|
Post by palealeman on Dec 18, 2017 10:54:02 GMT -5
Way to go, RJ. Blame the women.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Dec 18, 2017 10:54:38 GMT -5
It's been that way since time immemorial. It's amazing that the Party of the KKK just now discovered it since Trump was elected, and have gone into high dudgeon over what they have been doing for decades. Of course, they couldn't acknowledge any of it while Weinstein, et al, were donating hundreds of thousands of dollars to the Party of the KKK. But now, when they have to be able to make up stories, and pay women to make up stories, about Trump, they have to "clean house", at least in the media. Agree, powerful men have always been able to avail themselves of female flesh, willing or unwilling. Maybe from now on, they'll have to confine themselves only to the willing. (There's plenty of that around. Someone snarky might suggest looking at Trump's sequence of wives.) In this climate, I don't think there is anything "consensual" in a "relationship" like that. The male never knows when a female might decide she was "harassed", even though she gave consent, and no court is needed, other than the court of public opinion.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Dec 18, 2017 11:13:37 GMT -5
Way to go, RJ. Blame the women. Reality is not your friend PAM. Not every woman is sweet, virginal, chaste and innocent. Nor are they all above using men to get what they want.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Dec 18, 2017 11:23:06 GMT -5
Way to go, RJ. Blame the women. Reality is not your friend PAM. Not every woman is sweet, virginal, chaste and innocent. Nor are they all above using men to get what they want. Or even seeking revenge after a relationship goes south. Ref "mattress girl", who is now a "celebrity" because she accused someone of molesting her, when all the evidence shows she was stalking him, and much of the intimate situation was initiated by her.
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Dec 18, 2017 11:56:21 GMT -5
Your words, RJ: "There really are plenty of women who will throw themselves at a powerful man. Hate Trump all you want for saying what he said about grabbing women. He wasn’t wrong. Many of them even do it in hopes of being able to use the powerful person to get ahead."
Still defending Trump on the basis of his denial of everything. Blame the women. That's all you do. That's what the GOPPPP has done and continues to do. You tell me that reality is not my friend. It looks like you have no idea of what reality is.
How many other sexual predators do you support for higher office?
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Dec 18, 2017 12:30:49 GMT -5
Your words, RJ: "There really are plenty of women who will throw themselves at a powerful man. Hate Trump all you want for saying what he said about grabbing women. He wasn’t wrong. Many of them even do it in hopes of being able to use the powerful person to get ahead." Still defending Trump on the basis of his denial of everything. Blame the women. That's all you do. That's what the GOPPPP has done and continues to do. You tell me that reality is not my friend. It looks like you have no idea of what reality is. How many other sexual predators do you support for higher office? You don’t have the slightest idea what Trump has even been accused of, when, where or by whom. Otherwise you’d be willing to say Trump did W to X on Y date in Z location. Instead, you just refer to these amorphous accusations as though they don’t need to be even remotely examined for plausibility. This is in spite of the reality that I have previously directly linked to the list of all the accusations against Trump. I’ve read them, considered them, and decided they’re a combination of not credible and trivial. If you disagree, pick one of the accusations and we’ll discuss it. If you don’t I’ll assume you’re not serious, and just brining this up due to a raging case of Trump derangement syndrome.
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Dec 18, 2017 13:34:30 GMT -5
RJ, you've posted that Wikepedia link several times. I've read it, I've commented on it. I know what Mr. Trump has been accused of. You write it all off -- maybe you spend time in the same locker room as he does. You've come to a decision that the allegations are not credible or trivial. That's your judgement.
The key phrase you write is, ". . .as though they don’t need to be even remotely examined for plausibility." They do need to be so examined. By someone not as biased as you are. That's what I've been saying all along. Let's examine them. But not by someone as biased as you who accepts the word of a pervert over the the word of an accuser. By an independent third party (that omits me too).
