Yukle Posted November 8, 2017 Share Posted November 8, 2017 1 hour ago, Mother Cocanuts said: How is it at all a charitable interpretation? Your citing of the quote lends itself to my point: which part informs sexual predation? Is grabbing a woman by the pussy automatically predatory? What if, like he stated, the women let him do it? ... ... ... ... ... ... ... Is there something missing in your brain... ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mankytoes Posted November 8, 2017 Share Posted November 8, 2017 49 minutes ago, Mother Cocanuts said: Because your comment was in response to The Brandon Stark's, was it not? I agreed with him that rape-culture is a product of the left, but also agreed with you that the focus on "left" or "right" had little value. How is it at all a charitable interpretation? Your citing of the quote lends itself to my point: which part informs sexual predation? Is grabbing a woman by the pussy automatically predatory? What if, like he stated, the women let him do it? I agree with you. But this should not mean that the burden of proof be lax; if anything, it should be more stringent. I thought you were saying the term rape culture was a product of the left. That's quite different to saying rape culture itself is a product of the left. You understand someone letting you do something isn't the same as them consenting to it? If you want to grab someone's pussy, there are basic steps you take first... I'm a little surprised I'm having to explain why that isn't ok. Even Trump didn't try to defend the actual language used, he just said it was "locker room talk". Well the presumption of innocence always needs to apply. But when you have multiple reports, you have to say these women at least have the right to put the man they accuse on trial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mlle. Zabzie Posted November 8, 2017 Share Posted November 8, 2017 21 minutes ago, mankytoes said: Well the presumption of innocence always needs to apply. But when you have multiple reports, you have to say these women at least have the right to put the man they accuse on trial. Actually, it doesn't. That is, the presumption of innocence is the burden of proof necessary to convict someone such that we take away their liberty and/or property. It is weighted against the prosecutor. There is a lower standard to indict. And, in the court of public opinion, I don't think the "reasonable doubt" standard is the appropriate standard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maarsen Posted November 8, 2017 Share Posted November 8, 2017 40 minutes ago, Yukle said: ... ... ... ... ... ... ... Is there something missing in your brain... ? I guess you missed the posts MC put forth in the gun control thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted November 9, 2017 Share Posted November 9, 2017 21 minutes ago, maarsen said: I guess you missed the posts MC put forth in the gun control thread. Yeah, he has half (probably more) of us on ignore cause we all called him on his shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted November 9, 2017 Share Posted November 9, 2017 16 hours ago, Eggegg said: This last page is simply bizarre. It feels like an internet glitch 2017 feels like an internet glitch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xray the Enforcer Posted November 9, 2017 Share Posted November 9, 2017 [mod] Enough of this idiotic digression about left vs. right. Further posts in that vein will be deleted. Thank you. [/mod] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mankytoes Posted November 9, 2017 Share Posted November 9, 2017 1 hour ago, Mlle. Zabzie said: Actually, it doesn't. That is, the presumption of innocence is the burden of proof necessary to convict someone such that we take away their liberty and/or property. It is weighted against the prosecutor. There is a lower standard to indict. And, in the court of public opinion, I don't think the "reasonable doubt" standard is the appropriate standard. That is what I was referring to- the presumption of innocence has to apply for a conviction. I am saying these guys should be charged. I don't think I like the idea of a "court of public opinion" at all, honestly. But we should all remember than rumour and gossip can be extremely powerful things, and thus we should try to be responsible too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mother Cocanuts Posted November 9, 2017 Share Posted November 9, 2017 2 hours ago, Yukle said: ... ... ... ... ... ... ... Is there something missing in your brain... ? No. But that extended pause you took may indicate that there's something missing in yours. 2 hours ago, mankytoes said: You understand someone letting you do something isn't the same as them consenting to it? I actually don't. Please explain it to me. 2 hours ago, mankytoes said: If you want to grab someone's pussy, there are basic steps you take first... Which steps do you take first? 2 hours ago, mankytoes said: I'm a little surprised I'm having to explain why that isn't ok. You don't have to explain the reason it isn't okay; you have to explain the reason it makes him a sexual predator. 2 hours ago, mankytoes said: Even Trump didn't try to defend the actual language used, he just said it was "locker room talk". Yeah, it can appear vulgar. (I actually don't think there's anything wrong with his saying that.) But it still doesn't explain his being a sexual predator. So, I await your explanation. 