starr found her claims to be unsupportable. I think the reason that the sexual harassment angle wasn't pushed harder is that the group opposed to Clinton didn't want to legitimize sexual harassment as a thing. I agree 100% with the last sentence.
his voice is so soothing, but why do conspiracy nuts always sound like Batman and Robin solving one of Riddler's puzzles out loud? - fod

no one ever yells worldstar when a pet gets fucked up - dhex

User avatar
Mo
Posts: 21274
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:08

Re: No touching! - sexual impropriety thread

Post by Mo » 17 Nov 2017, 14:40

He got my vote. Especially for the Bob Taft Sr. revelation.
Image
his voice is so soothing, but why do conspiracy nuts always sound like Batman and Robin solving one of Riddler's puzzles out loud? - fod

no one ever yells worldstar when a pet gets fucked up - dhex

User avatar
Warren
Posts: 22001
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: No touching! - sexual impropriety thread

Post by Warren » 17 Nov 2017, 15:24

Mo wrote:
17 Nov 2017, 14:40
He got my vote. Especially for the Bob Taft Sr. revelation.
Image
Not bad but a little too self-serving to my eyes. "50 very attractive females" begs the questions, How many unattractive females? How many males?
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 20597
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: No touching! - sexual impropriety thread

Post by Jennifer » 17 Nov 2017, 15:25

Dear Penthouse Forum: I never imagined I'd be writing you, but....
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: pistoffnick and 1 guest