Al Franken is Gone, Sexual Harassment Allegations are Harming Democrats
- Thread starter ElectricFetus
- Start date
- Status
Its Alabama, enough said.
Bells
Staff member
What's going to get worse? Do you think allowing a serial groper of women to remain in the Senate is a better option because one day, in the future, it might be good for women?
As Ms Dupuy noted.. Is the DNC that lacking in talent that they cannot field candidates who will stand up to women's rights and not sexually harass or assault women?
It wasn't dishonest. It was an answer.
Oh, sorry. One in the Senate and one in the HoR.
My mistake.
And now you are up an extra Democratic senator who won in a deeply red state because the GOP fielded a sex offender...
But ya, it's a good idea for you to retain Franken after all the allegations against him, given how Jones managed to actually do the impossible in Alabama....
Right..
As Mr Archibald noted in Alabama.. "Alabama sent a message to women".
They wanted to believe the world they live in had changed. They wanted to think that finally, we've come to a place in society where sexual abuse is condemned, where the line of harassment is drawn and the consequence is real, where there's power for the powerless, hope for those who dared have none, a genuine climate of safety.
That's what's important here. That's the message, more than divisions or disputes between Republicans and Democrats.
That's what's important here. That's the message, more than divisions or disputes between Republicans and Democrats.
It's an amazing thing when the women are speaking, isn't it? It's amazing what can happen when you don't get down into the pig shit and when you stand on principal against sex offenders and show just how "the consequences are real". The impossible can happen.
Ask Moore about how the voters don't really hold it against actual individual candidates, iceaura.
In a deeply red state.. They voted against Moore. I didn't think they were going to do it, because well, it's Alabama. But they did. Which is telling, don't you think?
This is what zero tolerance looks like in real life.
So yeah, keep thinking that Minnesota voters won't hold it against Franken come next election if he was allowed to remain in place up to the next election.
A deeply red state just went blue for a senate seat because the red candidate was accused of molesting girls and women decades ago.
They wanted to think that finally, we've come to a place in society where sexual abuse is condemned, where the line of harassment is drawn and the consequence is real, where there's power for the powerless, hope for those who dared have none, a genuine climate of safety.
This is what the women in Alabama were saying. I highlighted the relevant bit. So why are you essentially arguing against zero tolerance of sexual harassment?
Ah, so now I am worse than the woman who endorsed and carried water for a paedophile and sex offender...
Ya, you really have the right to complain about slander..
Yep. I played with them. I kept the professions the same, and changed them.
What? You didn't realise that even unchanged, you were arguing for allowing men who sexually harass women remain in their positions for a certain time for expediency while ignoring the reality of what happens when this actually happens in real life? Your example is as bad as the argument one put forward about a woman having an abortion during child birth by demanding the baby be stuffed back up her vagina so the doctor can "kill da baby".
Oh so now it's "medical school reunions" and "professionally associated New Year's Parties"..
Whether they were or not, the response would have been the same. They would be fired. Firstly, most airlines have standards of conduct for their employees, as do hospitals. No, they would not be firing them while they are flying the plane or mid surgery, for obvious reasons.. You know, dealing with reality is sometimes hard, that you need to frame it 'while he's flying the plane' for example. I mean, what part of 'they would be fired' escaped your notice?
Franken wasn't fired. His female colleagues demanded he resign over 8 women accusing him, some of whom were groped at Democratic events.
That is the reality. That is the consequences of being gropyhands. That is what Mr Archibald meant when he said that the many many women, victims, he spoke to advised that there needed to be a line drawn and "where consequences are real". Franken wasn't fired. The women he worked with wanted him to resign for having groped 8 women.
You do get that, right? Now consider how a private organisation or someplace like a public hospital, would manage a pilot and a doctor in their employ who groped 8 women at an airport lounge while acting as a pilot for their organisation (or even if he was just a passenger and not in uniform), or a doctor groping women at medical school reunions and "professionally associated NY parties" while representing their organisation (or even their alumni)?
Now demand that those organisations not fire them because they are important people, and you don't want to delay passengers on a returning flight, or you don't think another neurosurgeon is capable of taking over the other's patients if he is fired...
