Sexual Harassment claims

[Parkbandit]

Figured we needed a whole thread on this topic.. since it's been getting so much traction since Harvey Weinstein was outed.

The latest ones:

http://images.tritondigitalcms.com/6616/sites/320/2017/11/15155723/leeann-airplane-pic.jpg

http://cdn01.cdn.justjared.com/wp-content/uploads/headlines/2017/11/jenny-mccarthy-steven-seagal-sexual-harassment.jpg

http://cdn4.thr.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/scale_crop_768_433/2011/08/brettr_a.jpg

[Parkbandit]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/04/Sylvester-Stallone-2014-2.jpg

http://image.masslive.com/home/mass-media/width620/img/entertainment/photo/louis-ck-edfe4905537baada.jpg

http://image.masslive.com/home/mass-media/width620/img/entertainment/photo/2014-sundance-film-festival---george-takei-portraits-5566d238212e67e2.jpg

[Parkbandit]

http://image.masslive.com/home/mass-media/width960/img/politics_impact/photo/george-hw-bush-heather-lind-876aa797fa52a17e.jpg

http://image.masslive.com/home/mass-media/width960/img/breakingnews/photo/2017/10/26/mark-halperin-ed823ce4074a01e4.jpg

http://image.masslive.com/home/advance-media/width960/img/entertainment_news_national_desk/photo/andrew-kreisberg-c2d27ca06f3f4bdf.jpg

http://image.masslive.com/home/advance-media/width960/img/entertainment_news_national_desk/photo/roy-moore-917a5dfdedebe993.jpg

[Parkbandit]

http://image.masslive.com/home/advance-media/width960/img/entertainment_news_national_desk/photo/andy-dick-photojpg-2049ca5902e5aa38.jpg

http://image.masslive.com/home/advance-media/width960/img/entertainment_news_national_desk/photo/oliver-stone-3b4395c907aabb10.jpg

http://image.masslive.com/home/advance-media/width960/img/entertainment_news_national_desk/photo/richard-dreyfusshelen-hunt-948eb5f4b13d8d9a.jpg

http://image.masslive.com/home/advance-media/width960/img/entertainment_news_national_desk/photo/dustin-hoffman-28e675b248b0c2a3.jpg

[Parkbandit]

http://image.masslive.com/home/advance-media/width960/img/entertainment_news_national_desk/photo/jeremy-piven-30360924a68ceed0.jpg

http://image.masslive.com/home/advance-media/width960/img/entertainment_news_national_desk/photo/ben-affleck-076733c68a76e7f5.jpg

http://image.masslive.com/home/mass-media/width620/img/entertainment/photo/kevin-spacey-863e61602948eb7b.jpg

And the one that started it all.............

http://image.masslive.com/home/mass-media/width620/img/entertainment/photo/harvey-weinstein-2e88f32e4b7ad32c.jpg

[Taernath]

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/facebook/000/089/873/Raping-Everybody-Guy-THEY-RAPING-EVERYBODY-OUT-HERE.jpg

[Parkbandit]

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/facebook/000/089/873/Raping-Everybody-Guy-THEY-RAPING-EVERYBODY-OUT-HERE.jpg

I'm all for karma biting them in the ass hard if they did it.. but it's going to get stupid soon.. if it already hasn't.

[Androidpk]

https://static.politico.com/dims4/default/f2f3681/2147483647/legacy_thumbnail/1160x629%5E/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic.politico.com%2F5c%2F7a%2 F4d90802443bd994395fb5755f3ba%2F20160909-donald-trump-bill-clinton-6.jpg

[Taernath]

I'm all for karma biting them in the ass hard if they did it.. but it's going to get stupid soon.. if it already hasn't.

A lot of these will be decided in the court of public opinion. I tend to believe the ones that have multiple accusers or show a pattern.

[Candor]

I tend to believe the ones that have multiple accusers or show a pattern.

Agree. I also tend to withhold judgement for awhile (having been a big Bill Cosby defender when the first accusation was made, I learned my lesson).

[Wrathbringer]

Agree. I also tend to withhold judgement for awhile (having been a big Bill Cosby defender when the first accusation was made, I learned my lesson).

Cut a fart, candork.

[Tisket]

Hadn't heard the accusation against Stallone. A 16 year old when he was like 40 years old? Yeah, no forgiveness in my heart. Fuck him.

[Shaps]

I just hope women and men feel empowered to speak out and report offenders to police immediately after an incident occurs. I can not imagine the feelings someone who is sexually assaulted has following an attack, but with the current media attention and support being given to victims I hope they gain strength from it.

I am always skeptical when allegations are 20, 30, 40 years old at first. I do believe that people should be presumed innocent until proven guilty... I hate the court of public opinion that can destroy a persons life if falsely accused (ie. Duke rape case - one of the more egregious media attacks on innocent people)... but also realize false accusations are a smaller percentage than actual cases of sexual assault. I just hope false accusers realize how they damage people who have truly been victimized...

Sad it has taken this long for such systemic abuse to gain the attention it should have had long before.

[Parkbandit]

http://www.calgaryherald.com/cms/binary/7900301.jpg

[Amerek]

Hadn't heard the accusation against Stallone. A 16 year old when he was like 40 years old? Yeah, no forgiveness in my heart. Fuck him.

He reportedly tag-teamed her with his body guard.

[Wrathbringer]

He reportedly tag-teamed her with his body guard.

She said she was ok with stallone but not the other guy.

[Jhynnifer]

I just hope women and men feel empowered to speak out and report offenders to police immediately after an incident occurs. I can not imagine the feelings someone who is sexually assaulted has following an attack, but with the current media attention and support being given to victims I hope they gain strength from it.

I am always skeptical when allegations are 20, 30, 40 years old at first. I do believe that people should be presumed innocent until proven guilty... I hate the court of public opinion that can destroy a persons life if falsely accused (ie. Duke rape case - one of the more egregious media attacks on innocent people)... but also realize false accusations are a smaller percentage than actual cases of sexual assault. I just hope false accusers realize how they damage people who have truly been victimized...

Sad it has taken this long for such systemic abuse to gain the attention it should have had long before.

+1000000

[Shaps]

http://www.calgaryherald.com/cms/binary/7900301.jpg

Lol.. Good old Ron Jeremy. Hung out with him one night after an event... was actually really down to earth and nice (least my interactions with him). Was amazing though how many hot women were all over him, cause he really isn't that attractive in real life.. but he has a ton of charisma.

[Wrathbringer]

Lol.. Good old Ron Jeremy. Hung out with him one night after an event... was actually really down to earth and nice (least my interactions with him). Was amazing though how many hot women were all over him, cause he really isn't that attractive in real life.. but he has a ton of charisma and a large penis.

fixed.

[Taernath]

Hung out with him one night after an event...

Was that event a gangbang?

[Parkbandit]

I think Al Franken was just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to politicians and sexual harassment.

I do love how all these liberals are now "re-examining" their diehard support for Bill Clinton now... I thought his sex life was "none of our business"?

Delicious.

[Parkbandit]

Lol.. Good old Ron Jeremy. Hung out with him one night after an event... was actually really down to earth and nice (least my interactions with him). Was amazing though how many hot women were all over him, cause he really isn't that attractive in real life.. but he has a ton of charisma.

He was the quintessential porn star back in the day:

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/3f/8f/77/3f8f7756f621db31208662690508e7a0--ron-famous-people.jpg

[Parkbandit]

Al Franken won't survive this.. another girl came out against him.

Also, this is a FB post from the Democrat nominee for Ohio Governor.. he's trying to get ahead of the stories, but he's not doing himself any favors:


Bill O'Neill


Now that the dogs of war are calling for the head of Senator Al Franken I believe it is time to speak up on behalf of all heterosexual males. As a candidate for Governor let me save my opponents some research time. In the last fifty years I was sexually intimate with approximately 50 very attractive females. It ranged from a gorgeous blonde who was my first true love and we made passionate love in the hayloft of her parents barn and ended with a drop dead gorgeous red head from Cleveland.
Now can we get back to discussing legalizing marijuana and opening the state hospital network to combat the opioid crisis. I am sooooo disappointed by this national feeding frenzy about sexual indiscretions decades ago.
Peace.

[Parkbandit]

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/11/17/19/46741D8800000578-5094047-image-a-49_1510947297366.jpg

[Androidpk]

The irony of Trump criticizing Franken when he has his own laundry list of rape and sexual assault/harassment charges against him.

[Gelston]

The irony of Trump criticizing Franken when he has his own laundry list of rape and sexual assault/harassment charges against him.

Oh? What charges?

[Androidpk]

Oh? What charges?

Sorry, accusations, though there is currently one lawsuit involving libel I believe.

[Parkbandit]

The irony of Trump criticizing Franken when he has his own laundry list of rape and sexual assault/harassment charges against him.

He does? Where's this laundry list?

I agree.. it was dumb though.

Almost as dumb as Franken criticizing anyone for sexual harassment, knowing the skeletons in his own closet.

[Tisket]

She said she was ok with stallone but not the other guy.

Except children aren't responsible for their own poor decision-making when a pedophile is involved. That's supposed to be the adult's responsibility. Stallone was at fault, regardless of her willingness. As was his kinky partner-in-crime, the bodyguard.

[Gelston]

Except children aren't responsible for their own poor decision-making when a pedophile is involved. That's supposed to be the adult's responsibility. Stallone was at fault, regardless of her willingness. As was his kinky partner-in-crime, the bodyguard.

It was in Nevada, she was 16. 16 is the age of consent in Nevada.

Whether it was against her will is another story. I have no clue.

[Tisket]

It was in Nevada, she was 16. 16 is the age of consent in Nevada.

Whether it was against her will is another story. I have no clue.

Is Nevada one of the 30 US states that has an age gap provision in determining whether age of consent applies?

Dude was 40 years old to her 16. What a fucking sleazeball.

[Gelston]

Is Nevada one of the 30 US states that has an age gap provision in determining whether age of consent applies?

Dude was 40 years old to her 16. What a fucking sleazeball.

It is 16 with no restrictions(Some states have lower ages, but those have restrictions, like max age or a marriage requirement or something), but yes, the age difference is pretty gross. If she was 18 and he was 42 it wouldn't really change it.

[subzero]

I'm all for karma biting them in the ass hard if they did it.. but it's going to get stupid soon.. if it already hasn't.

It's getting out of hand. See: Louis CK. Yeah, that was weird and not right, but these people are going to want to get paid now with this being the frenzy it is. Strike while the iron is hot, as they say.


Lol.. Good old Ron Jeremy. Hung out with him one night after an event... was actually really down to earth and nice (least my interactions with him). Was amazing though how many hot women were all over him, cause he really isn't that attractive in real life.. but he has a ton of charisma.

Corey fuckin Felman's loser ass has hot chicks waltzing around with him. They'll do pretty much anything for money.


http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/11/17/19/46741D8800000578-5094047-image-a-49_1510947297366.jpg

Sounds like bullshit to me, but I haven't really looked into it too much. One side saying there were several people in the car and her side saying it was just him. In the passenger sear next to her. Do these Uber dolts really just let anyone ride next to them in the passenger seat? I doubt it.






So... any of you fuckers loaded to the gills? I feel like at least one of you has to have touched me somewhere before.

[Gelston]

Franken is calling for an ethics investigation on himself. I think that means he doesn't want to be done with the Senate just yet.

[Taernath]

It's getting out of hand. See: Louis CK. Yeah, that was weird and not right, but these people are going to want to get paid now with this being the frenzy it is. Strike while the iron is hot, as they say.

What's different about Louis CK? His rumors actually started years ago.

[Wrathbringer]

What's different about Louis CK? His rumors actually started years ago.

What a freak. "can I masterbate in front of you?" seriously?

[subzero]

What's different about Louis CK? His rumors actually started years ago.

You don't think there's a difference between someone whipping their dick out compared to actually molesting or forcing/coercing people to have sex with them?

As far as the rumors go... isn't it telling that they obviously told people back then, but never really thought it was worth doing anything about until this harassment frenzy came along?

[Taernath]

You don't think there's a difference between someone whipping their dick out compared to actually molesting or forcing/coercing people to have sex with them?

It's not rape, if that's what you're getting at, but it still falls under the sexual harassment umbrella. You'd want to know if someone was jerking it in front of your wife or kid, right?


As far as the rumors go... isn't it telling that they obviously told people back then, but never really thought it was worth doing anything about until this harassment frenzy came along?

Not really. I think a lot of women are coming out now because it seems like people are finally willing to listen and do something about it.

[Tisket]

It's getting out of hand. See: Louis CK. Yeah, that was weird and not right, but these people are going to want to get paid now with this being the frenzy it is. Strike while the iron is hot, as they say.

Good. I've no sympathy for financial losses suffered by sexual predators. I hope they bleed money.

[Tisket]

It's not rape, if that's what you're getting at, but it still falls under the sexual harassment umbrella. You'd want to know if someone was jerking it in front of your wife or kid, right?



Not really. I think a lot of women are coming out now because it seems like people are finally willing to listen and do something about it.

Exactly this.

[Tisket]

I think Al Franken was just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to politicians and sexual harassment.

Absolutely. I also believe that Hollywood has just brushed the surface of it's own sexual predation.

[Tgo01]

Absolutely. I also believe that Hollywood has just brushed the surface of it's own sexual predation.

At first I thought Hollywood shot themselves in the foot by making such a big deal about what a pussy-grabbing sexist Trump was without realizing that the people could turn on them and their own fucked up ways.

