Sexual Assault Scandals 3- the Fempire Strikes Back

[mankytoes]

16 hours ago, Kalbear said:

My concern here is this:

This account is not good. It's typical, and something you see a lot of in stupid parties and the like, and it sucks. 

It is also NOT in the same ballpark as attempting to rape a 16 year old in your car. It is not in the same ballpark as copping the feel of a 14 year old as a 32 year old. It is NOT in the same ballpark as groping a 14 year old when you're in your 30s in a movie production together. It is NOT the same as someone systematically repressing all hints of illegal conduct while having multiple people cover for your sexual assaults and rapes. It is not the same thing as raping a woman in an alley behind a dumpster and getting off because you go to Stanford. 

My concern is that this allegation conflates these things together. I think it's reasonable and credible. I think it's reasonable that Franken resign, or take significant more action than he has.  But whatever he does, more should be required of the others. 

I think we should all be careful with tone on here, it's important to acknowledge this difference without making it sound like the lesser offences should be overlooked. I feel like that's often the way that these people justify things to themselves (sorry for the amateur psychology again)- "there are brutal rapists out there and I'm being persecuted for a little grope".

On my side of the pond- https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/nov/16/have-i-got-news-for-you-where-jo-brand-rebuked-all-male-panel-tops-complaints

Seems a little ridiculous when you watch the video. The headline that caused the panelist to say "some of this stuff is hardly high level" was "Tory MP takes his personal trainer to the cinema". That just sounds like gossip or boring chat, why is that even in this discussion? It's just fuel for people to dismiss the whole thing as a witch hunt.

It's interesting to compare the UK v USA reporting- their side seems more party political. Nothing like looking at America to make our crappy politicians seem slightly less crappy!

[Eggegg]

31 minutes ago, mankytoes said:

I think we should all be careful with tone on here, it's important to acknowledge this difference without making it sound like the lesser offences should be overlooked. I feel like that's often the way that these people justify things to themselves (sorry for the amateur psychology again)- "there are brutal rapists out there and I'm being persecuted for a little grope".

On my side of the pond- https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/nov/16/have-i-got-news-for-you-where-jo-brand-rebuked-all-male-panel-tops-complaints

Seems a little ridiculous when you watch the video. The headline that caused the panelist to say "some of this stuff is hardly high level" was "Tory MP takes his personal trainer to the cinema". That just sounds like gossip or boring chat, why is that even in this discussion? It's just fuel for people to dismiss the whole thing as a witch hunt.

It's interesting to compare the UK v USA reporting- their side seems more party political. Nothing like looking at America to make our crappy politicians seem slightly less crappy!

I think Jo Brand was great in that video, her point is spot on. My fear however is with the general publics perception of these cases. I think there is already a feeling amongst a lot of people that some of these cases are minor ( I think they are wrong but there you go), in the same way that many Trump voters were happy to dismiss his comments as 'locker room talk'. 

If we don't differentiate between these offences, even in some small way, then you cause people to zone out and lose interest, or take another side.

[Dr. Pepper]

1 hour ago, Leap said:

Can you please elaborate which part of my comment you're referring to specifically with this?

You have no idea what you're talking about. I absolutely do know how it feels to be messed with sexually, asleep and awake. I also never said she could give consent or that it wasn't even worse and humiliating being recorded. 

...I agree? Did any part of my comment give you reason to believe otherwise?

This comment is just absurd. @Kalbear. If someone claims they were groped, it absolutely matters if they were physically touched or not. How is that not obvious? 

Nobody argued that the photo isn't disturbing whether someone touched her or not. But to pretend that it doesn't matter and that we should all just jump straight to the same level of outrage whether someone was physically touched or not is also quite disturbing.

You responded to a comment that said "If you think actually touching skin is necessary for something to be violative, you'd be wrong" with "I think it makes a difference" and then went on to say that the kevlar matter.  No.  That's just gross.  You can absolutely be violating without physically touching someone. The fact is that whether she was wearing kevlar or not, Franken touched her or mimed touching her in a sexual way WHILE SHE WAS ASLEEP and then made sure someone took a picture of it.  All for supposed laughs.  This after she previously expressed discomfort being around him.

