Page 1 of 2 [ 26 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

WilliamWDelaney
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Apr 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,201

31 Jul 2012, 9:44 am

Okay, here is where I pronounce my hatred for sex scandals in general.

First up to bat, the Sandusky scandal. While the general public have been masturbating over whatever fantasies they have been having about Sandusky's sexual exploits with pre-teen boys, corruption and crime every bit as serious if not more-so barely gets any press at all. Famous coaches have routinely put steroids into their star players, permanently altering their development. Intelligent, young men, who might have contributed something to society, have driven to cardiac arrest. And yet the Sandusky scandal gets all kinds of press because it gives the public a massive boner to fantasize about perverse sexual exploits and an even bigger one to self-righteously wave their left fists at the screen while the other one is otherwise occupied. I've known a few victims of CSA; as much of a taint it is on society, it does not deserve the spectacularly over-blown attention that the Sandusky scandal has received.

However, that's not the only sex scandal that has tainted my t.v. screen. I remember the Monica Lewinsky scandal very well, in fact. You want to know why it got so much press? Because every middle-aged idiot in the country was fantasizing about it between their episodes of self-righteous raging and moralizing. While other politicians are robbing the country blind and disenfranchising our future...while women are being put through horrific forced pregnancy in some states...with politicians getting us into lunatic wars out of nothing more than religious bigotry, the country was transfixed by the personal infidelity of a president with an office intern. Everyone in the country was talking about a god damn blow-job, ignoring stuff that really matters.

More recently, the Weiner scandal was all over the news networks. Why? As much of a loud-mouthed schmuck as he is, there was no purpose whatsoever in drumming him out of politics over text-sex, particularly when it only seems to be a moderate concern for his wife. Huma Abedin doesn't have some gigantic vested interest in staying with Weiner. Politically, he's "damaged goods." However, there is only so much drama you can have over someone sending text messages to a Vegas prostitute. Again, the fact that the media could turn it into the Great Sex Scandal of the decade made it news when people shouldn't have taken any notice whatsoever.

Now, I know that there is only so much you can suppress human nature. However, I can guarantee that, if we were to start violently castrating every news reporter who attempted to make news out of this crap, then, pretty soon, we would stop hearing about this nonsense, and we might hear something that is actually news-worthy. Forget passing legislation, people. Let's just form a big, unruly mob. Whenever a news reporter starts thinking of reporting on a sex scandal, mob news headquarters, drag the degenerate out into the street, and cut off his balls. Let the fuckers make news out of that.

I hate sex scandals in the media. I see them as tawdry. I see them as stupid. I have no respect for the people who make an issue over them. I think that people who let these big sex scandals influence their opinions of public figures, no matter who it is, ought to be punched in the face and given a bloody nose. I see it as asinine. They deserve to have their balls barbecued, as far as I'm concerned.



YippySkippy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2011
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,986

31 Jul 2012, 9:49 am

Quote:
I think that people who let these big sex scandals influence their opinions of public figures, no matter who it is, ought to be punched in the face and given a bloody nose.


So the fact that Sandusky is a child rapist should in no way influence anyone's opinion of him? Is that what you're saying?



ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 116
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

31 Jul 2012, 10:01 am

I had never heard of him previously. I still wouldn't know him if I saw him. Meh, he's just another inmate.



Tequila
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 28,897
Location: Lancashire, UK

31 Jul 2012, 10:18 am

To be honest, I don't think sex "scandals" are any of the public's business when they involve an elected politician who has a) not committed a criminal offence and b) not representative of a political party or part of a movement that is trying to force the kind of repressive 'morals' that the politician himself has just flouted. A random backbench MP who has an affair really isn't of any importance to anyone but his wife and family, but a backbench MP or a Government Minister who lectures everyone else on morality should be flayed alive for his open hypocrisy.



WilliamWDelaney
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Apr 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,201

31 Jul 2012, 10:55 am

YippySkippy wrote:
Quote:
I think that people who let these big sex scandals influence their opinions of public figures, no matter who it is, ought to be punched in the face and given a bloody nose.


So the fact that Sandusky is a child rapist should in no way influence anyone's opinion of him? Is that what you're saying?
What annoys me is the fact that it gets more attention than a coach in an identical position of social prominence driving one of his players to cardiac arrest, which happens all the time, or otherwise abusing his position as coach at the expense of the good health of young people. I don't think that the sexual nature of Sandusky's crime makes it more relevant than any other form of abuse.

It goes back to our society's revolting obsession over sex, in which you have now made yourself a party. You know very well that you wouldn't be so morally outraged over an equal insult to a child's health. It just excites you that it's a crime of a sexual nature. I think it's perverted.

I think that these giant sex scandals in the media are perverted. I cannot imagine anything so crass.



Oldout
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Feb 2012
Age: 70
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,539
Location: Reading, PA

31 Jul 2012, 10:57 am

Back in the 90s during the Clinton/Lewinsky fiasco I was really looking forward to Ruth Baeder Ginsburg debating Clarence Thomas as to whether or not a blowjob constituted a valid sex act. That could have become a Supreme Court decision that would be known for centuries to come.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 84
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

31 Jul 2012, 11:00 am

Oldout wrote:
Back in the 90s during the Clinton/Lewinsky fiasco I was really looking forward to Ruth Baeder Ginsburg debating Clarence Thomas as to whether or not a blowjob constituted a valid sex act. That could have become a Supreme Court decision that would be known for centuries to come.