Now with more and more Democrats willing to throw Bill Clinton under the bus (finally) I think more and more people are open to taking famous predators to task because they think this will FINALLY be the way to take Trump down.

"Hey, look! We're even willing to give Al Franken and Bill Clinton shit now! It's time to impeach the Orange Hitler!"

As long as they're consistent and want to take down both Democrats and Republicans, both left leaning and right leaning celebrities, then I'm fine with it. But so far George Takei has largely remained unscathed and Al Franken hasn't been forced to resign yet so I'll reserve judgement on this shit. It's easy to throw Bill Clinton under the bus now that he has served his purpose being president and now that people are finally convinced Hillary Clinton ain't gonna do shit.

[subzero]

It's not rape, if that's what you're getting at, but it still falls under the sexual harassment umbrella. You'd want to know if someone was jerking it in front of your wife or kid, right?

You asked what the difference was. Louis CK didn't touch anyone. He certainly didn't hurt anyone. I'd say there's a rather large difference. Hell, whipping your dick out to take a leak will land you on the sex offenders list if a minor sees it. It's a pretty big umbrella that covers things ranging from ridiculous to rape.

Anyway... I admittedly haven't kept up with this, but did he have these people locked up somewhere? I believe I heard something about him supposedly asking these girls if he could do it and their response was basically just giggling. Were they really not up in arms disgusted about it then and there? Why did they not leave or call the police?

None of that seems to have happened. What happened is "rumors" got out about it because they told some people. It doesn't seem like they went to any police and told them about it. I haven't heard anything about false imprisonment claims or charges. Only now, while the iron is hot, are these people wanting to strike.


Not really. I think a lot of women are coming out now because it seems like people are finally willing to listen and do something about it.

Yeah, like the old lady that was fake crying during her camera time with Gloria Allred. Look, I'm not dismissing what may have happened to her, but give me a break with the fake ass tears. Shit happened to her like 40 years ago. She's not sitting there crying herself to sleep at night. Playing it up for the media irritates me. The crocodile tears only make the claims look phony. Stop it.

Let's see how many of these people don't take money to make them feel better.

[Tisket]

You asked what the difference was. Louis CK didn't touch anyone. He certainly didn't hurt anyone. I'd say there's a rather large difference. Hell, whipping your dick out to take a leak will land you on the sex offenders list if a minor sees it. It's a pretty big umbrella that covers things ranging from ridiculous to rape.

Anyway... I admittedly haven't kept up with this, but did he have these people locked up somewhere? I believe I heard something about him supposedly asking these girls if he could do it and their response was basically just giggling. Were they really not up in arms disgusted about it then and there? Why did they not leave or call the police?

None of that seems to have happened. What happened is "rumors" got out about it because they told some people. It doesn't seem like they went to any police and told them about it. I haven't heard anything about false imprisonment claims or charges. Only now, while the iron is hot, are these people wanting to strike.



Yeah, like the old lady that was fake crying during her camera time with Gloria Allred. Look, I'm not dismissing what may have happened to her, but give me a break with the fake ass tears. Shit happened to her like 40 years ago. She's not sitting there crying herself to sleep at night. Playing it up for the media irritates me. The crocodile tears only make the claims look phony. Stop it.

Let's see how many of these people don't take money to make them feel better.

Louis CK stood in front of the door blocking the chicks from leaving.

Regardless, why are you so opposed to the idea that people who have victimized others might be forced to pay for it? Serious question. Because you just seem very perturbed at the idea that these deviants might have to eventually shell out some money for their misdeeds or, even better in my opinion...lose out on future revenues. Seems like a very strange position to take.

[Gelston]

The Police said the victim of the alleged incident with Jameis Winston never contacted them nor filed a report. Straight to social media. That seems sketch to me. Lot of things just not adding up there.

[Neveragain]

Louis CK stood in front of the door blocking the chicks from leaving.

Regardless, why are you so opposed to the idea that people who have victimized others might be forced to pay for it? Serious question. Because you just seem very perturbed at the idea that these deviants might have to eventually shell out some money for their misdeeds or, even better in my opinion...lose out on future revenues. Seems like a very strange position to take.

I don't think anyone is opposed to punishing offenders. Their concerns are the seemingly non-existent laws to punish people that make false accusations. Another concern is how these laws are treated when a woman is the offender, I would bet the bank that women receive lighter sentences than men for the same offense.

[Gelston]

I don't think anyone is opposed to punishing offenders. Their concerns are the seemingly non-existent laws to punish people that make false accusations. Another concern is how these laws are treated when a woman is the offender, I would bet the bank that women receive lighter sentences than men for the same offense.

They are starting to get harsher on female teachers who bang their students.

[Parkbandit]

The Police said the victim of the alleged incident with Jameis Winston never contacted them nor filed a report. Straight to social media. That seems sketch to me. Lot of things just not adding up there.

The Uber driver did report it to Corporate and Corporate said she should go to the police. She said she didn't want the notoriety. Uber removed Winston's account.

I'm a huge Jameis Winston fan.. been that way since he was with FSU.. but he has a history of doing really, really stupid shit and this sounds like something stupid he would do.

He might not have done it, but his history says it's very plausible.

[Gelston]

The Uber driver did report it to Corporate and Corporate said she should go to the police. She said she didn't want the notoriety. Uber removed Winston's account.

I'm a huge Jameis Winston fan.. been that way since he was with FSU.. but he has a history of doing really, really stupid shit and this sounds like something stupid he would do.

He might not have done it, but his history says it's very plausible.

I'm siding with him on this one, yeah, I know he has done it in the past, and all the stuff he had to go through because of it makes me think he'd be less likely to do it again. Plus, her story is so full of inconsistencies. And she "doesn't want" the notoriety? I think she has just as much now then if she had gone to the police. I'm sure the NFL will ban him for 5 games though.

[Parkbandit]

I'm siding with him on this one, yeah, I know he has done it in the past, and all the stuff he had to go through because of it makes me think he'd be less likely to do it again.

I thought the same thing after he was caught on campus with pellet guns "shooting squirrels"... but then after they were released, they had a pellet gun fight at an apartment complex and caused $4000 damage. Then a couple weeks later, he was accused of rape.. the next year he went to a fast food place and allegedly stole soda (sounds retarded I know.. but the employee asked him to stop several times and he was more like "Do you know who I am" and kept drinking soda anyway). Then he shoplifted crabs from Publix, a no show at a code of conduct hearing for the alleged rape, "Fuck her right in the pussy" cafeteria chant...

He has a long and storied history of using his position as an excuse to get away with really stupid shit he does.


Plus, her story is so full of inconsistencies. And she "doesn't want" the notoriety? I think she has just as much now then if she had gone to the police. I'm sure the NFL will ban him for 5 games though.

Do you know who she is? I thought she was still rather anonymous?

[Gelston]

I thought the same thing after he was caught on campus with pellet guns "shooting squirrels"... but then after they were released, they had a pellet gun fight at an apartment complex and caused $4000 damage. Then a couple weeks later, he was accused of rape.. the next year he went to a fast food place and allegedly stole soda (sounds retarded I know.. but the employee asked him to stop several times and he was more like "Do you know who I am" and kept drinking soda anyway). Then he shoplifted crabs from Publix, a no show at a code of conduct hearing for the alleged rape, "Fuck her right in the pussy" cafeteria chant...

He has a long and storied history of using his position as an excuse to get away with really stupid shit he does.



Do you know who she is? I thought she was still rather anonymous?

She is just as anonymous as if she had made a sexual assault complaint to the police. They don't release identities for that.

[Nieninque]

I don't think anyone is opposed to punishing offenders. Their concerns are the seemingly non-existent laws to punish people that make false accusations. Another concern is how these laws are treated when a woman is the offender, I would bet the bank that women receive lighter sentences than men for the same offense.

Do you not have laws for perjury or obstructing the course of justice in Yankland?

[Nieninque]

Exactly this.

No. Exactly this.

[drauz]

No. Exactly this.

Please update your account to enable 3rd party hosting.

[Nieninque]

Please update your account to enable 3rd party hosting.

Please enable your mum to enable 3rd party hosting

[drauz]

Please enable your mum to enable 3rd party hosting

https://media.giphy.com/media/wMY3LjQQMqo5W/giphy.gif

[Gelston]

I'm contemplating using Nieninque's sigs as my own.

[Taernath]

Anyway... I admittedly haven't kept up with this, but did he have these people locked up somewhere? I believe I heard something about him supposedly asking these girls if he could do it and their response was basically just giggling. Were they really not up in arms disgusted about it then and there? Why did they not leave or call the police?

None of that seems to have happened. What happened is "rumors" got out about it because they told some people. It doesn't seem like they went to any police and told them about it. I haven't heard anything about false imprisonment claims or charges. Only now, while the iron is hot, are these people wanting to strike.

There are a lot of reasons people don't go to the police. The women CK did this to were new comics who didn't want to risk their careers or cause a scene, so they only told people they trusted. Maybe they didn't think there was anything the police would do, maybe they were ashamed, maybe something else, but they are victims. Shit, Terry Crews said the other day that some producer grabbed his dick, and he wasn't sure what he should do or if people would believe him.

[Gelston]

https://scontent.fmem1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/23561428_1721365187882275_3692403740415492309_n.jp g?oh=1955bc1e82173e15be13e56141229c45&oe=5A901C04

[Parkbandit]

http://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.kiss985.com/styles/delta__775x515/s3/s3fs-public/Staff/WKSE_TalentImage_RyanSeacrest_1170x515.jpg?itok=pQ KmXlQ1

[Gelston]

He looks familiar, who that?

[Ltlprprincess]

He looks familiar, who that?

Ryan Seacrest

[Parkbandit]

She is just as anonymous as if she had made a sexual assault complaint to the police. They don't release identities for that.

They don't as a department rule.. but the more places she has her name attached to the allegation, the more the chance she will be outed.

It would get out. I'm surprised it hasn't gotten out already.

[Gelston]

They don't as a department rule.. but the more places she has her name attached to the allegation, the more the chance she will be outed.

It would get out. I'm surprised it hasn't gotten out already.

Yeah, I mean, like Jameis Winston knows it, Uber knows it. Nothing is stopping him from just saying "Hey, this is her." If she had an official police report, there would be something very much preventing him from doing that.

[Parkbandit]

Good article about this whole thing I agree with:

It’s gone far enough. What started as a necessary mass-rejection of sexual harassment and assault is sliding into absurdity and irrelevance. A backlash is looming against the very people the spontaneous battle against sexual villainy was meant to help: powerless women and men.


The fight is being waged not with force, but with the rather bland Internet movement, #MeToo. The battle by hashtag conflates genuine sex crimes with mere childish behavior — blending the Harvey Weinsteins and Kevin Spaceys with the Al Frankens and George H.W. Bushes.


How long before we stop taking victims seriously?


Franken, the former “Saturday Night Live” writer and performer and now staunchly liberal senator from Minnesota, has been tossed into the guillotine without a trial. And while I reject his leftist politics — even more so his inability to be funny — I don’t think confusing childish, even lewd, behavior with clear, intimate violations helps anyone. Rather, it threatens to make accusers, many of them women, appear unserious. Or “hysterical,’’ to use a term commonly wielded against humans bearing XX chromosomes.


On Thursday, former Playboy model-turned-radio host Leeann Tweeden claimed Franken stuck his tongue in her mouth. He claimed he doesn’t remember the tongue-lashing that evidently occurred as they were “rehearsing” a scene for a skit on a USO tour to the Middle East in 2006, before Franken was elected to office. But there exists photographic evidence that he took things a few notches further. Franken was snapped, with a doofusy grin on his face, groping Tweeden’s flak jacket-covered breasts as she slept.


Lewd and crude? For sure. Grounds for public censure? Perhaps. But potentially career-ending? I don’t think so.
Franken initially issued a statement of apology to Tweeden, saying, “As to the photo, it was clearly intended to be funny but wasn’t. I shouldn’t have done it.” Hours later, he added an “I’m sorry’’ to “everyone else who was part of that tour, to everyone who has worked for me, to everyone I represent, and to everyone who counts on me to be an ally and supporter and champion of women.’’


Meanwhile, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is calling on the Senate Ethics Committee to investigate Gropegate. And a chorus of critics is urging Franken to resign from his seat. But in a preachy New York Times op-ed urging him to step aside, Michelle Goldberg revealed her underlying bias in the third paragraph: “Sure, Franken made plenty of sexist jokes when he was with ‘Saturday Night Live,’ ‘’ she wrote, “ but I thought he was one of the good guys. (I thought there were good guys.)’’


No good guys? Come on! And so, the war on sexual offenses has been revealed to be part of a wider feminist War on Men.


My fear is that the pendulum will swing so wildly out of control, the fight against genuine sexually based offenses will be delegitimized as much ado about nothing. It makes me wince that comic Louis C.K., who admitted pleasuring himself in front of grossed-out females, is mentioned in the same breath as nonagenarian ex-President George H.W. Bush, accused of patting women on their fannies and telling a dirty joke.


Wheelchair-bound at age 93 “his arm falls on the lower waist of people with whom he takes pictures,” said his spokesman, Jim McGrath. “To try to put people at ease, the president routinely tells the same joke — and on occasion, he has patted women’s rears in what he intended to be a good-natured manner.’’ He apologized.
Is Bush’s boorishness really equivalent to Louis CK pleasuring himself in front of women? Are Franken’s jokes really on the same level as Weinstein’s sexual assaults?


In Philadelphia, an old painting was removed from a restaurant because it showed Italian men whistling at women on the street. The trivial now threatens the legitimate.