I'm sorry, are you existing in a world where the airline would get on the radio and start firing pilots while they are flying? No, they would not. Just as the Democrats did not demand Franken resign while he was in the middle of negotiations in his state, for example. I mean, really? This is now your play? Are you that desperate?
To an invented, pretend question. A dishonest one.
And thereby avoided, reframed, invented, and posted dishonestly.
So? Anybody claiming otherwise, or are you trying to dodge again?
No, not "now" (that's dishonest) - inherently, in my illustration of your need for circumstances, and the workings of "zero tolerance" in non-cartoon reality. Which you have now triply verified.
That you are once again deflecting, and avoiding, and slandering, and attempting to reframe the posting you pretend to be responding to.
They are obvious reasons, indeed. They aren't "excuses", they don't involve "ignoring what he did". Hold that thought.
Illustrating, once again, how "zero tolerance" actually functions. Its beneficial consequences depend on grownups assessing circumstances - if that doesn't happen, it's crazy and self-destructive and injures its ostensible beneficiaries along with everyone else, politically.
Dishonest, again.
Dishonest,again.
For his State, you mean? (He's a US Senator). But they did. And now they have to deal with the consequences - cross your fingers. Dayton's been a worthy Governor, the scene in Washington is not hopeless, we all have some reasonable expectation of a reasonable outcome - so it's not a disaster. Yet.
Last edited:
Bells
Staff member
You keep repeating the same thing over again and my answer is still the same.. "neither".
Well, to begin with, your examples didn't exactly exist in reality.. More to the point, the solutions you presented or the scenario's of how this could play out, does not exist in reality. It is so far fetched (no, really, arguing of zero tolerance would see a pilot fired mid flight) that it was kind of pathetic and akin to the question from to pro choice 'what if she wants to abort it while she's in labor, can she have the baby re-inserted and then have it aborted if the umbilical cord is not cut'.. That is how your scenarios came across and played like. I mean, surely you can do better?
In other words, I gave your ridiculous examples the treatment it deserves. Don't like it? Stop posting pure stupidity and wasting everyone's time.
Dodge what? You haven't presented anything to dodge.
You said "school reunions". That could have meant anything. You know, specifics and whatnot.
And even if it was medical school reunions, while there in an official capacity and as a former student of that university or medical school.. You seriously think they'd umm and ahh?
As I said, your example was stupid because you were clearly attempting to imply that Franken's role is important, and you did so in the worst way imaginable.
You know, if you'd presented a thought to begin with, then you could say 'hold that thought'.
But it does happen. As happened with Franken. The grownup's assessed the allegations and the situations, deemed them credible and demanded he resign.
That is how zero tolerance for sex offenses functions.
So were your stupid examples.
As were your examples.
Yep. The consequences is that a pervert has resigned from the Senate. How devastating for you and the state of Minnesota and the Democrats.
#mgtow | (#chortle!)
Clearly.
No, really, just watch you freak out over the fact that women exist, and clearly you can be insulted.
Watch you respond with nothing but raw, stupid pride, and clearly you can be shamed.
Meanwhile, what's that? A mgtow posting a video against "feminism"? In a thread about sexual harassment?
Oh, hey, look, another mgtow who needs women to see him going his own way.
Notice how he lamely tried to turn mgtow into a movement which aims to protect women from
sexual harassment and assault, from one which protects the man from potential allegations of harassment and assault (because they just can't help themselves)? So all that talk of "risk" moves from the subject to the object of their... depraved (?) desires?
EF seemingly can't even keep up with himself, let alone other posters.
Sure, yeah... so do you have an arguement? You have counter argued nothing I have said.
Sure, yeah... so do you have an arguement? You have counter argued nothing I have said.So your going to ignore what she says about evolutionary biology because your trigger by the title?
So now you are a women?
Do you have any counter arguments to my list of recommendations?
1. The "guy on guy rule", any heterosexual man should treat women like he would other heterosexual men.
2. Don't ask women out, women should ask men out, since few are going to take seriously the idea of women sexually assaulting men.
3. Tinder and other dating apps: there women ask you out and state explicitly what they want. Traditional courting is now archaic and obsolete, it is almost 12018!
4. Co-workers = incest, just don't and never.
5. Redirect all sexual urges on to pornography and sex toys, all urges for relationships with hobbies and friends and family and pets.