No, it doesn't matter whether his hand were pressed firmly against her or not.  It's disturbing that you're spending so much time arguing that.  

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

31 minutes ago, Dr. Pepper said:

You responded to a comment that said "If you think actually touching skin is necessary for something to be violative, you'd be wrong" with "I think it makes a difference" and then went on to say that the kevlar matter.  No.  That's just gross.  You can absolutely be violating without physically touching someone. The fact is that whether she was wearing kevlar or not, Franken touched her or mimed touching her in a sexual way WHILE SHE WAS ASLEEP and then made sure someone took a picture of it.  All for supposed laughs.  This after she previously expressed discomfort being around him.

No, it doesn't matter whether his hand were pressed firmly against her or not.  It's disturbing that you're spending so much time arguing that.  

You are absolutely right going after someone when they are helpless is about as low as you can get.  

[The Warlock of Qarth]

I'm going to go against the grain here and say that Franken doesn't have to resign or even announce his retirement. The picture was a puerile and highly inappropriate and it's only right that he apologized for it. He also clearly isn't touching her, so he wasn't groping her, he was pretending to grope her. Not funny in the slightest, but not the same thing, and an apology is all that is required.

As for the unwanted tongue kiss, I'm not convinced yet. Franken's escort says Franken never went off on his own without him by his side. The woman is a known conservative Trump supporter (and friggin birther to boot) and has appeared multiple times on Hannity's show, basically the American televised version of 'Der Stürmer' or 'Völkischer Beobachter'. Now, I can hear you say: 'But WoQ, are you doubting her allegations merely because of her political beliefs?!' And my answer would be: 'You bet your ass I fucking am!'. Especially when Roger goddamn Stone gloats about it before the accusations even go public. When you willingly associate yourself with the modern day American equivalent of Julius Streicher or Joseph Goebbels and you publicly accuse a political opponent of misconduct, your credibility does take a hit, and I'm going to need a bit more evidence before I'm convinced.  #sorrynotsorry

So the calls for Franken's immediate resignation? Pure BS that some Dems are too willing to run with because in the short term it's the easier, quicker route. Wrong. Now is the time to hold fast, allow an ethics inquiry proceed and get everyone under oath and publicly testify for the record. Then, let the cards fall as they may.

[Fragile Bird]

18 minutes ago, Warlock of Quarth said:

I'm going to go against the grain here and say that Franken doesn't have to resign or even announce his retirement. The picture was a puerile and highly inappropriate and it's only right that he apologized for it. He also clearly isn't touching her, so he wasn't groping her, he was pretending to grope her. Not funny in the slightest, but not the same thing, and an apology is all that is required.

As for the unwanted tongue kiss, I'm not convinced yet. Franken's escort says Franken never went off on his own without his him by his side. The woman is a known conservative Trump supporter (and friggin birther to boot) and has appeared multiple times on Hannity's show, basically the American televised version of 'Der Stürmer' or 'Völkischer Beobachter'. Now, I can hear you say: 'But WoQ, are you doubting her allegations merely because of her political beliefs?!' And my answer would be: 'You bett your ass I fucking am!'. Especially when Roger goddamn Stone gloats about it before the accusations even go public. When you willingly associate yourself with the modern day American equivalent of Julius Streicher or Joseph Goebbels and you publicly accuse a political opponent of misconduct, your credibility does take a hit, and I'm going to need a bit more evidence before I'm convinced.  #sorrynotsorry

So the calls for Franken's immediate resignation? Pure BS that some Dems are too willing to run with because in the short term it's the easier, quicker route. Wrong. Now is the time to hold fast, allow an ethics inquiry proceed and get everyone under oath and publicly testify for the record. Then, let the cards fall as they may.

I agree with most of this. After seeing her interviewed on CNN I believe that the kissing scenario happened. Franken could have just lightly kissed her or pretended to kiss her at the 'rehearsal', but I've had too many men turn an opportunity to have a kiss into a French kiss to disbelieve her. I prefer to choose the people I'm willing to exchange bodily fluids with, thank you very much.