If this becomes the woman who cries wolf whistle, the real wolves are going to get away with it.

https://nypost.com/2017/11/17/metoo-has-lumped-trivial-in-with-legitimate-sexual-assault/

[Parkbandit]

Also.. do people who could see this sky writing get to sue the US government for sexual harassment?

https://d3p157427w54jq.cloudfront.net/uploads/2017/11/us-navy-giant-dick-sky-637x397.jpg

[Gelston]

Hah, called Leeann Tweeden a playboy model and I guess. She was never nude in it though.

[~Rocktar~]

When the line between simply crude is blurred or moved then the real harassment is ignored. Just like what has happened with the constant cries of racism, all logic and rationality has gone out the window and it is next to impossible to really attempt to improve the situation.

[Parkbandit]

Hah, called Leeann Tweeden a playboy model and I guess. She was never nude in it though.

Um, yea she was. She's posed plenty in the nude.

Not that I would know.. since I only read Playboy for the articles...

[Nieninque]

When the line between simply crude is blurred or moved then the real harassment is ignored. Just like what has happened with the constant cries of racism, all logic and rationality has gone out the window and it is next to impossible to really attempt to improve the situation.

That's one of the most stupid things I've heard.

Want to improve racism? Don't be racist.
Want to prevent sexual assault/harassment? Dont sexually assault/harass people.

There you go. Much better.

[Nieninque]

How long before we stop taking victims seriously?


How long before "we" start?

[~Rocktar~]

That's one of the most stupid things I've heard.

Want to improve racism? Don't be racist.
Want to prevent sexual assault/harassment? Dont sexually assault/harass people.

There you go. Much better.

WOOSHHHHHHHH!!!!

[Tisket]

When the line between simply crude is blurred or moved then the real harassment is ignored. Just like what has happened with the constant cries of racism, all logic and rationality has gone out the window and it is next to impossible to really attempt to improve the situation.

You are simply wrong here. This explains better than I could why:

"Has it already, to learn from some of the country’s senior thinkers, “gone too far”? Is it too late to join the witch hunt, jump on the bandwagon, succumb to the mass hysteria, swell the mob, sign up for the moral panic, add fervour to an atmosphere repeatedly described as “febrile” and thereby lose – in the still more popular phrase when prominent men pronounce on complaints about sexual misdemeanours that fell short of actual rape – all sense of proportion?

I do hope not.

As tiresome as it must be, for men who feel, about Westminster, much as Martin Amis does on Harvey Weinstein, that current levels of “public wrath” exceed those they would normally recommend for mishaps that scarcely compare with lifelong concubinage in a seraglio; the strong suspicion of many, admittedly inexpert, women, is: it hardly begins to reflect private disquiet.

Given, that is, the extent to which this male misuse of power extends far beyond politics, notwithstanding recent insider comment on the very specific climatic conditions that apparently increase the risk of being jumped on by a charismatic risk-taker who’s missing his partner and kiddies, the poor chap, you ought to see the way some of those attractive women carry on.

It’s possible, of course, that guided by the kind of men who see the funny side of Weinstein jokes, women will shortly become aware of how foolish and obsessed they appear, when they go on (and on) about sexual assaults that fell way short of them being trafficked into modern slavery in a German industrial park by brutal pimps who took away their passports. Nag, nag, nag. We heard you the first time, love.

Certainly the speed with which “witch hunt” – an ignorant mob’s pursuit of innocent women charged with imaginary offences – has become a favoured term for the reporting, by women, of incidents of harassment by real men, is unlikely to dispel the reticence that deters many from describing their experiences. It’s a tricky thing, its targets have learned, to get right. Don’t report an incident to the non-existent authorities in an unsympathetic era and Peter Hitchens will one day accuse you of being a failed feminist. Do report it later, in the hope of changing things, and his colleagues will shake their heads over bandwagons or revenge served too cold, or maybe wonder, if they are women left unscathed,why others are so much less resourceful than their younger selves.

Just how many examples of unreported molestation, and of what gravity and vintage, it would be helpful to know for the future, would be most likely to persuade doubters that something is badly wrong? As opposed to confirming, to men who say they have women’s interests at heart, that the current tide of complaints is a product of female hysteria, probably triggered by an unholy collision of raging estrogen and excess political correctness.

The massive response to the hashtag #MeToo, which has prompted women, around the world, painfully to speak about incidents they may have suppressed for years, was instantly converted by self-styled guardians of the sensible perspective, uniting behind the gaslighting banner, as the very reason to dismiss it. In fact, the popular criticism – “has it all gone too far?” – has exposed, almost comically, the degree to which many men genuinely believe a level of unwelcome sexualised engagement – “sugar tits”, knee touching, office sex toys – should be as tolerable to a younger woman as it is natural to its male initiators: a social norm.

Challenge that, and it’s men, such as “honourable”, “competent” – dirty talking and groping – Michael Fallon, who are suddenly the victims; their uncooperative targets, not the sexual opportunists, are the ones who present “a danger”, even to national stability. The proposal that these men should just stop? Plainly hysterical and the death knell to all romance.

So even if it is too late, too witchy and too bandwaggony, Fallon’s self-serving bollocks about what is “clearly not acceptable now” finally prompts me to pipe up that I’m yet another woman who can attest to what a certain kind of man in authority will do to juniors, even outside Westminster, in a society that tells him he has the right. I know, for certain, that when I was a student of 19, being assaulted by a tutor who had devised some pretext to get into my college room, was not, all those millions of years ago, something that I, or the very few people I told, felt was acceptable, even in the crazy era of Abba’s Dancing Queen. Why, to quote our sense-of-proportion minded commentators, “dredge”, “exhume” or “dig it up” now – with all the risks to harmless flirtation posed by these noisome grudges? Because, for those persuaded by Fallon’s line in exculpation, the experience was as shocking and distasteful to me then as it would be to anyone today.

As, I now realise, following Anne Robinson’s robust comments on sexual politics, a pathetically fragile young person, I failed to overcome the absence of any system for exposing such behaviour, along with the fear of not being believed and the repugnance of talking about it (even to my own family), asked to change my degree course, and left the scholarly perpetrator behind.

And that’s probably enough about my own leading perv, who will now be old enough and, I hope, frail enough, to be past creating opportunities to force his tongue into undergraduate mouths. Among the deterrents to reporting molestation, some powerfully detailed in Ronan Farrow’s latest New Yorker piece, is that it can feel like giving the abuser a prominent role in his (sorry, or her!) victim’s biography. You don’t have to have big ideas about your own obsequies to understand why, for instance, Rose McGowan, who alleges rape by Weinstein, had earlier signed a settlement and stayed silent. “I didn’t want his name next to mine in my obituary.”

A shared unwillingness to assign lasting influence to sexual aggressors possibly unites, despite overtly contrasting responses,women who make light of sexual harassment and women who bury it. Some of us, when studying or working in places dominated by hostile, proudly unreconstructed men, will have tried both. To report molestation, in anything other than a jocular way, would have meant being humourless and difficult; to become practised in indifference fostered the belief that younger women should do the same. As with Fay Weldon on rape, so with the Daily Mail’s crack team of snowflake assassins: resilience is one strategy for denying male control – except, we’ve learned, it just perpetuates it.

Ideally, action on unwanted male attention would not have required a single British #MeToo report, its prevalence being as obvious as Savile’s iniquity. Among those recently perving in plain sight were Alan Clark, the Nazi-sympathising predator; Lord Rennard, the Lib Dems’ pet groper; John Prescott, Tony Blair’s ithyphallic deputy; Richard Branson, grinning juggler of random female bodies – all protected by the culture that now demands of people wanting progress: has it gone too far? It’s only just begun."

Article source: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/nov/05/heard-too-much-about-sexual-harassment

[Parkbandit]

How long before "we" start?

You don't believe the victims are being taken seriously for the most part?

[Neveragain]

Ryan Seacrest

He's one of those people that you can't figure out why they are famous but they are for some reason, kind of like the Kardashians.

[Neveragain]

Do you not have laws for perjury or obstructing the course of justice in Yankland?

We do, as to the use of the English word "seemingly", though the punishment doesn't carry the severity of a phony sexual assault conviction.

[~Rocktar~]

You are simply wrong here. This explains better than I could why:

snipped pile of crap . . .

I am not wrong. There is a line between real harassment and what is just crude behavior and people will get to where they take it too far and can't tell the difference. When you cry fire enough times, people stop listening. It is good that people can come forward and be believed. It is bad when useless pieces of flesh can falsely accuse people, ruin their life and possibly get them in prison because they regret their decisions or just think it's funny.

There are a lot of crimes these days where you are guilty until proven innocent, and then you are still guilty. Rape, molestation, sexual harassment and so on. This is bullshit and it will come back to bite people in the ass. We are past that line with the discussion of race and racism, we are running toward the line at break neck speed with sexual harassment and so on assuming that we have not already passed it.

I have been the victim of false accusations of rape, sexual harassment and racism. In each case, it was a case of someone got their feelings hurt and tried to get even in whatever way was handy. This isn't helpful for working on ending real racism, real harassment, real exploitation and other issues. Saying that the concern for where the line is and that we need to work with caution, reason and thoughtful deliberation on finding it and dealing with the issues is not wrong. Saying that we should take all cases of accusations as truth 100% truth is mush headed.

[Tgo01]

Lewd and crude? For sure. Grounds for public censure? Perhaps. But potentially career-ending? I don’t think so.
Franken initially issued a statement of apology to Tweeden, saying, “As to the photo, it was clearly intended to be funny but wasn’t. I shouldn’t have done it.” Hours later, he added an “I’m sorry’’ to “everyone else who was part of that tour, to everyone who has worked for me, to everyone I represent, and to everyone who counts on me to be an ally and supporter and champion of women.’’

Al Franken should resign. So far Democrats have been calling for Roy Moore's head based on allegations and here we have photographic evidence of Franken's misdeeds and he shouldn't resign? Not to mention in most cases of Moore's it was him dating 16 year old girls, not even illegal in Alabama.

It's time for these people to reap what they sow. Or are they going to come out with a guidebook to let us know what is and is not acceptable behavior for a sitting Senator? Are they going to let us know the magical number of alleged victims that need to come forward before the allegations are taken seriously? Does photographic evidence not carry more weight than someone's unverified accusations?

This is the problem when you insist on going after your political opponents for everything without first establishing boundaries; sometimes it comes back to bite you in the ass.

[Androidpk]

Al Franken came clean and issued an apology, to which the lady forgave him for. Roy Moore is still a pedophile crying fake news.

[Androidpk]

This is the problem when you insist on going after your political opponents for everything without first establishing boundaries; sometimes it comes back to bite you in the ass.

Sorta like how it's coming back to biting Trump in the ass for his attack on Franken.

[Tgo01]

Al Franken came clean and issued an apology, to which the lady forgave him for. Roy Moore is still a pedophile crying fake news.

Well that's another rule that needs to be established. If someone just offers a pathetic apology in order to secure their job is that good enough? Or is it only good enough for Democrats caught red handed with photographic evidence? I need the rules clarified please. Thanks.

[Tgo01]

Sorta like how it's coming back to biting Trump in the ass for his attack on Franken.

Yup. Honestly Trump should just sit back and let the liberal elites both in Hollywood and DC eat each other. It's all a tactic to keep deflecting towards Trump, with their eye on the "prize" of impeaching him. He just helps the news cycle circle back to his allegations every time he attacks someone else.

[~Rocktar~]

Al Franken came clean and issued an apology, to which the lady forgave him for. Roy Moore is still a pedophile crying fake news.

But it's not a valid apology because he didn't say he was gay.

[subzero]

Louis CK stood in front of the door blocking the chicks from leaving.

If true, that's false imprisonment on top of any other charges. It just seems really strange to wait this long to say anything about it to officials.


Regardless, why are you so opposed to the idea that people who have victimized others might be forced to pay for it? Serious question. Because you just seem very perturbed at the idea that these deviants might have to eventually shell out some money for their misdeeds or, even better in my opinion...lose out on future revenues. Seems like a very strange position to take.

I'm not concerned that people might have to cough up some money if they've done wrong. My concern is in which of these people were legitimately assaulted and 'deserve' money (No, I'm sorry, I don't think there are any damages for people who had some guy whack off in front of them especially considering the fact that they waited until the money train started to fire up before going to officials) and which of them are frauds hoping to hop on the loot train. Also, sorry to the 60, 70, whatever year old lady. In King Subzero's world, you get nothing for waiting what had to have been at least 30 years, probably 40 or more before coming forth.

Let's be honest, though, regarding future losses. Louis CK will be fine. Jesus, Ray Rice can damn near break a woman's jaw on video and he's back like nothing happened. People still defend and love the hell out of Michael Jackson. The other people who have done more serious things to others may be in more trouble and that's fine.

Just for fun, I decided to go do some reading...



Another comedian, Rebecca Corry, said that while she was appearing with Louis C.K. on a television pilot in 2005, he asked if he could masturbate in front of her. She declined.

“He asked if we could go to my dressing room so he could masturbate in front of me.” Stunned and angry, Ms. Corry said she declined, and pointed out that he had a daughter and a pregnant wife. “His face got red,” she recalled, “and he told me he had issues.”

Holy shit! He asked someone and their response was, "No". Maybe I'm missing it, but, uh, it doesn't sound like he locked her up anywhere and whipped it out anyway. Weird.

