Author Topic: Re: #MeToo: Sexual Harassment  (Read 5061 times)

Bondo

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 23077
Re: #MeToo: Sexual Harassment
« Reply #30 on: May 02, 2020, 10:45:47 PM »
Today in the annals of #BelieveWomen, the then 14-yo niece of "Not A Witch" Christine O'Donnell accused Biden of commenting on her breasts at an event in Delaware in 2008...that Joe Biden was not at.

We are in the age of informational warfare, so as much as in ordinary life the presumption of belief is useful, in the context of politics, and especially campaigns, the presumption may need to be skepticism. This post by a PhD who specializes in national security policy, specifically relating to things like informational warfare, is fairly useful as it relates to the Reade case.

St. Martin the Bald

  • Lurker
  • Global Moderator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 11205
Re: Re: #MeToo: Sexual Harassment
« Reply #31 on: May 03, 2020, 01:11:15 AM »
Once #MeToo was weaponized (as it was certain to be) - nobody gets a free pass anymore.
Victims/accusers  need to treated with care and compassion but the accused deserve the same as anyone else navigating our justice system: innocent until proven guilty.
Investigate aggressively and leave no stone unturned but in this day and age - blind faith isnít a choice, in my opinion.
Hey, nice marmot!

Eric/E.T.

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3830
Re: #MeToo: Sexual Harassment
« Reply #32 on: May 03, 2020, 01:56:27 AM »
Once #MeToo was weaponized (as it was certain to be) - nobody gets a free pass anymore.
Victims/accusers  need to treated with care and compassion but the accused deserve the same as anyone else navigating our justice system: innocent until proven guilty.
Investigate aggressively and leave no stone unturned but in this day and age - blind faith isnít a choice, in my opinion.

I'm so torn because I've seen it weaponized against a fellow teacher by a woman who it took another year for us to fully figure out, but then also believe that if we revert back to the pre-#MeToo/Believe Women (Victims) skepticism, then we're reverting to the victim-blaming and shaming of a prior status quo. I don't know if there is a satisfactory middle ground, but I do know we have to create and maintain an environment where victims are comfortable coming out, and that means getting the benefit of the doubt. If you don't think anyone will believe you, and in many of these cases there is no evidence but the words of the two parties, abuse will continue. But there need to be degrees of punishment involved that don't always mean losing all livelihood and status, especially since norms regarding behavior between men and women have changed so much in so little time.

I'm voting D in November regardless. We talk a good deal about the children in cages here; well, it's not their fault that the person best positioned to beat Trump may have sexually harassed people in his past. They don't deserve indefinite detention because of his sins. For that, and many other reasons as to why Trump needs to go, I vote D.
A witty saying proves nothing. - Voltaire

1SO

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 36101
  • Marathon Man
Re: #MeToo: Sexual Harassment
« Reply #33 on: May 04, 2020, 03:49:31 PM »
There's nothing left to discuss if the people who started and shepherded the movement will turn their back on an accuser the second it becomes politically inconvenient. There is no one potentially more powerful than the president so why should anyone come forward anymore?


Will, really want your answer to my question...

So what do we do? What can we do?
Assume Tara Reade is telling the truth. Assume there's more we don't even know.
We can hope for a better option, but if there isn't one...
Who do you vote for?

Which stance is the morally correct one?

Will

  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 912
  • Justice for Elijah McClain
    • The Alice Guy Blache Show
Re: #MeToo: Sexual Harassment
« Reply #34 on: May 13, 2020, 09:11:02 PM »
Bondo, where do you get your sources? You post and post and post but you never seem to cite things. Let's go.

I keep hearing people say that Ryan Grim broke the Ford story but I went back and looked at his thing and that isn't at all true. His reporting there was just as irresponsible and politically motivated...not to take out Kavanaugh but to try to hit Feinstein and to FORCE Ford out with her story against her will.


Where's the source that Grim wasn't the first to report? Here's mine: https://theintercept.com/2018/09/12/brett-kavanaugh-confirmation-dianne-feinstein/

Find me the article that justifies your claim.

Second on this point, why not hit Feinstein? Are you claiming that Feinstein is beyond reproach? Or are you claiming that journalists shouldn't leak documents that contain information that shows potential government leaders to lead unethical lives? Are you then, by extension, against the Pentagon Papers? Deep Throat? Should journalists never leak anything if it could be interpreted as an attack on a politician? Or perhaps - do you think since Democrats are, generally speaking, on the right side of history, that they should be immune by attacks from the press? These are questions, not accusations.