But the fact that she's a birther is news to me. The sympathy of her sincerity has just been undercut dramatically. She felt violated by the kiss, the fact Franken drew devil's horns on her picture, the fact that Franken had that stupid picture taken, and yet she took the position that Obama was an illegitimate president because he wasn't born in the USA? Now there's a violation far greater on the scale of things.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

6 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

I agree with most of this. After seeing her interviewed on CNN I believe that the kissing scenario happened. Franken could have just lightly kissed her or pretended to kiss her at the 'rehearsal', but I've had too many men turn an opportunity to have a kiss into a French kiss to disbelieve her. I prefer to choose the people I'm willing to exchange bodily fluids with, thank you very much.

But the fact that she's a birther is news to me. The sympathy of her sincerity has just been undercut dramatically. She felt violated by the kiss, the fact Franken drew devil's horns on her picture, the fact that Franken had that stupid picture taken, and yet she took the position that Obama was an illegitimate president because he wasn't born in the USA? Now there's a violation far greater on the scale of things.

Where did Franken draw devil's horns on her photo?

[Morpheus]

9 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Where did Franken draw devil's horns on her photo?

She said that after the kissing incident, they had a full two weeks together where Franken continued to belittle  her in chidish ways, including defacing her headshots used for autographs.

[The Wedge]

I have a question:

Did Tweeden (or an intermediary on her behalf) ever approach Franken in the ensuing years to let him know that this USO trip deeply upset her?  Is there a reason that this had to be done via a story to the press if Franken never had a chance to realize his actions caused such suffering on Tweeden's part?

I ask because Franken seems to me like a man who would have made his apology and amends as much as possible to Tweeden without having to have learned it through the media.

This would have provided Tweeden a way to come forth in the media, but at the same time to indicate that Franken had a chance to react.  If his apologies and amends were okay, then she could say so. If he attempted to dodge and deny, then she could say so.

How should this work so that anyone aggrieved can feel confident that they are telling their vital stories, yet allowing for the story to be advanced farther before the entire world knows? 

I really don't know.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

42 minutes ago, Warlock of Quarth said:

I'm going to go against the grain here and say that Franken doesn't have to resign or even announce his retirement. The picture was a puerile and highly inappropriate and it's only right that he apologized for it. He also clearly isn't touching her, so he wasn't groping her, he was pretending to grope her. Not funny in the slightest, but not the same thing, and an apology is all that is required.

As for the unwanted tongue kiss, I'm not convinced yet. Franken's escort says Franken never went off on his own without his him by his side. The woman is a known conservative Trump supporter (and friggin birther to boot) and has appeared multiple times on Hannity's show, basically the American televised version of 'Der Stürmer' or 'Völkischer Beobachter'. Now, I can hear you say: 'But WoQ, are you doubting her allegations merely because of her political beliefs?!' And my answer would be: 'You bett your ass I fucking am!'. Especially when Roger goddamn Stone gloats about it before the accusations even go public. When you willingly associate yourself with the modern day American equivalent of Julius Streicher or Joseph Goebbels and you publicly accuse a political opponent of misconduct, your credibility does take a hit, and I'm going to need a bit more evidence before I'm convinced.  #sorrynotsorry

So the calls for Franken's immediate resignation? Pure BS that some Dems are too willing to run with because in the short term it's the easier, quicker route. Wrong. Now is the time to hold fast, allow an ethics inquiry proceed and get everyone under oath and publicly testify for the record. Then, let the cards fall as they may.

Yeah, I'm in complete agreement regarding the resignation/retirement notion. I don't think that's an appropriate punishment or reaction to this at all. This is not equivalent to the allegations against Roy Moore. And hell, we don't even know if those allegations are going to cost Moore this election.

 I'm not willing to go so far as to discredit her story based on her political beliefs, but the political element to this is relevant, methinks. You've got all sorts of Right Wing media types saying "what now, Libs?" and directly comparing this controversy to the reactions to the Moore allegations. That side of this story is absolute bullshit. To expect the same punishment for both men is ludicrous. 

 Franken has seconded the idea of a Senate investigation. That's a logical, reasonable response to this story, not resignation.