6. There are 4 babies born every second there are 7.5 billion people now, reproduction is so last century, with the rate AI is developing humans will hopeful be obsolete and in decline by the end of this century, the final humans living lives of bliss fucking sex bots until death.
Anything other than I'm a doodo head dat don't spell no good? Call me what ever you want if it makes you feel better, none the less my arguments still stand.
Here is some more triggering for yous:
Is this supposed to be funny? I hope that was your intent, even though it is not funny.
No its serious, do you have a counter argument to these points?
See this is all you people got, emotion. When I argue with alt-righter about how the Jews are behind everything and white man is supreme and the jews must be exterminated and the black men sent back to africa, etc, etc," I don't reply with "are you serious, you are not funny, your stupid and racist and evil and dood head and don't spell no good and I hate you, I hate you, I hate you!"
I actually counter argue them, break down their arguments "if the white man is supreme how then do the jews run everything, look a the IQ studies you cite to claim blacks are chimps, it say right there jews are the smartest ethnic group, heck the Chinese are superior to whites too, kickout out all the blacks would be impossible and would collapse our civilization and result in total civil/race war of which millions of whites you care about will die, etc, etc"
Frankely they get off on being called names, reducing their opponents to emotional tantrums validates them, for their arguments must be logically solid because no one can counter argue them, only call them names.
Likewise if my arguments are wrong then you can calmly and rationally prove me wrong.
Last edited:
Unlike you, I do not hate/fear women, I have no desire to rape women, and NOT sexually harassing women is terribly easy for me. I also do not subscribe to your "bitches be shoppin" nonsense (which anyone with half a brain will inform you has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with evolutionary biology, so until you can back that up with actual science (which you can't), just STOP), and neither do I acknowledge these "risks" which you obsess over. So...
Your recommendations are simply not relevant to me, or anyone who isn't a serial sex offender, for that matter.
Can you direct me to where I said any of that? I only recall having said that you, seemingly, struggle with reading comprehension and that you regularly use words for which you do not fully understand their meaning.
How can I have a counter argument when you don't have an argument?
You have a list of ways to behave that are silly, which of course you know.
Sexual harassment is not that difficult of a subject to grasp. Here is an easy way to 'get it'. Treat women the way you would want them to treat your sister or daughter.
If this doesn't help, then the safest thing to do is to lock yourself in your house cut off all contact with women - then you might be safe.
spidergoat
Valued Senior Member
Your argument is that being against sexual harassment is the same as being against human reproduction generally?
See this is all you people got, emotion. When I argue with alt-righters about how the Jews are behind everything and the white man is supreme and the jews must be exterminated and the black men sent back to africa", etc, etc, I don't reply with "are you serious, you are not funny, your stupid and racist and evil and dood head and don't spell no good and I hate you, I hate you, I hate you!"
I actually counter argue them, break down their arguments :"if the white man is supreme how then do the jews run everything, look a the IQ studies you cite to claim blacks are chimps, it say right there jews are the smartest ethnic group, heck the Chinese are superior to whites too, kicking out out all the blacks would be impossible and would collapse our civilization and result in total civil/race war of which millions of whites you care about will die", etc, etc"
Frankely they get off on being called names, reducing their opponents to emotional tantrums validates them, they conclude their arguments must be logically solid because no one can counter argue them, only call them names and attack their character. Actually counter arguing them either makes them reconsider or now they are the ones tantrum about being talked down to be a dirty jew, certainly those on the fence of alt-rightery can see not everyone on the left are just cry baby snowflakes.
Likewise if my arguments are wrong then you can calmly and rationally prove me wrong.
Silly, that your counter argument? How are they silly?
Why not the way I would want them to treat my brother or son? Is there some ways we should treat women that we should not treat men?
Yeah and? Sounds fine to me. Do you think I liked having a graduate student shaking her ass in my face? If she wanted to date me, she could have simply ask me out, then I could have denied her officially, citing university policy on faculty student relationships.
Well first of all that is all a stawman of your creation, second it has nothing to do with my points, third, evolutionary biology is fact. Men and women on average have different personalities and preferences, and this is the product of sex hormones and of evolution moulding men and women's instincts in accordance with their different reproductive strategies. This is in fact where much of our modern problems comes from between the sexes because modern society and our instincts are incongruent, my argument is to fix the problem by redirecting instinct with modern technology.