You're showing more and more that you really belong to the GOPPPP.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Dec 18, 2017 13:43:05 GMT -5
RJ, you've posted that Wikepedia link several times. I've read it, I've commented on it. I know what Mr. Trump has been accused of. You write it all off -- maybe you spend time in the same locker room as he does. You've come to a decision that the allegations are not credible or trivial. That's your judgement. The key phrase you write is, ". . .as though they don’t need to be even remotely examined for plausibility." They do need to be so examined. By someone not as biased as you are. That's what I've been saying all along. Let's examine them. But not by someone as biased as you who accepts the word of a pervert over the the word of an accuser. By an independent third party (that omits me too). You're showing more and more that you really belong to the GOPPPP. So you’re not even willing to take one of the accusations and discuss its merits? Clearly that’s a conversation you know better than to get into. But then you make the silly suggestion that a proper investigation should take place into these accusations. How, pray tell, would an investigator investigate whether or not a hug he didn’t witness went on too long. Or whether or not someone had their ass grabbed by Trump in a club 30 years ago?
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Dec 18, 2017 16:58:38 GMT -5
You're right, RJ. Few witnesses to any of these incidents. A "debate" about these between you and me would be not much more than you saying there's no proof and Trump denies everything, therefore he's due the benefit of the doubt. Except, maybe, for the case where a chaperone was present. Or the one that occurred when Trump was with a group of men.
The worst part of this whole topic, and perhaps the most telling, is that you consider allegations of sexual harassment to be trivial, as you said in an earlier post. That says a lot about the respect -- or lack of respect -- that you have for women.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Dec 18, 2017 17:15:21 GMT -5
You're right, RJ. Few witnesses to any of these incidents. A "debate" about these between you and me would be not much more than you saying there's no proof and Trump denies everything, therefore he's due the benefit of the doubt. Except, maybe, for the case where a chaperone was present. Or the one that occurred when Trump was with a group of men. The worst part of this whole topic, and perhaps the most telling, is that you consider allegations of sexual harassment to be trivial, as you said in an earlier post. That says a lot about the respect -- or lack of respect -- that you have for women. The case with the chaperone was Temple Taggart. She accused Trump of “unwanted kisses and embraces” The one with the group of men was Karena Virginia. Trump is accused of commenting on her legs, grabbing her arm, and brushing up against the side of her breast. Even if the accusations are exactly what happened, YES, they’re trivial. Harassment generally requires a pattern of behavior. One-off incidents rarely make the cut. Especially things like simple embraces or grabbing an arm. Taggart didn’t even accuse Trump of trying to shove his tongue in her mouth. Franken is accused of being more aggressive than Trump, and now that Moore is gone, the Democrats are starting to say he should stay.
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Dec 18, 2017 18:16:35 GMT -5
I know what the cases were, RJ. I read the stuff. And I'm sorry that you consider them trivial. Again, it says a lot about you.
You might want to define "pattern of behavior." If you mean that harassment only happens when someone is harassed multiple times, I'll agree. But the offender can also establish a pattern of behavior by harassing multiple women over a period of time. That's what our President appears to have done.
And I haven't mentioned Franken recently. He's resigned and should leave.
Hope you don't work in a place with many women around.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Dec 18, 2017 18:22:55 GMT -5
I know what the cases were, RJ. I read the stuff. And I'm sorry that you consider them trivial. Again, it says a lot about you. You might want to define "pattern of behavior." If you mean that harassment only happens when someone is harassed multiple times, I'll agree. But the offender can also establish a pattern of behavior by harassing multiple women over a period of time. That's what our President appears to have done. I’m sorry, but no. He didn’t harass any of these women who had one-off incidents. And if you want to call a kiss and embrace something more than trivial, that’s just absurd. Franken hasn’t resigned. He just said he would. Oh, and don’t bring up my job again. That’s just a douche move. I’d like to say it’s beneath you, but as a liberal Democrat, i already know you’re a low-life. For the record though, I am close enough to a few female co-workers that we do embrace when we see each other. It’s a normal thing that well-adjusted people do without it being sexual. I know that this comes as a shock to you. That members of the opposite sex can embrace in greeting without a sexual subcontext, but then again, every day we seem to have a New Democrat predatory dirtbag to talk about. So many liberals think a hug and kiss are harassment because for people who think like Harvey Weinstein and Bill Clinton, a hug and kiss is always a prelude to rape.