Would it have stood up to any future judicial review? When does stare decisis become stare erectus?

ruveyn



PM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Oct 2010
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,466
Location: Southeastern United States

31 Jul 2012, 11:06 am

Sex scandals are a media trick to divert our attention from relevant issues.


_________________
Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men?


ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 116
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

31 Jul 2012, 11:08 am

News shows exist to fill space between advertisements.

The only news show that I watch regularly is The Colbert Report. He has a conservative slant, but he is entertaining. Plus, I catch his shows at my leisure from his internet site.

I might listen to NPR if in the car by myself.

The television networks want to hold your attention just long enough so that you won't change channels through the next round of advertisements. People who watch news channels might imagine themselves to be intellectually superior to, or better informed than, people who watch steamy soap operas, but they really aren't.



JanuaryMan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jan 2012
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,359

31 Jul 2012, 11:52 am

I dislike sex scandals because for the most part they aren't illegal and act as a distraction from the more important issues in the news such as where is our money going, why are we even fighting or aiding certain people overseas, and what is happening to normal people around the country.

However, illegal sex acts should definitely be exposed via the media to show that having influence in said media and society does not make one immune to the law. I don't agree with how much time they are given in the news, but if it happens I sure would like the people responsible held to account publicly like with any other terrible crime (the recent shooting for example).



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,059
Location: temperate zone

31 Jul 2012, 2:46 pm

WilliamWDelaney wrote:
YippySkippy wrote:
Quote:
I think that people who let these big sex scandals influence their opinions of public figures, no matter who it is, ought to be punched in the face and given a bloody nose.


So the fact that Sandusky is a child rapist should in no way influence anyone's opinion of him? Is that what you're saying?
What annoys me is the fact that it gets more attention than a coach in an identical position of social prominence driving one of his players to cardiac arrest, which happens all the time, or otherwise abusing his position as coach at the expense of the good health of young people. I don't think that the sexual nature of Sandusky's crime makes it more relevant than any other form of abuse.

It goes back to our society's revolting obsession over sex, in which you have now made yourself a party. You know very well that you wouldn't be so morally outraged over an equal insult to a child's health. It just excites you that it's a crime of a sexual nature. I think it's perverted.

I think that these giant sex scandals in the media are perverted. I cannot imagine anything so crass.


Answer the question.
Does the fact that Sandusky raped boys irrelevent to your opinion of him?

And after you finnaly give an answer to that- are you saying the the Global Vatican coverup of pedaphile priests is nobody's business?



Last edited by naturalplastic on 31 Jul 2012, 3:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

YippySkippy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2011
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,986

31 Jul 2012, 2:51 pm

Quote:
It goes back to our society's revolting obsession over sex, in which you have now made yourself a party. You know very well that you wouldn't be so morally outraged over an equal insult to a child's health. It just excites you that it's a crime of a sexual nature. I think it's perverted.


So....because I asked a question in response to your post, I am a sex-obsessed pervert? Is that your line of reasoning?



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

31 Jul 2012, 3:08 pm

You're not going to get too many people agreeing with you by supporting Sandusky. The man is a convicted child rapist, you not believing it for whatever reason doesn't change that. I hope there is never any tolerance for child rape by the general public. Sandusky was a child predator and was protected by huge university and the winningest college football coach of all time.

As for the run of the mill political sex scandal, it's usually more about them lying/trying to cover up said scandal or them being a hypocrite to their values, a question of character. If they simply own up to it they usually survive if they weren't already vulnerable politically. If it's something illegal it definitely should be exposed.



JanuaryMan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jan 2012
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,359

31 Jul 2012, 8:01 pm

YippySkippy wrote:
Quote:
It goes back to our society's revolting obsession over sex, in which you have now made yourself a party. You know very well that you wouldn't be so morally outraged over an equal insult to a child's health. It just excites you that it's a crime of a sexual nature. I think it's perverted.


So....because I asked a question in response to your post, I am a sex-obsessed pervert? Is that your line of reasoning?


Don't feel too bad about it. Projection is a lot easier than answering questions for some LOL. I've answered this thread as if there was an overall topic to discuss but what is really up for discussion is a particular view from a previous thread.



WilliamWDelaney
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Apr 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,201

01 Aug 2012, 5:25 am

Okay, having read the responses here, I have decided that anyone who mentions a sex scandal of any kind to me, ever, will be punched squarely between the eyes. Done.



JanuaryMan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jan 2012
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,359

01 Aug 2012, 5:50 am

WilliamWDelaney wrote:
Okay, having read the responses here, I have decided that anyone who mentions a sex scandal of any kind to me, ever, will be punched squarely between the eyes. Done.


...I don't get it. You're the one who brought it up in the first place. So your answer to dealing with responses you don't like is to throw tantrums and hit people?

There are a good mix of comments in this thread with balanced views not just one side or another side. There are also some questions that remain unanswered in this thread and the previous. Why do you find them so hard to tackle? You keep bringing this up but refuse to talk about it and blame us for talking about it?