Example: that psychology today article I quoted a few pages back, about how most women do not like asking men out but prefer to be asked out? Do you deny their conclusions?
As for what "risks" you deny: what do you mean?
I disagree, I think it is relevant to any man (which you may or may not be). Men want to ask women out for romantic and/or sexual relationships, how should they go about it in order to minimize the chances of it being sexual harassment? I propose how they should do just that and better yet just not need women at all. I would think you people would be pleased, is not the reduction of sexual harassment what you want? How about you propose how men should court women in a manner as to minimize sexual harassment?
Insults irrelevant to my argument, equivalent to calling me "doodo head dat don't spell no good", yes.
How do you derive that? Tiassa was arguing that if all men do as I do then men would go extinct, I countered with the fact I would be fine with that.
I actually counter argue them, break down their arguments :"if the white man is supreme how then do the jews run everything, look a the IQ studies you cite to claim blacks are chimps, it say right there jews are the smartest ethnic group, heck the Chinese are superior to whites too, kicking out out all the blacks would be impossible and would collapse our civilization and result in total civil/race war of which millions of whites you care about will die", etc, etc"
Frankely they get off on being called names, reducing their opponents to emotional tantrums validates them, they conclude their arguments must be logically solid because no one can counter argue them, only call them names and attack their character. Actually counter arguing them either makes them reconsider or now they are the ones tantrum about being talked down to be a dirty jew, certainly those on the fence of alt-rightery can see not everyone on the left are just cry baby snowflakes.
Likewise if my arguments are wrong then you can calmly and rationally prove me wrong.
Silly, that your counter argument? How are they silly?
Why not the way I would want them to treat my brother or son? Is there some ways we should treat women that we should not treat men?
Yeah and? Sounds fine to me. Do you think I liked having a graduate student shaking her ass in my face? If she wanted to date me, she could have simply ask me out, then I could have denied her officially, citing university policy on faculty student relationships.
Well first of all that is all a stawman of your creation, second it has nothing to do with my points, third, evolutionary biology is fact. Men and women on average have different personalities and preferences, and this is the product of sex hormones and of evolution moulding men and women's instincts in accordance with their different reproductive strategies. This is in fact where much of our modern problems comes from between the sexes because modern society and our instincts are incongruent, my argument is to fix the problem by redirecting instinct with modern technology.
Example: that psychology today article I quoted a few pages back, about how most women do not like asking men out but prefer to be asked out? Do you deny their conclusions?
As for what "risks" you deny: what do you mean?
I disagree, I think it is relevant to any man (which you may or may not be). Men want to ask women out for romantic and/or sexual relationships, how should they go about it in order to minimize the chances of it being sexual harassment? I propose how they should do just that and better yet just not need women at all. I would think you people would be pleased, is not the reduction of sexual harassment what you want? How about you propose how men should court women in a manner as to minimize sexual harassment?
Insults irrelevant to my argument, equivalent to calling me "doodo head dat don't spell no good", yes.
How do you derive that? Tiassa was arguing that if all men do as I do then men would go extinct, I countered with the fact I would be fine with that.
Sorry, I have no inclination to continue this discussion it seems to have gone beyond the absurd. I suppose for some life is more complicated if you have to take into account how your behavior affects women - sorry if this is an issue for you.
Not an issue at all, my life is much simpler because I don't have to take account of how my behavior affects women, because my behavior should not affect women, at least not in any sexual manner.
Lots of things are absurd, electing a pig boar because he promises to ban all Muslims and "build the wall" is abused, and yet it happened.
spidergoat
Valued Senior Member
No one is complaining about normal sexual behavior, but you are acting like suddenly the rules have changed and you have to go to extraordinary lengths to protect yourself from harassment claims.
Oh then what is normal sexual behavior? What is sexual harassment? Be specific. Because to me it appears as if a man does anything to a women that makes her FEEL sexualized, objectified, threatened, demand, offended, etc, it is sexual harassment. What is the difference between accidentally bumping into a women and groping? Why her opinion and memory of the event that it.
Tina Liebling was talking to me after her debate last weekend and she told me that one of the other candidates had accidentally brush her knee in one of the other debates and immediately and profoundly began apologizing to her, she was flabbergasted at why, but then she understood: she could at a whim accuse him of sexual harassment.