Anyway, Reade's case continues to be a mess. Her brother originally said he only learned of things recently until he was actively coached by Nathan Robinson (who confessed as much on twitter) and perhaps Grim and Halper. They seem to have had an active cooperation regarding the content and timing of everything. She has gone back and edited past Medium posts to align with her current story. In the legal world if you tamper with evidence the court tends to say the jury should basically assume that evidence would be negative. She also apparently didn't put Biden's name on the police report (so she couldn't be charged for false reporting). She has absolutely no credibility.

She has a growing number of corroborators and she personally worked for Biden. Her Mom called into Larry King and reported a similar incident with her in 1993. Kavanaugh denied ever meeting Ford. Biden cannot do the same. As a survivor, it took many years for me to truly understand what happened to me. Assault clouds the memory so things may change over the course of time. As a paralegal, in "the legal world", there's a concept known as "beyond a reasonable doubt." Since there are very few criminal cases that you can be 100% absolutely sure about, you must prove that the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. However, this doesn't solely rest on testimony - as seen in 12 ANGRY MEN, a movie I think you like, you can look at surrounding circumstances and make a case from there. Do we know if the son killed his father? No, but we don't know if he didn't either. Instead, we look at everything from all sides. Speaking of...

But let's stop talking about her credibility - let's talk about Biden's credibility. Let's talk about many video compilations you can find of Biden actively groping girls as young as 7 years old at public events. Like... this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DquPIf8xkz0 Let's talk about how he joked that he got consent to touch kids at a political event: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1xnunfpurA

Okay, fine. That's just about his touching behavior. What about any history of him lying about things that have nothing to do with assault? Yup: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/joe-biden-plagiarism/ That lie made him drop out of an entire race.

Regardless if you think it happened or not, the fact remains that this is a solid case once you consider all of the factors instead of just solely analyzing and criticizing the Tara Reade testimony. I believe every single accusation could be held to the level of scrutiny that Tara Reade has received. Pretty much every single attack that has been used on Tara Reade is a direct parroting of right wingers or defenders of Celeb abusers as Lyta Gold analyzes here: https://www.currentaffairs.org/2020/05/the-attacks-on-tara-reade-are-unbelievable-bullshit

In summation,


From a consequentialist perspective, if one views the Republican policy agenda as evil, then the timing of this revelation, if it were true, is itself immoral, because it only accomplishes the agenda of bolstering the Republican position (which is something leftist accelerationists see as valuable). That the timing seems to have been calculated to do this is highly suspicious.

What Biden policy are you so enamored with that you're ready to bury the MeToo movement for? I know you may likely think I'm a Bernie supporter, but I much rather see pretty much ANY other candidate go against Trump right now than who is likely a senile rapist who was only picked by Obama as a VP to satisfy moderates back in 2008.

Will

  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 912
  • Justice for Elijah McClain
    • The Alice Guy Blache Show
Re: #MeToo: Sexual Harassment
« Reply #35 on: May 13, 2020, 09:24:31 PM »
There's nothing left to discuss if the people who started and shepherded the movement will turn their back on an accuser the second it becomes politically inconvenient. There is no one potentially more powerful than the president so why should anyone come forward anymore?


Will, really want your answer to my question...

So what do we do? What can we do?
Assume Tara Reade is telling the truth. Assume there's more we don't even know.
We can hope for a better option, but if there isn't one...
Who do you vote for?

Which stance is the morally correct one?

I'd get Biden to step down. I don't want the Dems to sacrifice yet another political conviction that differs themselves from the Right (climate change might be the only difference right now and I am certain they will compromise). If he doesn't step down, feel free to vote for him (I won't, sorry), but at the very least be able to say "I believe Tara Reade" or "I don't know if I can ever be certain if I can believe Tara Reade". I think there's a dignity and grace in accepting the reality that the Democratic party is filled with just as much scum and hypocrisy as the Right. I hope one day we rid ourselves of these two political parties.

Will

  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 912
  • Justice for Elijah McClain
    • The Alice Guy Blache Show
Re: #MeToo: Sexual Harassment
« Reply #36 on: May 13, 2020, 09:27:57 PM »
Once #MeToo was weaponized (as it was certain to be) - nobody gets a free pass anymore.
Victims/accusers  need to treated with care and compassion but the accused deserve the same as anyone else navigating our justice system: innocent until proven guilty.
Investigate aggressively and leave no stone unturned but in this day and age - blind faith isnít a choice, in my opinion.


I'm voting D in November regardless. We talk a good deal about the children in cages here; well, it's not their fault that the person best positioned to beat Trump may have sexually harassed people in his past. They don't deserve indefinite detention because of his sins. For that, and many other reasons as to why Trump needs to go, I vote D.