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Dec 18, 2017 18:36:51 GMT -5
You should probably do some research to find out just what sexual harassment is. A kiss and/or an embrace can be sexual harassment. For you to continue to claim that those actions are trivial shows that you have no idea what you're talking about. But that's really not too surprising.
And there you go again, a member of the GOPPPP, calling the other party low-lifes. There's not much more lower than condoning sexual harassment. You seem OK with it. You're OK with Trump doing it. I guess your standards aren't very high (which, again, is nothing that we haven't known before). Personally, I have too much respect for women to even think of doing anything that could be considered harassment. Guess your standards are different. Is that what it means to be a card-carrying member of the GOPPPP?
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Dec 18, 2017 18:38:39 GMT -5
And when will you celebrate Alex Kosinsky as your "Perv of the Day???
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Dec 18, 2017 18:48:12 GMT -5
Maybe you should let those female co-workers know your opinion about sexual harassment. Then again, it would probably change their opinion of you.
I have no problem with "well adjusted" people hugging when they see each other. Not sure it's appropriate conduct for a work place, but whatever turns you on. However, that same sort of behavior with strangers can be considered harassment. That same behavior with subordinates can be considered harassment.
Again, you should probably take a seminar to learn just what sexual harassment is. You're really in the dark. And please don't say you that do know what it is -- the fact that consider it trivial shows that you have no idea.
Hope you're not the HR person that has to invetigate those complaints.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Dec 18, 2017 18:50:44 GMT -5
You should probably do some research to find out just what sexual harassment is. A kiss and/or an embrace can be sexual harassment. For you to continue to claim that those actions are trivial shows that you have no idea what you're talking about. But that's really not too surprising. And there you go again, a member of the GOPPPP, calling the other party low-lifes. There's not much more lower than condoning sexual harassment. You seem OK with it. You're OK with Trump doing it. I guess your standards aren't very high (which, again, is nothing that we haven't known before). Personally, I have too much respect for women to even think of doing anything that could be considered harassment. Guess your standards are different. Is that what it means to be a card-carrying member of the GOPPPP? Again, normal, well-adjusted people can hug and kiss each other affectionately without a sexual subcontext. Look, I get that for people like Bill Clinton and Harvey Weinstein, a hug and kiss are always a prelude to rape. So for people who are sexual predators, or who think like a sexual preadator, a hug and kiss are indeed very serious. So when you surround yourself and identify with people like Bill Clinton, Harvey Weinstein, and Anthony Weiner, it’s natural and normal to see them kissing and hugging someone and thinking “crap, Harvey Weinstein just hugged and kissed that woman. He’s going to rape her!” Because that’s just how Weinstein is. For those of outside the Clinton-Weinstein-Lauer-Weiner-Conyers-Franken bubble though, a hug and kiss (especially when it is a one-time thing) isn’t evidence of anything but affection. But, you’re inside the bubble.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Dec 18, 2017 18:53:57 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Dec 19, 2017 7:11:45 GMT -5
Maybe you should let those female co-workers know your opinion about sexual harassment. Then again, it would probably change their opinion of you. Yeah. Next time one of them goes to hug me, I'll be sure to let them know that it's ok to do so, and I don't consider it harrassment.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Dec 19, 2017 9:53:09 GMT -5
I know what the cases were, RJ. I read the stuff. And I'm sorry that you consider them trivial. Again, it says a lot about you. You might want to define "pattern of behavior." If you mean that harassment only happens when someone is harassed multiple times, I'll agree. But the offender can also establish a pattern of behavior by harassing multiple women over a period of time. That's what our President appears to have done. I’m sorry, but no. He didn’t harass any of these women who had one-off incidents. And if you want to call a kiss and embrace something more than trivial, that’s just absurd. Franken hasn’t resigned. He just said he would. Oh, and don’t bring up my job again. That’s just a douche move. I’d like to say it’s beneath you, but as a liberal Democrat, i already know you’re a low-life. For the record though, I am close enough to a few female co-workers that we do embrace when we see each other. It’s a normal thing that well-adjusted people do without it being sexual. I know that this comes as a shock to you. That members of the opposite sex can embrace in greeting without a sexual subcontext, but then again, every day we seem to have a New Democrat predatory dirtbag to talk about. So many liberals think a hug and kiss are harassment because for people who think like Harvey Weinstein and Bill Clinton, a hug and kiss is always a prelude to rape. Notice that he can't come up with a legal definition of "sexual harassment". That's because it's all dependent on the "victim's" point of view, which is not legislatable. Which is why so many women are now claiming harassment when they didn't for years, or even decades.
