Donald trump accused of serial groping

Post Reply New Topic

^

Exactly none of what you claimed is in that sentence.

This is a rather long stretch

What the bloody hell, I almost rewrote the exact same words he used.
First off, I was not defending someone just because they are celebrities, which is something untrue that he malignantly implied. He was attributing to me something false that is has nothing to do with what I said, i.e. that I was just defending him because he is a celebrity.
Second he was saying that I (because he was obviously referring to me) was ignoring what the disclosers had to say, which I never did.
Also he said that these actions, that he unjustly attributed to me, are an example of rape culture. Which is true, but it had nothing to do with me.
It was not a manifest ad hominem, like saying "you're wrong because you are gay" or something like that, but it still was to some extent.

That's what the victims have accused her of. I agree that she and her husband shouldn't be assumed guilty without some investigation, but people seem to think that the same thing doesn't apply to Trump.

First-of-all, B19 is a SHE! Secondly, I agree with jrjones9933----NOWHERE in B19's two posts that you addressed (including where she made the 7 points, as reported by "The Washington Post") did she say: "I am talking to YOU, ALONE, Peacesells". Just because one posts DIRECTLY beneath you, doesn't mean they're addressing you----and, her Washington Post one was made SEVERAL posts after yours, and you seem to take THAT one, personally, TOO.

Suggestion: Just ONLY look for your NAME----that's what *I* always do----THAT way, if someone DOES not-put-a-name, on PURPOSE, to see how many suckas they can trap (I'm NOT saying that's what B19, did), YOU will not have fallen for it / been baited.

We're not going to have a police investigation of either. There won't be any final guilty or not guilty from a court. You evidently still haven't bothered to look into all the media coverage of the charges against the Clintons. There was this special prosecutor, Ken Starr, who spent 6 years and several millions of dollars in that effort and didn't ever reveal very much. In the end, the trial was held in the media and Bill beat the charges there, too. Please, insist that Trump get the same treatment, but you might want to know what you're asking for.

This thing we're doing now with Trump. It's exactly the same as the process we went through with Clinton. When there are no charges, it's the best we can do. I don't see the unequal treatment you claim, but then you clearly haven't bothered to know anything about the situation you're discussing.

Just because you don't see it, or rather don't want to see it, it doesn't mean that it is not true. I was the one discussing with the person, it's very obvious that it was directed at me.

Excuse me, I thought that when a person accused another of sexual harassment or rape there would be at least an investigaiton. How silly of me.
I do think that there should be an investigation on this claims and maybe a trial.
Also I am not sure that Trump is getting the same treatment, I think it's very amplified. For example I didn't know that about Bill Clinton until recently. Sure I didn't look for it and maybe they mentioned it here in the news when it happened, but now they are always saying that about Trump and you can't really not know it. Surely it happens because of the elections, otherwise I wouldn't know as well.

As long as you don't look, you can remain ignorant. Good luck with that.

Back to Trump, the more I think about it the more I become convinced that he was telling the truth when he said that it is just locker room talk. I didn't believe it at first, especially after hearing from all the professional athletes, but I had not considered the locker rooms that Trump must have seen. I never saw the locker rooms at the University of Pennsylvania or WWE. I don't see a lot of other locker rooms on his Wikipedia page, so please correct my list if there are others. Anyway, I'm thinking that he has actually heard that specific kind of talk in those specific locker rooms. Maybe he goes to an exclusive Queens or Manhattan gym, and they talk that way in the men's locker room there. Does anyone know which gyms Trump works out at?

Maybe this whole thing comes down to cultural differences. Did any of my fellow liberals make the same discriminatory assumption as I did?

No, I don't think so.

I have been in locker rooms in several universities and a number of Manhattan and Brooklyn gyms. I never overhead someone saying anything about walking up to women and grabbing their genitalia. I certainly overheard men talking about women they were attracted too, and sometimes they were pretty crude about that, but their is an important difference between "I want to sleep with that woman" even if that desire is expressed in earthy language and "I will just go up and grab that P***"

I just have not heard guys talking about their desire to sexually assault women, or ability to get away with doing it.
I have heard plenty of guys talking about how attractive they find particular women, but that's not at all the same thing.