Yeah, about those children in cages... https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2019/sep/13/joe-biden/fact-checking-biden-use-cages-during-obama-adminis/

Eric/E.T.

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3830
Re: #MeToo: Sexual Harassment
« Reply #37 on: May 13, 2020, 10:34:24 PM »
Once #MeToo was weaponized (as it was certain to be) - nobody gets a free pass anymore.
Victims/accusers  need to treated with care and compassion but the accused deserve the same as anyone else navigating our justice system: innocent until proven guilty.
Investigate aggressively and leave no stone unturned but in this day and age - blind faith isnít a choice, in my opinion.


I'm voting D in November regardless. We talk a good deal about the children in cages here; well, it's not their fault that the person best positioned to beat Trump may have sexually harassed people in his past. They don't deserve indefinite detention because of his sins. For that, and many other reasons as to why Trump needs to go, I vote D.

Yeah, about those children in cages... https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2019/sep/13/joe-biden/fact-checking-biden-use-cages-during-obama-adminis/

From the very article:

Our ruling

Biden said the Obama administration "didn't lock people up in cages."

Immigration policies of Obama and Trump are very different. Trumpís administration implemented a policy that led to the separation of thousands of children from their parents. Obama did not have that policy.

But for Biden to say that Obamaís administration did not put people in cages is inaccurate. Obama and Biden in 2014 saw an influx of children arriving at the border without a parent or guardian, and reporting from 2014 by the Arizona Republic referred to a chain-link enclosure holding children as "cages." A former Homeland Security secretary under the Obama administration in interviews has acknowledged that some have described as "cages" the enclosures used during Obamaís tenure.

Thereís a debate on whether a chain-link enclosure is a "cage" and whether applying that term to those structures is subjective. But the term certainly was used in 2014 to describe enclosures used by Obamaí administration.

We rate Bidenís claim False.


What I put in green is a part of why I'll vote Biden. I agree with a lot of what you say about the similarities between the two parties, but there is still a difference. Here's a taste, from Reuters.
A witty saying proves nothing. - Voltaire

Bondo

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 23077
Re: #MeToo: Sexual Harassment
« Reply #38 on: May 13, 2020, 10:39:09 PM »
Bondo, where do you get your sources? You post and post and post but you never seem to cite things. Let's go.

I keep hearing people say that Ryan Grim broke the Ford story but I went back and looked at his thing and that isn't at all true. His reporting there was just as irresponsible and politically motivated...not to take out Kavanaugh but to try to hit Feinstein and to FORCE Ford out with her story against her will.


Where's the source that Grim wasn't the first to report? Here's mine: https://theintercept.com/2018/09/12/brett-kavanaugh-confirmation-dianne-feinstein/

Find me the article that justifies your claim.

My claim is literally in the article that you link. Breaking the Ford story would mean interviewing Ford. Not reporting that "someone" sent a letter to the Senate Committee. Feinstein sucks but trashing Feinstein for not thinking it proper to make the letter public against the wishes of the woman in question and just being a general bull in the china shop until Ford had to speak publicly is a bad look. The Intercept is garbage and Current Affairs is garbage. Nathan Robinson of Current Affairs was actively coaching corroborating witnesses who all magically remembered they had been told the new story after all the serious journalists looked into it last fall and no one said a word (Reade mysteriously said all the mainstream outlets ignored her when they didn't). You use evidence of the mom calling CNN even though that doesn't specifically corroborate the new story, just the original one that is not particularly being denied. And then she avoids interviews from serious TV journalists in favor of Megyn Kelly? There are so many other things I could bring up that I don't feel the need to (the orgy of evidence of Russia ties, which I should point out make me think Russia isn't involved, the bank fraud charge, her various issues with horse non-profits, her claiming to be a testifying expert on abuse). The point is, if I were to "believe women" I wouldn't even know what to believe because even within the past month her story has veered wildly all over the place on so many details on things like whether she actually filed a complaint, whether she left or was forced out, etc.

Anyway, your boy Ryan Grim was quick to hype the Delaware allegation that was clearly disproven within hours, so maybe he needs to slow his roll. This is politics and there are a lot of bad actors. Sorry if I apply a higher burden of proof.

Will

  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 912
  • Justice for Elijah McClain
    • The Alice Guy Blache Show
Re: #MeToo: Sexual Harassment
« Reply #39 on: May 13, 2020, 11:33:05 PM »
Bondo, you can't poo-poo the websites I link to when you literally started out this page with posting a link to a BLOG and not even a fairly reputable one at that.

 

love