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Dec 19, 2017 11:00:15 GMT -5
You should probably do some research to find out just what sexual harassment is. A kiss and/or an embrace can be sexual harassment. For you to continue to claim that those actions are trivial shows that you have no idea what you're talking about. But that's really not too surprising. And there you go again, a member of the GOPPPP, calling the other party low-lifes. There's not much more lower than condoning sexual harassment. You seem OK with it. You're OK with Trump doing it. I guess your standards aren't very high (which, again, is nothing that we haven't known before). Personally, I have too much respect for women to even think of doing anything that could be considered harassment. Guess your standards are different. Is that what it means to be a card-carrying member of the GOPPPP? Again, normal, well-adjusted people can hug and kiss each other affectionately without a sexual subcontext. Look, I get that for people like Bill Clinton and Harvey Weinstein, a hug and kiss are always a prelude to rape. So for people who are sexual predators, or who think like a sexual preadator, a hug and kiss are indeed very serious. So when you surround yourself and identify with people like Bill Clinton, Harvey Weinstein, and Anthony Weiner, it’s natural and normal to see them kissing and hugging someone and thinking “crap, Harvey Weinstein just hugged and kissed that woman. He’s going to rape her!” Because that’s just how Weinstein is. For those of outside the Clinton-Weinstein-Lauer-Weiner-Conyers-Franken bubble though, a hug and kiss (especially when it is a one-time thing) isn’t evidence of anything but affection. But, you’re inside the bubble. Thank you for again showing us just how biased you really are. You can hug someone at work and that's OK, but if a democrat does it it means that the rape is not far behind. How stupid can you continue to be? How low can you go? I noticed, in that long list of Republican perverts that I posted a while back, that so many of them were going after kids. Guess that's the difference between the parties -- Democrats look for adults to harass, Republicans look for kids. And, for the record, I've never met any of the men you mention. Never had any contact with any atorthem. But I agree that a hug and a kiss from a sexual predator can be a prelude of things to come. That's why I've made it a point to keep my kids away from conservatives. Go GOPPPP!
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Dec 19, 2017 11:11:43 GMT -5
Again, normal, well-adjusted people can hug and kiss each other affectionately without a sexual subcontext. Look, I get that for people like Bill Clinton and Harvey Weinstein, a hug and kiss are always a prelude to rape. So for people who are sexual predators, or who think like a sexual preadator, a hug and kiss are indeed very serious. So when you surround yourself and identify with people like Bill Clinton, Harvey Weinstein, and Anthony Weiner, it’s natural and normal to see them kissing and hugging someone and thinking “crap, Harvey Weinstein just hugged and kissed that woman. He’s going to rape her!” Because that’s just how Weinstein is. For those of outside the Clinton-Weinstein-Lauer-Weiner-Conyers-Franken bubble though, a hug and kiss (especially when it is a one-time thing) isn’t evidence of anything but affection. But, you’re inside the bubble. Thank you for again showing us just how biased you really are. You can hug someone at work and that's OK, but if a democrat does it it means that the rape is not far behind. How stupid can you continue to be? How low can you go? I noticed, in that long list of Republican perverts that I posted a while back, that so many of them were going after kids. Guess that's the difference between the parties -- Democrats look for adults to harass, Republicans look for kids. And, for the record, I've never met any of the men you mention. Never had any contact with any atorthem. But I agree that a hug and a kiss from a sexual predator can be a prelude of things to come. That's why I've made it a point to keep my kids away from conservatives. Go GOPPPP! Again, YOU are the one insisting a hug and kiss is harassment. That is all Trump was accused of in several of the cases you assert are harassment. Including by Temple Taggart, that you put forward as serious enough to warrant investigation. That forced me to contemplate why anyone would classify a hug and kiss as harassment. That led me to the obvious conclusion that you live in a world where such contact is somehow serious. The rest simply followed logically given the ever growing list of Democrats being accused.