A fifth woman said he, "repeatedly asked her to watch him masturbate" and she agreed! Now she's saying he abused his power over her? What? You mean like he abused his power over the woman who told him no who he apparently didn't pull his dick out for? The one who was not fired or further harassed or anything?

Another one is complaining about him jerking it on a phone call! REALLY?!?!?! Boy, that's a tough spot to get out of right there.

Regarding the two brain surgeons that laughed at his question: During Ms. Goodman and Ms. Wolov’s surreal visit to Louis C.K.’s Aspen hotel room, they said they were holding onto each other, screaming and laughing in shock, as Louis C.K. masturbated in a chair. “We were paralyzed,”

I have seen nothing stating that he held anyone captive or blocked any doors. What I've seen is that he's asked people if he can be a weirdo in front of them. The one that said no apparently never saw his wang. Go figure.

So, after reading that article, I'm even more in favor of Louis coming out of this alright. Unless I'm missing something huge, not a single one of these women should get a penny.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/09/arts/television/louis-ck-sexual-misconduct.html?smid=tw-nytimesarts&smtyp=cur&_r=0

[subzero]

The Police said the victim of the alleged incident with Jameis Winston never contacted them nor filed a report. Straight to social media. That seems sketch to me. Lot of things just not adding up there.

Imagine that. All aboard the loot-train!


The Uber driver did report it to Corporate and Corporate said she should go to the police. She said she didn't want the notoriety. Uber removed Winston's account.

I'm a huge Jameis Winston fan.. been that way since he was with FSU.. but he has a history of doing really, really stupid shit and this sounds like something stupid he would do.

He might not have done it, but his history says it's very plausible.

This is exactly the sort of thing that can prompt false allegations. With all these people jumping in combined with his history of stupidity, he's a prime target.


There are a lot of reasons people don't go to the police. The women CK did this to were new comics who didn't want to risk their careers or cause a scene, so they only told people they trusted. Maybe they didn't think there was anything the police would do, maybe they were ashamed, maybe something else, but they are victims. Shit, Terry Crews said the other day that some producer grabbed his dick, and he wasn't sure what he should do or if people would believe him.

The only people who come close to being victims are the two chuckleheads that just laughed at him asking if he can jerk it in front of them. As far as the others go, one person told him he could, another one was a phone call for god's sake, and the last woman told him no and nothing happened. I have seen nothing to indicate that he threatened or imprisoned anyone.

How many molesters and rapists ask their victims if they can do X, Y, and Z to them? Zero. Absolutely fucking zero. They just do things. This guy, by all accounts, has asked people if he can be his weird self in front of them and for the most part they've either agreed or didn't object. The two 'paralyzed' chuckleheads were even laughing during their traumatic victimization. Get the fuck out of here.

What happened to the woman that told him no? Nothing. It seems clear that he has not 'abused his power'. There were no threats. No firings. Nothing. Does he have some weird ideas of a good time? Sure, most people probably feel that way. But it doesn't seem like he was forcing it on people. Those people don't ask.


In Philadelphia, an old painting was removed from a restaurant because it showed Italian men whistling at women on the street. The trivial now threatens the legitimate.


Troof.

[Taernath]

How many molesters and rapists ask their victims if they can do X, Y, and Z to them? Zero. Absolutely fucking zero. They just do things. This guy, by all accounts, has asked people if he can be his weird self in front of them and for the most part they've either agreed or didn't object. The two 'paralyzed' chuckleheads were even laughing during their traumatic victimization. Get the fuck out of here.


There are more choices than 'whip your dick out' and 'ask before whipping your dick out'. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that a much better choice is 'don't whip your dick out'. In fact, it should probably be your default state.

[subzero]

There are more choices than 'whip your dick out' and 'ask before whipping your dick out'. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that a much better choice is 'don't whip your dick out'. In fact, it should probably be your default state.

Some people are in to weird shit, man. The only way to know if the other person is also into that sort of thing or is otherwise ok with it is to ask. He asked. Those who did not object received (non-physically, of course).

[drauz]

How many molesters and rapists ask their victims if they can do X, Y, and Z to them? Zero. Absolutely fucking zero.

I would guess a lot. When the answer is no, they just do it anyways.

[Archigeek]

Not to mention in most cases of Moore's it was him dating 16 year old girls, not even illegal in Alabama.

Or rather forcing himself on fourteen year olds, but let's not quibble over a couple of years and the difference between consensual sex and assault.

[Tgo01]

Or rather forcing himself on fourteen year olds, but let's not quibble over a couple of years and the difference between consensual sex and assault.

Like I said...in MOST of the cases with Moore it's him dating 16 year olds.

This has to do with the bullshit narrative that we're supposed to ignore the allegations if it's just one or two victims, as is the case with George Takei and Al Franken. Oh, wait, maybe we're just supposed to ignore one or two allegations if they are hurled at a Democrat? Like I said, we need rules established.

People keep pointing out the number of "accusers" against Moore, when people were calling for his head even when all but one of the allegations were just him dating 16-18 year olds, because suddenly the Democrat party has become the puritan party and we can't have our senators dating teenagers 40 years ago, even if it was legal!

But I know, looking at the big picture and all of the facts and realizing there seems to be a set of rules for one side of the political spectrum and a different set of rules for another side of the political spectrum is too much work. Let's just make it easier on ourselves and believe everything the biased media shoves down our throats.

[Nieninque]

You don't believe the victims are being taken seriously for the most part?

I think victims are mostly disbelieved or ignored, for the most part.

[Tisket]

I am not wrong. There is a line between real harassment and what is just crude behavior and people will get to where they take it too far and can't tell the difference. When you cry fire enough times, people stop listening. It is good that people can come forward and be believed. It is bad when useless pieces of flesh can falsely accuse people, ruin their life and possibly get them in prison because they regret their decisions or just think it's funny.

There are a lot of crimes these days where you are guilty until proven innocent, and then you are still guilty. Rape, molestation, sexual harassment and so on. This is bullshit and it will come back to bite people in the ass. We are past that line with the discussion of race and racism, we are running toward the line at break neck speed with sexual harassment and so on assuming that we have not already passed it.

I have been the victim of false accusations of rape, sexual harassment and racism. In each case, it was a case of someone got their feelings hurt and tried to get even in whatever way was handy. This isn't helpful for working on ending real racism, real harassment, real exploitation and other issues. Saying that the concern for where the line is and that we need to work with caution, reason and thoughtful deliberation on finding it and dealing with the issues is not wrong. Saying that we should take all cases of accusations as truth 100% truth is mush headed.

So you are upset that some people make false allegations? Are you suggesting we ignore all allegations because of a few liars? Or are you championing the idea that only those victims who can prove they've been victimized should be allowed to speak up? And what level of proof would you find acceptable? Most asshole perverts know to hide their behavior so there isn't a witness (well, except for Louis CK) so I guess those victims are shit out of luck in your world.

Your insincere concern for the "real" issues of rape and sexual harassment is noted though.

[~Rocktar~]

So you are upset that some people make false allegations? Are you suggesting we ignore all allegations because of a few liars? Or are you championing the idea that only those victims who can prove they've been victimized should be allowed to speak up? And what level of proof would you find acceptable? Most asshole perverts know to hide their behavior when there isn't a witness (well, except for Louis CK) so I guess those victims are shit out of luck in your world.

Your insincere concern for the "real" issues of rape and sexual harassment is noted though.

We live in a nation of laws founded on the idea that people are innocent until proven guilty. This is one of the foundations of our society and one of the key differences in our society from most of the rest of the world. Your willingness to discard that and assume guilt in all matters without substantiation is both an emotional over reaction and a repudiation of the foundations of the American justice system, both of which are unacceptable to me. Nice emotional argument to the extreme there. I have not suggested that anyone does not have the freedom to speak out, I also believe that they should also be responsible for false accusations. In other words, you call something sexual harassment/assault then it better not turn out to be a case of revenge or stupid regret. I do not know what is an acceptable level of proof, I do know that a lot of accusations over the past have been cases of revenge seeking and stupid regret and people must be accountable for their false accusations. Nice argument to the masses there, lots of emotion and self righteous anger to try and sound like it has substance.

I want real shitbags to get punished, I want people to believe that when someone is found innocent that they are really innocent and didn't just get off on a technicality when the accusation clearly done for revenge or regret and I want people to get over being butthurt over everything. Also, there is a statute of limitations for most things. Many things society considers sexual harassment today were not considered harassment 40 years ago. We cannot continue to dig up the past, back date the laws and so on to alter history to fit perceptions today. Continuing to do so is lunacy and will hasten the destruction of our society.

I appreciate your callous, self righteous, pompous, arrogant and condescending acknowledgement of my genuine concern for real victims.

When you want to discuss things like this in a rational manner in the future then I might take you up on it, until then, let your hatred go, it's only hurting you.

[Tisket]

I appreciate your callous, self righteous, pompous, arrogant and condescending acknowledgement of my genuine concern for real victims.

The irony in that single sentence is overwhelming.

The rest of your wordy post is just a bunch of fearful ignorance.

[Gelston]

Like I said...in MOST of the cases with Moore it's him dating 16 year olds.

This has to do with the bullshit narrative that we're supposed to ignore the allegations if it's just one or two victims, as is the case with George Takei and Al Franken. Oh, wait, maybe we're just supposed to ignore one or two allegations if they are hurled at a Democrat? Like I said, we need rules established.

People keep pointing out the number of "accusers" against Moore, when people were calling for his head even when all but one of the allegations were just him dating 16-18 year olds, because suddenly the Democrat party has become the puritan party and we can't have our senators dating teenagers 40 years ago, even if it was legal!

But I know, looking at the big picture and all of the facts and realizing there seems to be a set of rules for one side of the political spectrum and a different set of rules for another side of the political spectrum is too much work. Let's just make it easier on ourselves and believe everything the biased media shoves down our throats.

MOST cases doesn't matter. In SOME cases he was a pedophile. It doesn't matter if a dude has banged 345343456 of age women, he bangs one that is underage, he is a statutory rapist. I don't see why it matters that a lot of them were legal to you? He is still a fucking disgusting piece of shit.

[Gelston]

The irony in that single sentence is overwhelming.

The rest of your wordy post is just a bunch of fearful ignorance.

He asked for neither your Opinion,
your Acceptance
nor your Permission.

[Parkbandit]

I think victims are mostly disbelieved or ignored, for the most part.

The problem in most cases, it's a He said / She said (or vica versa, or he/he or she/he or whatever gender...)

[Wrathbringer]

The problem in most cases, it's a He said / She said (or vica versa, or he/he or she/he or whatever gender...)

way to offend the other 3,221 genders by not including them.

[Parkbandit]

way to offend the other 3,221 genders by not including them.

All 3221 have been included:


or whatever gender

Stop being a genderist.

[Tenlaar]

And Tgo actually manages to find a new low, combining the "only one of his accusers was 14" defense with a nice dash of "but libruls are the REAL rapists" and just the faintest hint of "fake news." A truly masterful bullshit sandwich.

http://www.reactiongifs.com/r/cwclp.gif

[Parkbandit]

http://gazettereview.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/russell-simmons-net-worth.jpg

[Gompers]

https://i.redd.it/exd4vktt0wyz.jpg

Fucking disgusting.

[Tisket]

He asked for neither your Opinion,
your Acceptance
nor your Permission.

I see that I'm going to have to hire someone to cycle my rep. I hate that message that says I'm unable to give it out when I want. Fucking rules.

[Parkbandit]

I see that I'm going to have to hire someone to cycle my rep. I hate that message that says I'm unable to give it out when I want. Fucking rules.

What's it pay?

[Tisket]

What's it pay?

Hugs and kisses.

[~Rocktar~]

The irony in that single sentence is overwhelming.

It is expressed in the same manner as your comment which is mirrors. Sorry that you don't like mirrors.


The rest of your wordy post is just a bunch of fearful ignorance.

I do apologize that facts and opinions hurt your little feelings because they don't fall in line with your narrow view of misandry.

[Tisket]

It is expressed in the same manner as your comment which is mirrors. Sorry that you don't like mirrors.



I do apologize that facts and opinions hurt your little feelings because they don't fall in line with your narrow view of misandry.

So all these women (and men) claiming sexual harassment are just out to topple the patriarchy?

Man, you get more ridiculous each time you post.

[Taernath]

Whoa who would have thought a guy who is into Gorean slave ERP has weird views on women and sexual harassment?

[~Rocktar~]

So all these women (and men) claiming sexual harassment are just out to topple the patriarchy?

Man, you get more ridiculous each time you post.

I don't know which is more inane, your hysterical rantings because I dared to suggest that we should apply a critical eye to accusations that ruin people's lives to determine their veracity and perhaps to establish some kind of genuine guideline on what is and isn't harassment so that we protect the rights of the accused properly OR your ridiculous leap of fancy in claiming that I am worried that accusations of harassment will topple some patriarchy also in your fantasy land.

[Nieninque]

The problem in most cases, it's a He said / She said (or vica versa, or he/he or she/he or whatever gender...)


That's the way it is in all cases. There is often corroboration of various aspects.

Sexual assault is the only crime though, where the investigation begins by disbelieving the victim.

[Nieninque]

I don't know which is more inane, your hysterical rantings because I dared to suggest that we should apply a critical eye to accusations that ruin people's lives to determine their veracity and perhaps to establish some kind of genuine guideline on what is and isn't harassment so that we protect the rights of the accused properly OR your ridiculous leap of fancy in claiming that I am worried that accusations of harassment will topple some patriarchy also in your fantasy land.

Thereby proving my previous post.