By the way Tina's latest letter:
Dear Friends,
Thank you to all of you who took time to respond to my email about why I did not call for Al Franken's resignation. I received many responses, and about 90% of them supported my position. There were so many that I can't respond individually, but I read and appreciated all that were not ugly (only a few were ugly). I have also been approached in person by many DFLers who are angry at what happened and happy to see my email because they thought they were alone. I am sharing a sampling of the responses so you can get a flavor of the reaction.
On Sunday, former Governor Arne Carlson weighed in with a similar sentiment. You can read the entire piece here: http://govarnecarlson.blogspot.com/
Here are a few of the responses I received. (Initials only, to protect the privacy of the writers, some edited for length.)
Thank you again for your support,
Tina
P.S. To learn more about my candidacy, please visit www.TinaLiebling.com
I would like to express my support and agreement with your statements regarding Al Franken. As a woman approaching 60, I worked in a male-dominated of engineering many years and understand the challenges and patterns of behavior. No doubt lots of crap has gone down over the years and needs to stop. But all scenarios are not the same as you so eloquently stated thank you.
The concern for me is that it has become more about sexual behavior in isolation rather than the behavior around gender that truly threatens women's paychecks. Both are extremely important, but somehow grabbing someone's ass instead of their paycheck is much more titillating. In the rearview mirror of my career the bigger impact is most certainly those instances where my career and paycheck were threatened. Often times they are intertwined, but we need to pay attention to both not just the more salacious events and pictures.
Best regards and thank you -SS
Very well written. I agree completely. I am mad that we will not know the truth. I feel cheated that our Senator was forced to resign for something he may not have done. Sexual harassment is deplorable, but so is being forced out by anonymous allegations without a hearing. Where is the due process that America is noted for? I feel Al was cheated.
Keep up your measured, reasonable thought process. It will suit you (and all of us) well in your future endeavors. -LD
I agree that it is a great disappointment that too many democrats called for Senator Franken to go as soon as the first allegation became public, seemingly without any due diligence on their part and certainly no due process for Sen. Franken. It would have been very difficult for Senator Franken to go through the ethics hearing but it would have been much more important to have gone through the process and establish the FACTS of his misogynist behavior. This really does nothing to bring attention or justice to the transgressions of "Judge" Roy Moore or Donald Trump. Their bestial reaction will be to gloat about how they can get away with it.
There is now a feeling among many I have spoken with, male and female, that a lynch mob mentality prevails, with little proof more than "he said, she said,,,". Let's punish misogynism wherever found, but with thoughtful, measured response rather than continue the circular firing squads. This message was read and approved by the important women in my life. -NW
I really appreciate this email and statement from you. Like most women I know, I've had dozens of experiences with men in my lifetime that occupy a gray area somewhere between "inappropriate but harmless" and obviously wrong. Yet, I fear that we're missing an opportunity for learning and growth if we continue down this path of casting out every man who has ever crossed into that gray space. It's an important "ah ha moment" for many men to realize that things they've said and done in the past, believing them to be harmless fun, can actually make women feel victimized. But, we need to allow men the opportunity to experience that moment of understanding, apologize, and grow into better people in the future. And, like you said, there is a clear difference in my mind between someone who has made off-color jokes, or even hugged/patted/kissed a woman without her consent, and men who literally rape or molest women and especially underage girls.
Thanks for putting yourself on the line to speak up. -AH
Thank you for standing up for Al!!! With you now. Took great courage not to join the witch hunt. Thank you for your smart, thoughtful explanation and for the courageous action itself. Bravo! -KB
It is exactly how many of my Democratic feminist friends and I see the issue, and I'm sure it took courage for you to stand up and say it. It's too easy to be bullied into false equivalencies these days. Dems have just shot themselves in the foot in a big way. I just made a donation to your campaign. It felt like the only positive thing I've had a chance to do politically in a long time! -JS
You can't imagine what a joy it was to receive your email explaining why you did not support the remove to pressure Al Franken to resign. You have the good sense and ethics to remind us of the dangers inherent in the current moment, without disputing the gravity of pervasive sexual harassment. That is a nuanced thinking that I find woefully lacking in many liberal colleagues. Thanks, and know that many of us stand behind your position. -LS-S
spidergoat
Valued Senior Member
Ask HR.
- Status