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Dec 19, 2017 12:06:23 GMT -5
Oh, RJ, please learn to read and comprehend. Please. It's in your best interests.
What I said above was, 'I have no problem with "well adjusted" people hugging when they see each other.' I also added was that such behavior could be viewed as inappropriate in the workplace. Two coworkers hugging each other could be appropriate behavior, but it could also be inappropriate. Might depend on the rules your workplace has in effect.
And, again, please read up on sexual harassment. Obviously you know nothing about it. You continue to give Trump a pass and consider the behavior trivial.
Until you have an understanding of what sexual harassment is, there's no need to continue this discussion.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Dec 19, 2017 12:37:24 GMT -5
Oh, RJ, please learn to read and comprehend. Please. It's in your best interests. What I said above was, 'I have no problem with "well adjusted" people hugging when they see each other.' I also added was that such behavior could be viewed as inappropriate in the workplace. Two coworkers hugging each other could be appropriate behavior, but it could also be inappropriate. Might depend on the rules your workplace has in effect. And, again, please read up on sexual harassment. Obviously you know nothing about it. You continue to give Trump a pass and consider the behavior trivial. Until you have an understanding of what sexual harassment is, there's no need to continue this discussion. I know enough about sexual harassment to know that in most cases it needs to be a pattern of behavior. Single isolated incidents rarely amount to harassment. You really should take your own advice and read up on it. As for Trump’s behavior, what he has been accused of doesn’t even rise to the level of the accusations against Franken, who the Democrats are now starting to defend again, now that Roy Moore isn’t going to be a Senator. You have held up the accusations made by Taggart and Virginia as examples of incidents that need to be investigated. Taggart accused Trump of a single incident of excessive hugging and kissing; Virginia accused Trump of a single incident of commenting on her legs, grabbing her arm and touching the side of her breast. I consider this behavior boorish, but it doesn’t even get close to harassment. Remind me to keep you away from my 96 year old grandmother. She is prone to cheek pinching, and I don’t want her charged with sexual battery.
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Dec 19, 2017 13:12:49 GMT -5
As I will keep you away from women I know so that you don't have a chance to make unwelcomed comments and touch the sides of their breasts.
|
|
|
Post by freddfish on Dec 20, 2017 6:17:59 GMT -5
I know enough about sexual harassment to know that in most cases it needs to be a pattern of behavior. Single isolated incidents rarely amount to harassment. You really should take your own advice and read up on it. As for Trump’s behavior, what he has been accused of doesn’t even rise to the level of the accusations against Franken, who the Democrats are now starting to defend again, now that Roy Moore isn’t going to be a Senator.
You have held up the accusations made by Taggart and Virginia as examples of incidents that need to be investigated. Taggart accused Trump of a single incident of excessive hugging and kissing; Virginia accused Trump of a single incident of commenting on her legs, grabbing her arm and touching the side of her breast. I consider this behavior boorish, but it doesn’t even get close to harassment. Remind me to keep you away from my 96 year old grandmother. She is prone to cheek pinching, and I don’t want her charged with sexual battery. RJ.... Given his classless behavior to date, what odds would you give that Franken will actually keep his word and resign from the Senate? (Not that faux resignation we were given, complete with a non-apology and a vague "in a few weeks". I mean truly leaving his office) Given Roy Moore's loss, I'd say it's about 80% certain he will walk it back and try to hang on to his position. What odds would you give?
|
|