Why would you apply a critical eye to allegations of sexual assault. That isnt the starting point for allegations of fraud or robbery. Why sexual assault?
There is no greater incidence of false allegations of sexual assault than any other crime, so why are abuse victims treated with "a critical eye" (aka, scepticism/disbelief) when in fact all that needs to happen is for the evidence to be gathered non-judgementally, then applied to criminal law thresholds to see whether it meets the burden of proof?

[ClydeR]

This has to do with the bullshit narrative that we're supposed to ignore the allegations if it's just one or two victims, as is the case with George Takei and Al Franken. Oh, wait, maybe we're just supposed to ignore one or two allegations if they are hurled at a Democrat? Like I said, we need rules established


There are rules..


"One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established." Deuteronomy 19:15

[~Rocktar~]

Thereby proving my previous post.

Why would you apply a critical eye to allegations of sexual assault. That isnt the starting point for allegations of fraud or robbery. Why sexual assault?
There is no greater incidence of false allegations of sexual assault than any other crime, so why are abuse victims treated with "a critical eye" (aka, scepticism/disbelief) when in fact all that needs to happen is for the evidence to be gathered non-judgementally, then applied to criminal law thresholds to see whether it meets the burden of proof?

Incorrect. When someone accuses another of fraud, someone reviews the complaint to determine if it is possibly, in fact fraud and not just regret or stupidity. This is EXACTLY what I think is not happening now. People hear an accusation and the roasting begins, jobs are lost, careers ended and so on all the while, no standard of what is and isn't abuse/harassment and barely any responsibility for any false accusations. Also, there is no real standard for what is and what is not harassment or abuse.

So you have a system where the accusation makes you guilty and you suffer the consequences of that without trial, without evidence and without even a reasonable guideline of what is and is not abuse/harassment and yet you and others can't see the problem with this? And I am the evil misogynist because I want to actually use the justice system properly and protect the rights of the accused from abuse. What's wrong with this picture?

[Tisket]

LOL, Rocktard called a woman hysterical because she didn't agree with him. What a surprise.

[Latrinsorm]

Al Franken should resign. So far Democrats have been calling for Roy Moore's head based on allegations and here we have photographic evidence of Franken's misdeeds and he shouldn't resign? Not to mention in most cases of Moore's it was him dating 16 year old girls, not even illegal in Alabama.

It's time for these people to reap what they sow. Or are they going to come out with a guidebook to let us know what is and is not acceptable behavior for a sitting Senator? Are they going to let us know the magical number of alleged victims that need to come forward before the allegations are taken seriously? Does photographic evidence not carry more weight than someone's unverified accusations?

This is the problem when you insist on going after your political opponents for everything without first establishing boundaries; sometimes it comes back to bite you in the ass.If Senator Franken resigns (which I think he should) the Democrat Governor will just appoint another Democrat Senator. If Moore formally withdraws from the campaign, the Democrat will win. That's why no Republican is demanding or even suggesting a quid pro quo here. Happy to help.
How many molesters and rapists ask their victims if they can do X, Y, and Z to them? Zero. Absolutely fucking zero.You are wildly misinformed on this topic, but nowhere more than this.
We live in a nation of laws founded on the idea that people are innocent until proven guilty.*in a court of law

[Nieninque]

Incorrect.

He says,


When someone accuses another of fraud, someone reviews the complaint to determine if it is possibly, in fact fraud

Proving my point once again.

In the case of fraud, one gathers the evidence submits the necessary tests against the burden of proof.

With sexual assault, one asks the victim whether they are lying. One then behaves as though the victim is lying...then when confirmation bias comes to be, one castigates the victim for lying...even though they arent.

[HeyJoe]

I am not wrong. There is a line between real harassment and what is just crude behavior and people will get to where they take it too far and can't tell the difference. When you cry fire enough times, people stop listening. It is good that people can come forward and be believed. It is bad when useless pieces of flesh can falsely accuse people, ruin their life and possibly get them in prison because they regret their decisions or just think it's funny.

There are a lot of crimes these days where you are guilty until proven innocent, and then you are still guilty. Rape, molestation, sexual harassment and so on. This is bullshit and it will come back to bite people in the ass. We are past that line with the discussion of race and racism, we are running toward the line at break neck speed with sexual harassment and so on assuming that we have not already passed it.

I have been the victim of false accusations of rape, sexual harassment and racism. In each case, it was a case of someone got their feelings hurt and tried to get even in whatever way was handy. This isn't helpful for working on ending real racism, real harassment, real exploitation and other issues. Saying that the concern for where the line is and that we need to work with caution, reason and thoughtful deliberation on finding it and dealing with the issues is not wrong. Saying that we should take all cases of accusations as truth 100% truth is mush headed.

You have had multiple people "falsely" accuse you, eh? Ever think that maybe, just maybe, it isn't them, it is you?

Nah, I'm sure I'm just talking crazy.

[~Rocktar~]

LOL, Rocktard called a woman hysterical because she didn't agree with him. What a surprise.

Actually I am calling YOU hysterical because you have gone off on an irrational rant simply because I want to see sexual harassment and abuse allegations investigated properly, the rights of the accused protected equally under the law and false accusers held accountable and you want anyone that is accused to be persecuted until death without the thinest shred of evidence. I disagreed with you and off you went into a nearly incoherent screed.



Proving my point once again.

In the case of fraud, one gathers the evidence submits the necessary tests against the burden of proof.

With sexual assault, one asks the victim whether they are lying. One then behaves as though the victim is lying...then when confirmation bias comes to be, one castigates the victim for lying...even though they arent.

You really have no clue what you are talking about when it comes to criminal investigations. Also, I am pretty much arguing for the presentation of evidence and a clear guideline which is what you say you want however you are clearly too stupid to understand that. Not my fault.


You have had multiple people "falsely" accuse you, eh? Ever think that maybe, just maybe, it isn't them, it is you?

Nah, I'm sure I'm just talking crazy.

Being in a management role in a call center, no, it's not me, it was them. It is a terribly common thing, so much so that training is provided for dealing with it. Since call centers are predominantly staffed by women, it is very common tactic used against all members of management regardless of sex or sexual orientation.

[Parkbandit]

That's the way it is in all cases. There is often corroboration of various aspects.

Sexual assault is the only crime though, where the investigation begins by disbelieving the victim.

Yes, yes.... we should always believe the victim, no matter what.....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke_lacrosse_case

[Gelston]

I personally feel that in cases of sexual assault, rape, etc... The police should keep both identities secret until the trial ends. At that time if the person is guilty, then release their ID.

This current stuff though, nothing is going to the police. Straight to social media. Yes, there are folks who doubt every woman's claim, but I think it still destroy's the accused's standing in society.

[drauz]

I personally feel that in cases of sexual assault, rape, etc... The police should keep both identities secret until the trial ends. At that time if the person is guilty, then release their ID.

This current stuff though, nothing is going to the police. Straight to social media. Yes, there are folks who doubt every woman's claim, but I think it still destroy's the accused's standing in society.

^ This exactly.

You lose credibility with me when you go straight to social media before going to the police.

[subzero]

The world would be a better place without social media.

[Latrinsorm]

white men fear change

sky remains blue

water remains wet

more news at 11

[Tgo01]

I don't see why it matters that a lot of them were legal to you?

Because people are using the argument that we should believe Roy Moore is guilty because he has "so many accusers", yet at first all but one "accuser" was just stating he dated/tried to date them when they were between 16 and 18 years old.

Yet Al Franken is largely getting a pass even with photographic evidence because "It's just one accuser." Same with George Takei. Why was Roy Moore being demonized with just one accuser yet these two are let off the hook?

Either we believe all accusers or we don't believe all accusers. Let's stop with this clearly obvious partisan attack bullshit.

[Tgo01]

And Tgo actually manages to find a new low, combining the "only one of his accusers was 14" defense with a nice dash of "but libruls are the REAL rapists" and just the faintest hint of "fake news." A truly masterful bullshit sandwich.

http://www.reactiongifs.com/r/cwclp.gif

At this point you either can't read or you are once again misrepresenting my arguments because you are one of the most pathetic pieces of shit on this forum.

[Gelston]

Because people are using the argument that we should believe Roy Moore is guilty because he has "so many accusers", yet at first all but one "accuser" was just stating he dated/tried to date them when they were between 16 and 18 years old.

Yet Al Franken is largely getting a pass even with photographic evidence because "It's just one accuser." Same with George Takei. Why was Roy Moore being demonized with just one accuser yet these two are let off the hook?

Either we believe all accusers or we don't believe all accusers. Let's stop with this clearly obvious partisan attack bullshit.

Who is giving Franken a pass? I've seen nothing but outrage expressed at him. There is also a difference, what Moore is accused of is a lot more severe.

[Tgo01]

That's the way it is in all cases.

Nope. There is actual photographic evidence of Al Franken sexually assaulting a woman but he has largely been given a pass because he's A) A Democrat B) The woman he attacked is a Republican and C) He "apologized" and basically called her other allegations bullshit because there is no photographic evidence of her other accusations.

[drauz]

white men fear change

sky remains blue

water remains wet

more news at 11

https://media.giphy.com/media/qmfpjpAT2fJRK/giphy.gif

[Tgo01]

If Senator Franken resigns (which I think he should) the Democrat Governor will just appoint another Democrat Senator.

I don't give a flying fuck. I want there to be consistent rules in this shit. Maybe you should stop being a partisan hack, Mr "Republican."


If Moore formally withdraws from the campaign, the Democrat will win.

Depends if the Democrat gets enough votes. Moore's name stays on the ballot even if he drops out and if he gets the most votes then the election is null and they hold a new election.


That's why no Republican is demanding or even suggesting a quid pro quo here. Happy to help.

I'm not "demanding" a quid pro quo, stop being stupid. I'm "demanding" people be consistent in their shit.

[Neveragain]

white men fear change

sky remains blue

water remains wet

more news at 11

http://share.gifyoutube.com/ryb.gif

[Tgo01]

Who is giving Franken a pass? I've seen nothing but outrage expressed at him.

Who has called for him to resign? Any Democrats? Any prominent Democrats? So far the worst I've heard is he MIGHT face a senate ethics investigation. Scary! The most an ethics investigation has done in the past 10+ years is write a letter to a senator basically telling them they should have known better.

Bill Maher even went on his stupid show to say Franken shouldn't resign. ParkBandit posted something by some Republican stating Fraken shouldn't lose his career over his allegations.

Why not? Why is alleged groping a 14 year old 40 years ago grounds for this guy to not even be given a chance to be senator, but actual photographic evidence of him grabbing a woman's tits 10 years and allegations that he sexually assaulted her not grounds for him to be removed/forced to resign?

[Gelston]

Who has called for him to resign? Any Democrats? Any prominent Democrats? So far the worst I've heard is he MIGHT face a senate ethics investigation. Scary! The most an ethics investigation has done in the past 10+ years is write a letter to a senator basically telling them they should have known better.

Bill Maher even went on his stupid show to say Franken shouldn't resign. ParkBandit posted something by some Republican stating Fraken shouldn't lose his career over his allegations.

Why not? Why is alleged groping a 14 year old 40 years ago grounds for this guy to not even be given a chance to be senator, but actual photographic evidence of him grabbing a woman's tits 10 years and allegations that he sexually assaulted her not grounds for him to be removed/forced to resign?

Yeah, he grabbed so much tit through kevlar and SAPI plate. It is unfortunate that you seem to find it the same as child rape. Read up on Roy Moore's history in the first place. He was a dirtbag before these allegations. Most Republicans didn't want him running even before the allegations.

[Tgo01]

Yeah, he grabbed so much tit through kevlar and SAPI plate.

So it's okay to grab a woman's tits as long as her tits are protected via clothing? Or does it have to be specifically kevlar?


It is unfortunate that you seem to find it the same as child rape.

He groped the 14 year old, I'm not "defending" his alleged actions, but let's get the facts straight here.

So is that the line then? Allegedly groping a 14 year old 40 years ago means you can't be in the senate, but photographic evidence of grabbing a woman's tits 10 years ago and allegations that he sexually assaulted her means you can be a senator? I just want someone to tell me where the line is.

[Gelston]

So it's okay to grab a woman's tits as long as her tits are protected via clothing? Or does it have to be specifically kevlar?



He groped the 14 year old, I'm not "defending" his alleged actions, but let's get the facts straight here.

So is that the line then? Allegedly groping a 14 year old 40 years ago means you can't be in the senate, but photographic evidence of grabbing a woman's tits 10 years ago and allegations that he sexually assaulted her means you can be a senator? I just want someone to tell me where the line is.

No, it is still a lewd act that he shouldn't have done, but he wasn't "grabbing her tits".

As for the second part, that is up to the voters to decide isn't it?

[Tgo01]

No, it is still a lude act that he shouldn't have done, but he wasn't "grabbing her tits".

As for the second part, that is up to the voters to decide isn't it?

And that's fine if that's the position people want to take, but people are calling for Roy Moore to drop out and the senate is already threatening to expel him if he wins.

[Neveragain]

tell me where the line is.

According to the wisdom of Great White, it's the state line.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bz61YQWZuYU

[Gelston]

And that's fine if that's the position people want to take, but people are calling for Roy Moore to drop out and the senate is already threatening to expel him if he wins.

I don't have a problem with them tell him to drop out. Now, if he is elected, they cannot remove him from the Senate for actions that took place while he was not a senator. And even if they somehow found a Constitutional way to do it, there'd be a special election inwhich he could run and win again. This has actually happened before when another Congressman was removed.