2 hours ago, mankytoes said: Well the presumption of innocence always needs to apply. But when you have multiple reports, you have to say these women at least have the right to put the man they accuse on trial. I think that there should be more than just reports, regardless of how many, and a thorough investigation before going to trial. Other than that, I agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mankytoes Posted November 9, 2017 Share Posted November 9, 2017 10 minutes ago, Mother Cocanuts said: I actually don't. Please explain it to me. Which steps do you take first? You don't have to explain the reason it isn't okay; you have to explain the reason it makes him a sexual predator. Yeah, it can appear vulgar. (I actually don't think there's anything wrong with his saying that.) But it still doesn't explain his being a sexual predator. So, I await your explanation. I think that there should be more than just reports, regardless of how many, and a thorough investigation before going to trial. Other than that, I agree. Ok, try to look at it with a bit of empathy. A rich, powerful, older guy just comes up and goes to grab your genitals. It's shocking. A common reaction to this sort of thing is to freeze. You might well feel intimidated, frightened. This is not normal social behaviour, even amongst "handsy" people. I mentioned something more minor that happened to me once earlier. Know what I did immediately after? I apologised to her. It's a shocking experience, you don't act the way you might wish you had. A woman who Trump grabs could scream or hit him, but those are both pretty big reactions, guarenteed to cause a big reaction. Maybe she will feel it's better just to get it over with. That isn't consent. I mean, I assume you've had sexual contact with someone, and you didn't just go up and grab their genitals? You go over, you talk, you flirt, you make a joke. If she seems interested, learn a little closer, gauge the reaction. Touch her arm, gauge the reaction. Ask her to come back with you. Kiss her. Slowly slide your hands across her body. In these situations, body language tends to make it pretty obvious whether your advances are welcome or not. By the time you're near the pussy grabbing, consent should be extremely self evident. Because it's sexually predatory behaviour. As I say, I really don't think many people are disputing this. Trump isn't saying "yes I do that, but it's ok", he's saying "I don't really do that, it's a joke". Even Trump understands that behaviour is not acceptable. Like what? I mean what sort of evidence are you looking for, photos, video? Obviously there should be preliminary investigations, like if the person wasn't even at the same location. But remember, the presumption of innocense isn't the same as presuming the accuser isn't telling the truth. And multiple, unconnected reports constitute strong evidence in themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanteGabriel Posted November 9, 2017 Share Posted November 9, 2017 Jesus Christ, sea-lioning away sexual assault. What the suffering fuck? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted November 9, 2017 Share Posted November 9, 2017 5 minutes ago, DanteGabriel said: Jesus Christ, sea-lioning away sexual assault. What the suffering fuck? Yeah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Week Posted November 9, 2017 Share Posted November 9, 2017 36 minutes ago, mankytoes said: I mean, I assume you've had sexual contact with someone, and you didn't just go up and grab their genitals? I'm curious where the genitals are on the typical firearm. /grabs popcorn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukle Posted November 9, 2017 Share Posted November 9, 2017 2 hours ago, Mother Cocanuts said: You don't have to explain the reason it isn't okay; you have to explain the reason it makes him a sexual predator. DON'T TOUCH SOMEBODY'S GENITALS UNLESS YOU ARE SPECIFICALLY GIVEN PERMISSION FROM THEM WITHIN A CONSENSUAL RELATIONSHIP. I think that's pretty clear, although I am really concerned that you think this requires clarification, or to be stated in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted November 9, 2017 Share Posted November 9, 2017 Rape bad. Don't rape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted November 9, 2017 Share Posted November 9, 2017 On the flip side we did get some high quality Trump fan fic erotica. Also, trumps phrasing that they let you get away with it implies nonconsensual behavior. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted November 9, 2017 Share Posted November 9, 2017 Oh right, I'm on ignore. Holy shit, for the first time in a while I hope this person is actually a troll, cause, seriously, just, fuck. No, you can't just grab someone's junk. Jesus Christ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrellius Posted November 9, 2017 Share Posted November 9, 2017 Spoiler WTF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HexMachina Posted November 9, 2017 Share Posted November 9, 2017 Well this thread turned super gross quickly *shudder* Perhaps this video will help explain consent to MC, though somehow I doubt it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theda Baratheon Posted November 9, 2017 Share Posted November 9, 2017 8 hours ago, Mother Cocanuts said: Actually I have. I'm not saying all women would be okay with it. But, you'd be surprised how many women are fine with it. Personal space is just that: personal. It's informed by a subjective standard. Outside of the bedroom with a consenting sexual partner just plain walking up to someone and grabbing their genitals is disgusting behaviour and you'd be surprised how many women have endured sexual assault and harassment and let things happen whilst not consenting because they'e frightened. The fact you've done it more than once to various people enough to warrant this comment is disturbing as hell. Gross. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.