I heard worse in the army, both from enlisted as well as from officers. that just tells me that horndogs come in all kinds.

Wow what a good argumentation. I still don't get why one can dismiss harassment claims just because he guy is married to his favourite candidate, but ok.

Yeah, I can definitely see what you're saying here, as I have experienced the same thing in the military. The level of "crudeness" was, at least, as bad----if not WORSE, like you said; and, this wasn't just statements like, "MAN, I'd like to do HER"----this was detailed recounting of sexual acts.

The problem that I'm having though, is that Trump wasn't discussing consensual behavior. I've been grabbed, groped, forcibly kissed, and worse----and hearing him talk like this, has been so disturbing to me, that I've had to mute the TV, every time they talk about it, cuz I'm afraid it's gonna cause me to have a seizure. I mean, how can ANYONE (Trump), with a conscience, think it's okay to take something that doesn't belong to them----which is, in effect, what someone does when they do what Trump was describing.

Yeah, I know there are some guys who think: "If a good-lookin' chick groped ME, I'd LOVE it!"----but, I'm thinking that's because they feel it would make their job (finding / courting a date), easier for them. I'm thinking that if these same guys felt like they were being robbed, or being made to feel "less than"----or, felt like they were going to PUKE, seize, or poop themselves----every time it happened, it would get old, REAL quick; and, these are some of the things some women experience, when it happens to them.

Also, the age of the woman doesn't matter (this has happened to me from college-age, all-the-way up 'til my age now; and, I'm thinking this is the same, for MOST women)----nor, the attractiveness, even; cuz it's about "gittin' some of that" (even if it's "just" groping); it's NOT about getting a date / spouse----AND, I would even venture to say that it's quite possible that it happens, at least, as-much-as, if not MORE, to a woman whom most would consider UNattractive, because some men think ANY attention they're giving a woman, is better than NONE, and is doing them a favor.

Also, the age of the perpetrator doesn't matter, either. The men who have done it to ME, have been, pretty much, ALL ages----from about 30ish to 80ish----and, please don't think "EIGHTY----awww, he's HARMLESS!", cuz it doesn't matter whether he could actually DO "anything" (or, anything MORE); what matters, is if you've had it done to you, your ENTIRE life----which, as I said, I think most women, HAVE!!

Also, I'm thinking that it's quite possible that it won't matter whether or not a female voter has had this done to her (at WHATEVER level of being violated); because, I'm thinking, that MOST believe it CAN / has happened, to OTHERS!!

(Note: I am NOT a Hillary supporter, EITHER.)

[tangent about crude terms in the military]
As I read this, I was reminded of a rather good book and miniseries on War by Gwynne Dyer. I think I saw it on WNET/PBS but it was originally a Canadian production. Part of the series showed soldiers in basic training learning small unit hand signals and the instructor was using an imaginary encounter with "Suzy Rottencrotch" to help get the gestures into the men's heads (If I recall correctly, these were Marines at Paris Island 20 years ago) The comand to spread out was described as pushing Suzy's legs apart while the close up command was described as pushing her knees back together. It was memorable, if crude.

Link for the book--an excellent if somewhat depressing read.

Also, someone has put parts of it on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPnppCelvk0

It was decades ago, and I may not be remembering it correctly, but there is an interesting book and documentary series behind these links for anyone who is curious about the military

/tangent

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37639640

As a woman who is only a few years younger than Trump's oldest target of sexual assault, I can second what she says about the way women her age were socialised to believe that sexual assault was their own fault, it was one of many reigning silencing techniques, and it is very rare and perhaps more difficult for a woman in her 70s to disclose sexual assault at all, which makes her stand all the more credible to me.

Why didn't she report it at the time?

There are many many reasons why not:

Because she believed that she would not be believed
Because of the imbalance of power
Because police often refused to investigate such complaints
Because she perceived the culture of blaming the victim was still entrenched at the time
Because she had observed the vindictive streak in Trump's personality and felt very threatened by that

These are some reasons, not all.

Excruciating footage of Trump trying to force his lips onto an unwilling child this week:

http://www.politicususa.com/2016/10/17/ ... issed.html