[Latrinsorm]

I don't give a flying fuck. I want there to be consistent rules in this shit. Maybe you should stop being a partisan hack, Mr "Republican."I didn't say you did, I patiently explained to you why you're all alone on this ridiculous limb.
Depends if the Democrat gets enough votes. Moore's name stays on the ballot even if he drops out and if he gets the most votes then the election is null and they hold a new election.Good luck with that.
I'm not "demanding" a quid pro quo, stop being stupid. I'm "demanding" people be consistent in their shit.You sir, are no Republican.

[Archigeek]

I don't have a problem with them tell him to drop out. Now, if he is elected, they cannot remove him from the Senate for actions that took place while he was not a senator. And even if they somehow found a Constitutional way to do it, there'd be a special election inwhich he could run and win again. This has actually happened before when another Congressman was removed.

The Senate can remove a senator at any time for any reason with a 2/3rds majority vote.


Under Article I, Section 5, clause 2, of the Constitution, a Member of Congress may be removed from office before the normal expiration of his or her constitutional term by an “expulsion” from the Senate (if a Senator) or from the House of Representatives (if a Representative) upon a formal vote on a resolution agreed ...

[Latrinsorm]

I don't have a problem with them tell him to drop out. Now, if he is elected, they cannot remove him from the Senate for actions that took place while he was not a senator. And even if they somehow found a Constitutional way to do it, there'd be a special election inwhich he could run and win again. This has actually happened before when another Congressman was removed.The Constitution gives the Senate (and House) absolute discretion in expelling a member in Article 1 Section 5. It does not require a conviction, actions taking place while serving, or any other condition whatsoever.

As you say there would be another election in that event, but even if Moore won again it would not constitute a Constitutional crisis. What you have to remember is the Founding Fathers gave no f***s about democracy or the common people. They would be perfectly happy for the Senate to expel Moore or any other Senator indefinitely, that's why they gave the Senate the power to do so.

[Gelston]

The Constitution gives the Senate (and House) absolute discretion in expelling a member in Article 1 Section 5. It does not require a conviction, actions taking place while serving, or any other condition whatsoever.

As you say there would be another election in that event, but even if Moore won again it would not constitute a Constitutional crisis. What you have to remember is the Founding Fathers gave no f***s about democracy or the common people. They would be perfectly happy for the Senate to expel Moore or any other Senator indefinitely, that's why they gave the Senate the power to do so.

It says he can be expelled for disorderly behavior. If he isn't behaving disorderly, he can't be expelled.

[Tgo01]

I didn't say you did, I patiently explained to you why you're all alone on this ridiculous limb.

All alone on a ridiculous limb that I never claimed to have climbed on to? Stop strawmanning.

[Latrinsorm]

It says he can be expelled for disorderly behavior. If he isn't behaving disorderly, he can't be expelled.Even if we pretend disorderly behavior isn't wildly arbitrary, the Constitution says he can be *punished* for disorderly behavior. In a separate clause it specifies the criteria for expulsion. I will list those criteria here:

-with the concurrence of two thirds

end of list

happy to help

[Gelston]

Even if we pretend disorderly behavior isn't wildly arbitrary, the Constitution says he can be *punished* for disorderly behavior. In a separate clause it specifies the criteria for expulsion. I will list those criteria here:

-with the concurrence of two thirds

end of list

happy to help

If he isn't exhibiting disorderly behavior, he can't be punished for it. Infact, a member of congress has been expelled for disorderly behavior before. They got reelected right back in. Did Congress try to expel them again? Sure as fuck didn't.

[Archigeek]

If he isn't exhibiting disorderly behavior, he can't be punished for it. Infact, a member of congress has been expelled for disorderly behavior before. They got reelected right back in. Did Congress try to expel them again? Sure as fuck didn't.

There is no prerequisite of disorderly behavior for expulsion. They can expel anyone for ANY reason whatsoever, so long as they get the requisite 2/3rds votes to do so.

[Tisket]

Actually I am calling YOU hysterical because you have gone off on an irrational rant simply because I want to see sexual harassment and abuse allegations investigated properly, the rights of the accused protected equally under the law and false accusers held accountable and you want anyone that is accused to be persecuted until death without the thinest shred of evidence. I disagreed with you and off you went into a nearly incoherent screed.

I understand your desire to rewrite the narrative in this thread and I'm certain you feel no one will bother fact checking but let me remind you that I simply told you that you were wrong and insincere and asked a few questions. You then went on a rant about how "callous, self righteous, pompous, arrogant and condescending" you thought I was. I suppose because I asked you for clarification on your opinion.

So really, the only one who has responded in an hysterical fashion is yourself. I know it's embarrassing to have it pointed out but be a man and own it.

Listen, I understand you are one of those unfortunate men who feels that any gains toward equality made by women is a loss for men and that any gains by minorities is a loss for the white man but what astonishes me is that you can't see that in yourself. Because let me tell you, you are completely transparent to the rest of us and all of your wordy rants have only served to reinforce my already low opinion of you as a moron with a thesaurus.

[Tisket]

Whoa who would have thought a guy who is into Gorean slave ERP has weird views on women and sexual harassment?

Funniest fucking post of the week.

[Nieninque]

You really have no clue what you are talking about when it comes to criminal investigations.

I guess that couple of years working for the National Crime Agency were wasted then..?


Being in a management role in a call center...

Oh, well I guess in THAT role, you know all there is to know about criminal investigations..?


Yes, yes.... we should always believe the victim, no matter what.....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke_lacrosse_case

Investigators should be entirely neutral with their believing/disbelieving switch. It is their job to gather evidence and present it before a Court. The problem is that they* act in such a way that they present as cynical and therefore dissuade victims from disclosing abuse and engaging in the criminal justice system.

* - there are of course areas where good practice is exercised. Usually in specialist sexual assault teams. The problem is that they are rarely the first point of call and PC Joe Blow on the front desk acting like a douche acts as sufficient demotivator for them to wait to speak to the people who know what they are doing.


^ This exactly.

You lose credibility with me when you go straight to social media before going to the police.

Luckily, credibility with you comes fairly low down the list for victims of sexual abuse...unless it is someone you know...then shame on you for not being supportive to someone you know who has been sexually abused. Reporting abuse to the police is a terrifying experience. SOmetimes as terrifying as the abuse itself. There are a million and one reasons why someone might not report it to the old bill.

[drauz]

Reporting abuse to the police is a terrifying experience. SOmetimes as terrifying as the abuse itself. There are a million and one reasons why someone might not report it to the old bill.

How is it more terrifying than announcing it to the world?

[Nieninque]

How is it more terrifying than announcing it to the world?

At the moment there is safety in numbers, which adds support/removes doubt, so victims feel they are more likely to be believed. Things are in a strange place at the moment as well. There is an increase in people accepting that something might have happened, which is out of the norm, so people probably feel that now is a good time to talk about their own abuse - to anyone who will listen. There is still a huge difference between talking about it to people on social media or down the pub, than there is subjecting yourself to the inquisition and torture that is the criminal justice system. Not least because, on social media, you share as much as you want, when you want and how you want. When you report to the Police, you share everything, in the way they want and how they want. That lack of control is a big thing.

[Gelston]

There is no prerequisite of disorderly behavior for expulsion. They can expel anyone for ANY reason whatsoever, so long as they get the requisite 2/3rds votes to do so.

I guess the Constitution is just full of shit then.

[Parkbandit]

Investigators should be entirely neutral with their believing/disbelieving switch. It is their job to gather evidence and present it before a Court. The problem is that they* act in such a way that they present as cynical and therefore dissuade victims from disclosing abuse and engaging in the criminal justice system.

* - there are of course areas where good practice is exercised. Usually in specialist sexual assault teams. The problem is that they are rarely the first point of call and PC Joe Blow on the front desk acting like a douche acts as sufficient demotivator for them to wait to speak to the people who know what they are doing.


I don't disagree at all.

[Neveragain]

I understand your desire to rewrite the narrative in this thread and I'm certain you feel no one will bother fact checking but let me remind you that I simply told you that you were wrong and insincere and asked a few questions. You then went on a rant about how "callous, self righteous, pompous, arrogant and condescending" you thought I was. I suppose because I asked you for clarification on your opinion.

So really, the only one who has responded in an hysterical fashion is yourself. I know it's embarrassing to have it pointed out but be a man and own it.

Listen, I understand you are one of those unfortunate men who feels that any gains toward equality made by women is a loss for men and that any gains by minorities is a loss for the white man but what astonishes me is that you can't see that in yourself. Because let me tell you, you are completely transparent to the rest of us and all of your wordy rants have only served to reinforce my already low opinion of you as a moron with a thesaurus.

So it's been a while since the bucks have been looking in your direction I take it? Sadly women can't always stay 25.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vo4kDrWBa6c

[Archigeek]

I guess the Constitution is just full of shit then.

If you go back a page, I quoted the constitution in my first response to you, and Latrinsorm later did the same. There is no reason required for the removal of a member of congress, just a 2/3rds majority vote. I'm sorry you think the constitution is full of shit. it's important shit none-the-less.

[~Rocktar~]

I understand your desire to rewrite the narrative in this thread and I'm certain you feel no one will bother fact checking but let me remind you that I simply told you that you were wrong and insincere and asked a few questions. You then went on a rant about how "callous, self righteous, pompous, arrogant and condescending" you thought I was. I suppose because I asked you for clarification on your opinion.

So really, the only one who has responded in an hysterical fashion is yourself. I know it's embarrassing to have it pointed out but be a man and own it.

Listen, I understand you are one of those unfortunate men who feels that any gains toward equality made by women is a loss for men and that any gains by minorities is a loss for the white man but what astonishes me is that you can't see that in yourself. Because let me tell you, you are completely transparent to the rest of us and all of your wordy rants have only served to reinforce my already low opinion of you as a moron with a thesaurus.

You didn't ask for shit, you went off on a rant because I disagreed with you. You thinly veiled that rant with questions designed to bait me into falling into line with you or taking a position so far outside of reality that you could easily attack it. I didn't respond to your questions and called you on your shit. You again try this narrative with your inane statement suggesting my thoughts or behaviors align with ridiculous positions in order to justify to yourself that you somehow "won" this interaction all the while coming off as a whiny brat who got upset that someone didn't agree with your position of burn all the males that disagree or who might show a backbone.

OH, and I never once had to crack a thesaurus or use an online resource to flex my vocabulary a little bit. Your opinion of me matters little, your willingness to discard constitutional rights and civic decency speaks volumes about you.

[Gelston]

If you go back a page, I quoted the constitution in my first response to you, and Latrinsorm later did the same. There is no reason required for the removal of a member of congress, just a 2/3rds majority vote. I'm sorry you think the constitution is full of shit. it's important shit none-the-less.

No you didn't. You quoted an interpretation. The actual quote is "Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member." It says "and" not "or". the rules determine what is disorderly behavior, they may punish for the disorderly behavior, and the may expel for the disorderly behavior. Go ahead and keep believing Congress can jsut expel elected members because they just feel like it though. That would create a definite suppression of minority voice and that is obviously against the whole idea.

[~Rocktar~]

I guess that couple of years working for the National Crime Agency were wasted then..?

UK law and US law are different so I cannot address how the UK works, I do know how the US works fairly well and your supposition of how investigations are handled here is inaccurate based on my experience.


Oh, well I guess in THAT role, you know all there is to know about criminal investigations..?

Argue to the extreme much? I do know a good bit about how investigations into sexual harassment go so hey, your mileage may vary.


Investigators should be entirely neutral with their believing/disbelieving switch. It is their job to gather evidence and present it before a Court. The problem is that they* act in such a way that they present as cynical and therefore dissuade victims from disclosing abuse and engaging in the criminal justice system.

* - there are of course areas where good practice is exercised. Usually in specialist sexual assault teams. The problem is that they are rarely the first point of call and PC Joe Blow on the front desk acting like a douche acts as sufficient demotivator for them to wait to speak to the people who know what they are doing.

While I might agree that is how it "should" happen, it very rarely does here in the US. It starts with the accused is guilty and works back from there despite what TV crime shows try to make you think.


Luckily, credibility with you comes fairly low down the list for victims of sexual abuse...unless it is someone you know...then shame on you for not being supportive to someone you know who has been sexually abused. Reporting abuse to the police is a terrifying experience. SOmetimes as terrifying as the abuse itself. There are a million and one reasons why someone might not report it to the old bill.

This is kind of rambling, however I agree that it is tough to report crime to the police. I have assisted people I know to report crimes, it takes work.

[drauz]

No you didn't. You quoted an interpretation. The actual quote is "Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member." It says "and" not "or". the rules determine what is disorderly behavior, they may punish for the disorderly behavior, and the may expel for the disorderly behavior. Go ahead and keep believing Congress can jsut expel elected members because they just feel like it though. That would create a definite suppression of minority voice and that is obviously against the whole idea.

I believe it is saying they can do all three, not that all three have to happen at the same time... So they can determine their Rules for Proceedings. They can punish a member for disorderly behavior. They can also expel a member with a 2/3 majority. Not sure why you are focusing on the "and".

If they wanted to kick someone out because they farted they could so long as they have a 2/3 majority for the vote.

[ClydeR]

No you didn't. You quoted an interpretation. The actual quote is "Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member." It says "and" not "or". the rules determine what is disorderly behavior, they may punish for the disorderly behavior, and the may expel for the disorderly behavior. Go ahead and keep believing Congress can jsut expel elected members because they just feel like it though. That would create a definite suppression of minority voice and that is obviously against the whole idea.