[Theda Baratheon]

7 minutes ago, The Wedge said:

I have a question:

Did Tweeden (or an intermediary on her behalf) ever approach Franken in the ensuing years to let him know that this USO trip deeply upset her?  Is there a reason that this had to be done via a story to the press if Franken never had a chance to realize his actions caused such suffering on Tweeden's part?

I ask because Franken seems to me like a man who would have made his apology and amends as much as possible to Tweeden without having to have learned it through the media.

This would have provided Tweeden a way to come forth in the media, but at the same time to indicate that Franken had a chance to react.  If his apologies and amends were okay, then she could say so. If he attempted to dodge and deny, then she could say so.

How should this work so that anyone aggrieved can feel confident that they are telling their vital stories, yet allowing for the story to be advanced farther before the entire world knows? 

I really don't know.

I don't know - this seems a bit dodgy to me. To put the onus on the "victim" (if you will) to contact and reach out to the person who made them uncomfortable and to make themselves vulnerable a second time doesn't sound like a good idea in cases like this. 

[Fragile Bird]

27 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Where did Franken draw devil's horns on her photo?

She said that on the tour they signed autographs after every show. They had boxes of pictures they would sign. She claimed that Franken was very petty towards her after the kissing event (though she also said she never spoke to him again afterwards outside the show and was never alone with him, spending time with other members of the show instead) and as an example of the pettiness, at least once (and now I think, only once) he took one of her pictures and drew horns and a mustache on it. 

[OldGimletEye]

23 hours ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

 I'm not willing to go so far as to discredit her story based on her political beliefs, but the political element to this is relevant, methinks. You've got all sorts of Right Wing media types saying "what now, Libs?" and directly comparing this controversy to the reactions to the Moore allegations. That side of this story is absolute bullshit. To expect the same punishment for both men is ludicrous. 

Like you I’m not willing to change my assessment of somebody’s credibility just because their political beliefs are different from my own.

And at this juncture, I’m very inclined to believe Ms. Tweeden’s version of events, her basic political beliefs notwithstanding.

However, if somebody has gone around actively promoting birther conspiracy theories or other insane nutball theories that have no basis in reality, then there is, in my estimation, a reason to call into question their basic attachment to facts.

Now of all this stuff that Franken has done, I find the forced kiss to be the most egregious act. Now unlike Franken’s highly inappropriate touching, the issue of the kiss depends largely on believing Ms. Tweeden’s version of events, it would seem. And I’m willing to have a very strong prior that she is in fact relating events accurately. But, if she has gone around promoting birther conspiracies, then that prior in my view needs some revision. One cannot expect to be considered an intellectually honest player, after going around spewing pure nuttery.

Now, as far as I know, I’m not aware of any credible source at this time that Ms. Tweeden has in fact ever promoted any birther conspiracy or anything like it. 

I think their maybe a mixup here between Ms. Tweeden and Ms. Morgan, who to my understanding has been willing to engage in outright falsehoods.

[Kelli Fury]

41 minutes ago, The Wedge said:

I have a question:

Did Tweeden (or an intermediary on her behalf) ever approach Franken in the ensuing years to let him know that this USO trip deeply upset her?  Is there a reason that this had to be done via a story to the press if Franken never had a chance to realize his actions caused such suffering on Tweeden's part?

I ask because Franken seems to me like a man who would have made his apology and amends as much as possible to Tweeden without having to have learned it through the media.

This would have provided Tweeden a way to come forth in the media, but at the same time to indicate that Franken had a chance to react.  If his apologies and amends were okay, then she could say so. If he attempted to dodge and deny, then she could say so.

How should this work so that anyone aggrieved can feel confident that they are telling their vital stories, yet allowing for the story to be advanced farther before the entire world knows? 

I really don't know.

She doesn’t owe anyone that.

Nobody should be expected to reach out to the person in the wrong before outing them.

Maybe I’m just an extra petty person, but if I were her I’d have come out with this two weeks before his election. She could have hit him harder then- but she didn’t. I think a lot of people are coming forward about these matters now because people are being believed for once, and because they see that other women who have been assaulted by men who are not famous need their example.

