View Single Post
Old 04-04-2019, 09:27 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,418
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
Then I'll be damned if I'm able to figure out what you're saying.

What exactly is special about these photos and videos that their consent to this specific use is necessary, given that they're photos and videos of a public event? If it's not about anything particularly salacious or revealing going on in them, what's the deal?

If it's a matter of just the simple nonconsensuality of the touching, suppose Person A punches Person B in the face at a public event. That's nonconsensual touching, for sure. Should Person B's consent be required before anybody publishes a photo of it?

You're trying to stand on some sort of principle here, but I just don't grok it.
Maybe my position is complicated and has a lot of nuance, but I've tried to explain it as best I can in several recent posts.

But further, why the hell do you need the videos? Multiple women have spoken up, with very credible (and consistent!) allegations of inappropriate touching by Biden. Unless you're the type that just naturally disbelieves women (and I don't think you are, based on past threads on other instances of inappropriate behavior), the videos are entirely unnecessary to your argument. Now I believe the number is 7 -- 7 women have come forward with very similar stories about inappropriate touching by Biden. Why not just use those stories to criticize Biden, just on the off chance that there might be a shred of truth to my argument -- that perhaps one or two of these other women and girls really don't want videos of their bodies being touched used as evidence (and more importantly, spread around and duplicated all over the internet) for an argument they aren't interested in making?

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 04-04-2019 at 09:29 AM.