This is what happens when schools stop teaching diagraming sentences.

[Gelston]

I believe it is saying they can do all three, not that all three have to happen at the same time... So they can determine their Rules for Proceedings. They can punish a member for disorderly behavior. They can also expel a member with a 2/3 majority. Not sure why you are focusing on the "and".

If they wanted to kick someone out because they farted they could so long as they have a 2/3 majority for the vote.

Because all three ideas are related, hence the "and". If it said or, it would be saying they are independent. Still, look through the history of EVERY expulsion. They all had a reason that happened during their current term.

[Archigeek]

No you didn't. You quoted an interpretation. The actual quote is "Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member." It says "and" not "or". the rules determine what is disorderly behavior, they may punish for the disorderly behavior, and the may expel for the disorderly behavior. Go ahead and keep believing Congress can jsut expel elected members because they just feel like it though. That would create a definite suppression of minority voice and that is obviously against the whole idea.

I stand corrected on the first part of your statement above, I didn't post a quote. Apologies. I do however stand by the claim that they can expel any member at any time for any reason.

You are hanging your hat on a conjunction. You're starting to sound like Bill Clinton arguing over the word "is." A better way to parse the logic of a sentence that contains three parts is to see how it reads with one of the parts missing. By your argument, the sentence only applies to disorderly conduct, which would then mean that the other two parts of the sentence don't apply except in cases of disorderly conduct. This makes no sense, because of course congress gets to make its own rules with no regard whatsoever to disorderly conduct.

Additionally, as others have pointed out, "disorderly conduct" is wildly open to interpretation.

Lastly, the proof is in the pudding. If you look at the US Senate's list of those who have been expelled (or a 2/3rds majority wasn't met to expel them), not a single one was expelled for disorderly conduct. Most of them were expelled for "support of the confederacy" but also for a wide variety of other reasons. No one was expelled for disorderly conduct.

[Gelston]

I stand corrected on the first part of your statement above, I didn't post a quote. Apologies. I do however stand by the claim that they can expel any member at any time for any reason.

You are hanging your hat on a conjunction. You're starting to sound like Bill Clinton arguing over the word "is." A better way to parse the logic of a sentence that contains three parts is to see how it reads with one of the parts missing. By your argument, the sentence only applies to disorderly conduct, which would then mean that the other two parts of the sentence don't apply except in cases of disorderly conduct. This makes no sense, because of course congress gets to make its own rules with no regard whatsoever to disorderly conduct.

Additionally, as others have pointed out, "disorderly conduct" is wildly open to interpretation.

Lastly, the proof is in the pudding. If you look at the US Senate's list of those who have been expelled (or a 2/3rds majority wasn't met to expel them), not a single one was expelled for disorderly conduct. Most of them were expelled for "support of the confederacy" but also for a wide variety of other reasons. No one was expelled for disorderly conduct.

I would consider "support of the Confederacy" to be disorderly conduct, seeing as the US was at war with the Confederacy. The proof is in the pudding, every instance is considered disorderly conduct.

[Gelston]

A second woman has accused Sen. Al Franken of groping her, saying the Minnesota Democrat inappropriately touched her in 2010.

The women alleges Franken grabbed her buttocks while posing for a photo with her at the Minnesota State Fair, according to CNN.

The woman, Lindsay Menz, also tweeted about the alleged incident last Thursday, in response to explosive claims by Los Angeles radio anchor Leeann Tweeden that Franken forcibly kissed and groped her during a 2006 USO tour.

"In August 2010, @alfranken grabbed me while taking a photo together at the Minnesota State Fair. I felt violated & embarassed. I 100% believe your account of him & his actions, @LeeannTweeden. Thank you for sharing your story," Menz tweeted.


Hey, this happened while he was a Senator. Wonder if he is still doing shit like this?

[Androidpk]

Trump mocking Franken. Hillary mocking Trump. Is this real life?

[ClydeR]

Additionally, as others have pointed out, "disorderly conduct" is wildly open to interpretation.

Yes, very broad. It's exactly what that lady was charged with for laughing at Jeff Sessions (https://www.snopes.com/woman-prosecuted-laughing-sessions/). If they would try to send her to jail for laughing, then you know they would punish each other for the same thing.

[Tisket]

You didn't ask for shit, you went off on a rant because I disagreed with you.

I didn't ask a series of questions? Oh wait a second....


You thinly veiled that rant with questions designed to bait me into falling into line with you or taking a position so far outside of reality that you could easily attack it. I didn't respond to your questions

You can't even keep track of your wandering logic within one post. Understandable when you are so easily goaded. I really hope you don't take your impotent anger and frustration out on the poor women that work with you. Sounds like you've made a habit of doing just that though :(

[Tisket]

So it's been a while since the bucks have been looking in your direction I take it? Sadly women can't always stay 25.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vo4kDrWBa6c

I'm pretty much unoffendable but, I like to at least understand the insults that come my way. I don't get this one though. The clip is funny I guess but what has it to do with the post you quoted? Or maybe it was just a random opportunity to take a swipe at me? If so, uh, cool?

[Jhynnifer]

I'm pretty much unoffendable but, I like to at least understand the insults that come my way. I don't get this one though. The clip is funny I guess but what has it to do with the post you quoted? Or maybe it was just a random opportunity to take a swipe at me? If so, uh, cool?

I think he's insinuating you're not as hot as you were at 25. Which is, of course, the go to insult for some idiotic reason. If you manage to deflect this one gracefully he'll most likely call you a whore.

[Tisket]

I think he's insinuating you're not as hot as you were at 25. Which is, of course, the go to insult for some idiotic reason. If you manage to deflect this one gracefully he'll most likely call you a whore.

I'm not as hot as when I was 25. What woman is? I might be a whore though. I could be!

[Gelston]

I'm not as hot as when I was 25. What woman is? I might be a whore though. I could be!

I'm hotter than I was at 25.

[Jhynnifer]

I'm not as hot as when I was 25. What woman is? I might be a whore though. I could be!

Which is why the standard "go-to" insults of Ugly/Fat/Old and Whore are so hilarious. Also, we know you have the makings of an amazing whore, just hike up that skirt and unbutton that blouse a little. Yeah, just like that.


I'm hotter than I was at 25.

Are you a woman? =p

[Wrathbringer]

Are you a woman? =p

According to the thread tags, yes, he is.

[Tisket]

I'm hotter than I was at 25.

Aging men fall into two camps: balding and beer-bellied or the silver fox. The attractive silver fox is a rare creature indeed.

[Gelston]

Are you a woman? =p

Sexist. Reported.


Aging men fall into two camps: balding and beer-bellied or the silver fox. The attractive silver fox is a rare creature indeed.

According to studies, the beer-bellied dad body is the most attractive. You may not like it, but it is peak performance.

[Tisket]

According to studies, the beer-bellied dad body is the most attractive. You may not like it, but it is peak performance.

Your wishful thinking doesn't count as a study.

[Gelston]

Your wishful thinking doesn't count as a study.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2017/01/06/dad-bods_n_14008484.html

https://www.mensfitness.com/women/dating-advice/we-asked-100-women-do-you-guys-who-have-dad-bods

https://www.maxim.com/maxim-man/dad-bod-physique-more-attractive-live-longer-2016-11

https://hellogiggles.com/beauty/surveys-say-male-body-type-considered-attractive/

https://www.menshealth.com/guy-wisdom/women-prefer-dad-bod

https://www.unilad.co.uk/health/men-with-dad-bods-are-more-attractive-to-women-and-live-longer/

http://www.fhm.com/posts/these-are-the-most-preferred-body-types-and-most-attractive-body-parts-on-men-and-women-121540

[Taernath]

If hellogiggles.com says it's true, that's enough for me.

[Tisket]

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2017/01/06/dad-bods_n_14008484.html

https://www.mensfitness.com/women/dating-advice/we-asked-100-women-do-you-guys-who-have-dad-bods

https://www.maxim.com/maxim-man/dad-bod-physique-more-attractive-live-longer-2016-11

https://hellogiggles.com/beauty/surveys-say-male-body-type-considered-attractive/

https://www.menshealth.com/guy-wisdom/women-prefer-dad-bod

https://www.unilad.co.uk/health/men-with-dad-bods-are-more-attractive-to-women-and-live-longer/

http://www.fhm.com/posts/these-are-the-most-preferred-body-types-and-most-attractive-body-parts-on-men-and-women-121540

All written by balding men with beer bellies.

[Parkbandit]

Aging men fall into two camps: balding and beer-bellied or the silver fox. The attractive silver fox is a rare creature indeed.

:embarrassed:

[Gelston]

All written by balding men with beer bellies.

Does this shirt turn you on?

https://scontent.fmem1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/23722366_10160328453830377_2560867384226673032_n.j pg?oh=c9503bf7915f2e4b59ceafac7dd12b95&oe=5A9FC47D

[Tisket]

Does this shirt turn you on?

https://scontent.fmem1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/23722366_10160328453830377_2560867384226673032_n.j pg?oh=c9503bf7915f2e4b59ceafac7dd12b95&oe=5A9FC47D

lol

[Parkbandit]

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/pJ0WQ86-h0s/maxresdefault.jpg

[Erous]

Does this shirt turn you on?

https://scontent.fmem1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/23722366_10160328453830377_2560867384226673032_n.j pg?oh=c9503bf7915f2e4b59ceafac7dd12b95&oe=5A9FC47D

That's my Christmas outfit...it's just, well...not a shirt

[Latrinsorm]

If he isn't exhibiting disorderly behavior, he can't be punished for it.He can't be punished. He can be expelled. They are two separate clauses, the "for" prepositional phrase only applies to the first just like the "with" prepositional phrase only applies to the second.

Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.

I have a skillet, a plunger for plunging the toilet, and, with simply fabulous style, nail polish remover.

That sentence does not indicate I plunge the toilet with nail polish remover.
Infact, a member of congress has been expelled for disorderly behavior before. They got reelected right back in. Did Congress try to expel them again? Sure as fuck didn't.None of the 20 members of Congress ever expelled for any reason ever ran for Congress again, let alone were re-elected, let alone served. Someone's giving you bad information.

[Neveragain]

I'm pretty much unoffendable but, I like to at least understand the insults that come my way. I don't get this one though. The clip is funny I guess but what has it to do with the post you quoted? Or maybe it was just a random opportunity to take a swipe at me? If so, uh, cool?

It really wasn't meant as an insult, it just felt like a reflective reply to your cuntastic response to Rocktar. Honestly you sound like the jaded cat lady.

[Tisket]

It really wasn't meant as an insult, it just felt like a reflective reply to your cuntastic response to Rocktar. Honestly you sound like the jaded cat lady.

Reflective...I don't think that word means what you think it means.

[drauz]

https://i.imgur.com/zWFHASU.jpg

[Neveragain]

Reflective...I don't think that word means what you think it means.

I just don't think you're grasping what was being reflected. Just like your inability to grasp blind justice.

[Tisket]

I just don't think you're grasping what was being reflected. Just like your inability to grasp blind justice.

And you're not grasping your own inability to be subtle.

[drauz]

I have a skillet, a plunger for plunging the toilet, and, with simply fabulous style, nail polish remover.

That sentence does not indicate I plunge the toilet with nail polish remover.

You would obviously do that with the skillet.

[Taernath]

Honestly you sound like the jaded cat lady.

Didn't you give up on women and join a boys only movement because women were mean to you?

[Neveragain]

Didn't you give up on women and join a boys only movement because women were mean to you?

Is that how that went? Or are you just boring us again with the same conflated story you always tell as your fat ass rides in on your white horse?

[Taernath]

Is that how that went? Or are you just boring us again with the same conflated story you always tell as your fat ass rides in on your white horse?

I'm just saying, it's weird to be using 'crazy cat lady' as a callout when you're whatever the male version is. Maybe you and Rocktard can get together and form a Gor gaming group to work out all your issues.

[Tisket]

Is that how that went? Or are you just boring us again with the same conflated story you always tell as your fat ass rides in on your white horse?

So anyone who doesn't take your side must be white knighting? I think you seriously underestimate your ability to draw fire all by yourself.

[drauz]

So anyone who doesn't take your side must be white knighting? I think you seriously underestimate your ability to draw fire all by yourself.

I think he wants a pic of your ass to prove him wrong.

[Tisket]

I think he wants a pic of your ass to prove him wrong.

No, it's Taernath's buttocks he's interested in.

[Tisket]

Also, it's amusing that he'd accuse anyone else of white knighting when that's what he was doing for Rocktard.

[drauz]

No, it's Taernath's buttocks he's interested in.

http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/a5/a52dccdeac87cc0482e646ac96c4727824775f51e918085972 40632e3f430b03.jpg

[Taernath]

No, it's Taernath's buttocks he's interested in.

I refuse to believe he is beyond redemption.

Come back to the hetero side Neveragain.

https://d35892l6ckdunh.cloudfront.net/products/images/thumb/plan-thumb-1_1.jpg

[Neveragain]

So anyone who doesn't take your side must be white knighting? I think you seriously underestimate your ability to draw fire all by yourself.

What side was I arguing for by pointing out you sounding like a bitter old hag?

No, honestly Taernath has used the same bit more times than I can remember. Why my choice to only tap women between 25-35 weighs so heavily on his mind after nearly 2 years is couch worthy.

[Neveragain]

I think he wants a pic of your ass to prove him wrong.

If I wanted to look at cottage cheese I would visit the dairy section.