[The Wedge]

32 minutes ago, Theda Baratheon said:

I don't know - this seems a bit dodgy to me. To put the onus on the "victim" (if you will) to contact and reach out to the person who made them uncomfortable and to make themselves vulnerable a second time doesn't sound like a good idea in cases like this. 

I thought about this, too, putting the onus on the victim, that's why I mentioned maybe an intermediary could approach the other side.  If that other side rebuffs the accuser, then take it to the media or a lawyer if appropriate.

Are there mechanisms for victims to do such a thing without it involving a lawsuit or a story on the news?

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

6 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

I think their maybe a mixup here between Ms. Tweeden and Ms. Morgan, who to my understanding has been willing to engage in outright falsehoods.

Yeah, I've been watching a handful of her clips from Hannity and Red Eye (Greg Gutfeld's Fox Show) this morning, and I haven't heard anything from her regarding Birther nonsense. The main thing I've learned is that you can produce a Right Wing Talking Head show that is considerable worse than Hannity's. Fuck you, Greg Gutfeld. Fuck you right in your hacky, unfunny, no talent having ass. How in Dog's name did you manage to get a television show?

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

3 minutes ago, Kelli Fury said:

She doesn’t owe anyone that.

Nobody should be expected to reach out to the person in the wrong before outing them.

Maybe I’m just an extra petty person, but if I were her I’d have come out with this two weeks before his election. She could have hit him harder then- but she didn’t. I think a lot of people are coming forward about these matters now because people are being believed for once, and because they see that other women who have been assaulted by men who are not famous need their example.

Agree with that sentiment. The timing doesn't really matter.

That said, I'm not sure that this story does much damage back in 2008. As Kalbear has expounded in the politics thread, this probably doesn't get taken seriously 9 years ago. 

[Guest]

17 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

Yeah, I've been watching a handful of her clips from Hannity and Red Eye (Greg Gutfeld's Fox Show) this morning, and I haven't heard anything from her regarding Birther nonsense. The main thing I've learned is that you can produce a Right Wing Talking Head show that is considerable worse than Hannity's. Fuck you, Greg Gutfeld. Fuck you right in your hacky, unfunny, no talent having ass. How in Dog's name did you manage to get a television show?

Media Matters transcript of Hannity's show where Tweeden comments in support of Obama producing his birth certificate.

HANNITY: Release -- do you have your birth certificate?

SPRINGER: No, I finally -- well, because I was born in England, and it was during the war, and really, I had to go through a whole process for my Social Security -- because I'm on Medicare now. I had to finally get --

LEEANN TWEEDEN (model and Fox Sports host): You had to track it down, and you did, right? And you had to produce it, right?

SPRINGER: But I found it. I found it. I found it. But because I was born in England, I can't be president anyway.

TWEEDEN: Right. But he had to produce the material, and he did, and now he has Medicare.

I'm not saying that nothing happened, or that Tweeden is lying. But she does appear to have bought in to the birther conspiracy. Combine that with the fact that Roger Stone knew about this beforehand, when it was a self-released news story rather than an investigative report, and I'm definitely curious to see the results of the Ethics Committee investigation.

That being said, the picture was just plain harassment and abject stupidity.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

17 minutes ago, The Great Unwashed said:

Media Matters transcript of Hannity's show where Tweeden comments in support of Obama producing his birth certificate.

 

 

She has shitty judgment as to Pres. Obama's citizenship.  How is pulling this out different from calling the integrity of Roy Moore's accusers into question?  What does this have to do with what Sen. Franken did?

[Guest]

16 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

She has shitty judgment as to Pres. Obama's citizenship.  How is pulling this out different from calling the integrity of Roy Moore's accusers into question?  What does this have to do with what Sen. Franken did?

I don't know if it has anything to do with what Franken did. Maybe it has nothing to do with what happened and I'm being overly paranoid during a time of epistemological crisis in American politics. 

But the combination of 3 data points that shows someone with a documented history of having a tenuous grasp of facts, with a self-released story promoted by a known bad-actor before the story even broke makes me wary and I'm glad an investigation will be conducted.