[Neveragain]

I refuse to believe he is beyond redemption.

Come back to the hetero side Neveragain.

https://d35892l6ckdunh.cloudfront.net/products/images/thumb/plan-thumb-1_1.jpg

You really need to stop hogging.

[drauz]

https://i.imgur.com/0c4fxtH.gif

[subzero]

Which is why the standard "go-to" insults of Ugly/Fat/Old and Whore are so hilarious. Also, we know you have the makings of an amazing whore, just hike up that skirt and unbutton that blouse a little. Yeah, just like that.

You just sexually harassed Tittyskeeter!



Are you a woman? =p

He/she/it is still deciding.

[drauz]

Didn't you give up on women and join a boys only movement because women were mean to you?

https://media.giphy.com/media/3o6Zt461fLdszZQUfK/giphy.gif

[Neveragain]

https://media.giphy.com/media/3o6Zt461fLdszZQUfK/giphy.gif

I'll at least give Taernath credit for having some salt, you on the other hand will always ride the pine like a bitch.

[subzero]

I'll at least give Taernath credit for having some salt, you on the other hand will always ride the pine like a bitch.

What'choo got against a bitch ridin some wood?

[~Rocktar~]

I didn't ask a series of questions? Oh wait a second....



You can't even keep track of your wandering logic within one post. Understandable when you are so easily goaded. I really hope you don't take your impotent anger and frustration out on the poor women that work with you. Sounds like you've made a habit of doing just that though :(

One day you will make a rational point. In another post you said you are pretty much unoffendable yet you spent a lot of time wailing at me because I did not agree with your burn all the men position. Seems like you were pretty offended.

[Tisket]

One day you will make a rational point. In another post you said you are pretty much unoffendable yet you spent a lot of time wailing at me because I did not agree with your burn all the men position. Seems like you were pretty offended.

Why is it that people like Rocktard believe it takes any effort or emotion to post? I'm sorry posting requires such a monumental effort by you that you assume that is the case with everyone else.

[Tisket]

You just sexually harassed Tittyskeeter!

Good. Took her long enough.

[Tisket]

If I wanted to look at cottage cheese I would visit the dairy section.

I think Taernath and/or drauz needs to spam your visitors page with pics of women's cottage cheese thighs. I never visit my own visitors page any more because of them. I think I need to point them in the direction of a new target.

[Taernath]

No, honestly Taernath has used the same bit more times than I can remember. Why my choice to only tap women between 25-35 weighs so heavily on his mind after nearly 2 years is couch worthy.

If that's the fantasy you're selling, I don't think many people are buying.

[Neveragain]

If that's the fantasy you're selling, I don't think many people are buying.

Oddly enough I don't think it's on anyone else's mind but yours.

[Taernath]

Oddly enough I don't think it's on anyone else's mind but yours.

... you're the one who brought it up? If you had told us another story about how your "girlfriend" was forcing you to go to gay bars again I wouldn't have said anything.

[Tisket]

Oddly enough I don't think it's on anyone else's mind but yours.

What, that you are a lying sack of shit who sleeps alone and masturbates to pictures of women who would never give you a second glance?

I mean, I just assume that it's such a given that you are subpar in every way that most of us don't give it much thought when you post like you're some irresistible stud except to roll our eyes.

[drauz]

I think Taernath and/or drauz needs to spam your visitors page with pics of women's cottage cheese thighs. I never visit my own visitors page any more because of them. I think I need to point them in the direction of a new target.

:barfy:

[drauz]

I'll at least give Taernath credit for having some salt, you on the other hand will always ride the pine like a bitch.

https://media1.tenor.com/images/019e73528ea8f0100b558f4caf44aaaa/tenor.gif?itemid=7814402

[Neveragain]

What, that you are a lying sack of shit who sleeps alone and masturbates to pictures of women who would never give you a second glance?

I mean, I just assume that it's such a given that you are subpar in every way that most of us don't give it much thought when you post like you're some irresistible stud except to roll our eyes.


You're going to have to step it up from High School level Tisket, I believe you're the one with the collection of dick pics.

For not giving it much thought you sure are yapping on about it.

[Neveragain]

https://media1.tenor.com/images/019e73528ea8f0100b558f4caf44aaaa/tenor.gif?itemid=7814402

You could always answer to Tiskets trumpeting. Oh wait.....

[Neveragain]

... you're the one who brought it up? If you had told us another story about how your "girlfriend" was forcing you to go to gay bars again I wouldn't have said anything.


Didn't you give up on women and join a boys only movement because women were mean to you?

I believe it's you that's obsessed with my relationship decisions.

[drauz]

You could always answer to Tiskets trumpeting. Oh wait.....

Lets be honest, its been pretty obvious I don't care for you. Any excuse to fuck with you is a good reason.

Anyways, I found that youtube video you made.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EjPUPqvYEw

[Neveragain]

Lets be honest, its been pretty obvious I don't care for you. Any excuse to fuck with you is a good reason.

Anyways, I found that youtube video you made.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EjPUPqvYEw

Oh shit Drauz "I'm not emotionally ready to care for a child so I had someone murder it instead" doesn't like me. Something tells me I'm not going to lose any sleep over a dude that is googling fat chic pics.

[drauz]

Oh shit Drauz "I'm not emotionally ready to care for a child so I had someone murder it instead" doesn't like me. Something tells me I'm not going to lose any sleep over a dude that is googling fat chic pics.

Oh no, the racist, my children don't like me, my wife divorced me because i'm an asshole (but its all her fault), and boasts on a forum about the women he doesn't really get doesn't like me. Whoa is me.

[Neveragain]

Oh no, the racist, my children don't like me, my wife divorced me because i'm an asshole (but its all her fault), and boasts on a forum about the women he doesn't really get doesn't like me. Whoa is me.

Is that what happened?

Racist? Really? How sad.

[Tisket]

You're going to have to step it up from High School level Tisket, I believe you're the one with the collection of dick pics.

For not giving it much thought you sure are yapping on about it.

I don't have the dick pics anymore. All my PMs got deleted. Well except for RC's pic.

Also, your use of random capitalization for words that shouldn't be capitalized is as bad as Rocktard's. The only time you capitalize "high school" is if you name a specific one, like Roosevelt High School.

This lesson brought to you courtesy of someone who, unlike yourself, paid attention in class. You're welcome.

[drauz]

Is that what happened?

Racist? Really? How sad.

Yes, that is exactly what happened.

I've literally shown you being a racist because every single time you have selective memory about it and say "derp Racist? Show me!!111". I show you and you stop responding. I'm not going to bother for the fourth time of doing this little Mr. Potatoeagain game and just ask everyone else if they think I'm correct.

[Neveragain]

Yes, that is exactly what happened.

I've literally shown you being a racist because every single time you have selective memory about it and say "derp Racist? Show me!!111". I show you and you stop responding. I'm not going to bother for the fourth time of doing this little Mr. Potatoeagain game and just ask everyone else if they think I'm correct.

Wait, you act as if I care.

[Taernath]

I believe it's you that's obsessed with my relationship decisions.

Because really they're pretty fucking funny and everyone loves a good trainwreck. If you weren't in the habit of offering awkward, revealing glimpses into your life these boards would be a lot less entertaining.

[Tisket]

Wait, you act as if I care.

...


For not giving it much thought you sure are yapping on about it.

[Neveragain]

I don't have the dick pics anymore. All my PMs got deleted. Well except for RC's pic.

Also, your use of random capitalization for words that shouldn't be capitalized is as bad as Rocktard's. The only time you capitalize "high school" is if you name a specific one, like Roosevelt High School.

This lesson brought to you courtesy of someone who, unlike yourself, paid attention in class. You're welcome.

I said step up and not step down to grammar nazi.

[Neveragain]

Because really they're pretty fucking funny and everyone loves a good trainwreck. If you weren't in the habit of offering awkward, revealing glimpses into your life these boards would be a lot less entertaining.

You're just reinforcing the argument that you're obsessed with me, you can stop any time, it's getting creepy.

[Tisket]

I said step up and not step down to grammar nazi.

I'm being helpful by pointing out your shortcomings but I understand that you don't like women who are smarter than you.

Your life must be just filled with disappointment and frustration.

[Neveragain]

I'm being helpful by pointing out your shortcomings but I understand that you don't like women who are smarter than you.

Your life must be just filled with disappointment and frustration.

Oh no, I find intelligent women very attractive. I just don't think a woman can be that intelligent if grammar is their hill to die on, that and being a jaded cunt kills any of the intellectual points their may be.

[Taernath]

You're just reinforcing the argument that you're obsessed with me, you can stop any time, it's getting creepy.

I wouldn't read too much into my responses, I'm watching Netflix and refreshing my phone every 15 minutes. Like I said man, you're a trainwreck.

[Tisket]

Oh no, I find intelligent women very attractive. I just don't think a woman can be that intelligent if grammar is their hill to die on, that and being a jaded cunt kills any of the intellectual points their may be.

"There" is not interchangeable with "their." Once again, you are welcome.

[Neveragain]

I wouldn't read too much into my responses, I'm watching Netflix and refreshing my phone every 15 minutes. Like I said man, you're a trainwreck.

What's a trainwreck about it?

All my kids are successful adults, I do what I want, when I want. I have a good job, married once for 17 years. I just refuse to date women from my generation...........where's the trainwreck here Taernath?

As I said before, it's the same over hyped bullshit you bring to the table every few months or so. Is your life this fucking boring?

[Taernath]

What's a trainwreck about it?

All my kids are successful adults, I do what I want, when I want. I have a good job, married once for 17 years. I just refuse to date women from my generation...........where's the trainwreck here Taernath?

As I said before, it's the same over hyped bullshit you bring to the table every few months or so. Is your life this fucking boring?

If you're asking me to link to one of the many meltdowns you've had I'm going to have to pass because that's really more effort than I'm willing to expend at this point.

[Neveragain]

"There" is not interchangeable with "their." Once again, you are welcome.

I'm glad we got that out of the way. I'm more impressed with you getting Drauz to google fat chics.

8865

[drauz]

I just refuse to date women from my generation...........where's the trainwreck here Taernath?

You do understand that the train was doing just fine before the wreck, right? Do you see the analogy now?

https://az616578.vo.msecnd.net/files/2016/09/26/636105299923578088-1610436935_its%20fine.jpg

[Neveragain]

If you're asking me to link to one of the many meltdowns you've had I'm going to have to pass because that's really more effort than I'm willing to expend at this point.

I realize that to the spineless squids like yourself it's easier to let people walk all over you. Then there are those like me that are willing to burn it all down in an attempt to clear our name.

I could easily be more divisive.

[Neveragain]

You do understand that the train was doing just fine before the wreck, right? Do you see the analogy now?

https://az616578.vo.msecnd.net/files/2016/09/26/636105299923578088-1610436935_its%20fine.jpg

Dude you couldn't even take on raising your own kid, you're a self admitted man-child.

[drauz]

Dude you couldn't even take on raising your own kid, you're a self admitted man-child.

Not everyone is fit to raise a child, I was 18 at the time with a woman I didn't love. I had no desire to be attached at the hip to someone I didn't care about for 18 years+. Call it what you want, but I call it maturity to realize my own short comings and own up to them.

[Taernath]

I realize that to the spineless squids like yourself it's easier to let people walk all over you. Then there are those like me that are willing to burn it all down in an attempt to clear our name.

I could easily be more divisive.

ROFL yes! Let the hate flow through you! Are you going to burn down and divide the PC or is this still about your no girls allowed club?

[Neveragain]

ROFL yes! Let the hate flow through you! Are you going to burn down and divide the PC or is this still about your no girls allowed club?

I think the PC did a good enough job burning itself down.

You're going to backtrack to the "No girls allowed" bit? You got me right in the feels, simp.

[Neveragain]

Not everyone is fit to raise a child, I was 18 at the time with a woman I didn't love. I had no desire to be attached at the hip to someone I didn't care about for 18 years+. Call it what you want, but I call it maturity to realize my own short comings and own up to them.

So owning up to your responsibilities is killing your child?

Did you tell her you loved her when you decided to make a child?

Yea, no fires here. :loser:

[drauz]

So owning up to your responsibilities is killing your child?

Did you tell her you loved her when you decided to make a child?

Yea, no fires here. :loser:

That's your opinion and you're entitled to be wrong.

[Parkbandit]

http://www.notmeus.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/conyers.png

[Gelston]

In her complaint, the former Conyers staffer accused him of repeatedly asking her for sexual favors, and ultimately firing her because she would not “succumb to [his] sexual advances.”

That seems pretty illegal, if true.

[Nieninque]

This is what happens when schools stop teaching diagraming sentences.

Clyde R hammering home the irony since, forever... (I'm not even sure if that comment was from this thread, but it appeared here. So fuck it.


I'm being helpful by pointing out your shortcomings but I understand that you don't like women who are smarter than you.

Which is pretty much all women.

[ClydeR]

Trump ends the confusion..


In his most extensive comments on the special-election race since several women accused Moore of pursuing them when they were teenagers and he was in his 30s, Trump said the allegations involve years-old incidents.

"If you look at what is really going on and you look at all the things that have happened over the last 48 hours, he totally denies it," Trump said. "He says it didn't happen. And you know, you have to listen to him also."

After the allegations were first reported by The Washington Post, Trump released a statement saying that Moore should drop out of the race if the claims were true. The White House has since said Alabama voters, who go to the polls next month, should decide their next senator.

More... (https://www.politico.com/story/2017/11/21/trump-says-roy-moore-totally-denies-allegations-255551)