Yes. I suspect a huge number of them are, in fact, sociopaths and narcissists.
I will keep this in mind going forward. Apologies if I’ve been a dick.
Back in the 70s I was much more of a manipulative bastard than a brutal one, but I am certain that I had a very poor concept of consent.
And I feel terrible about that now.
These 11th hour accusations are being portrayed as sooooo unfair.
You know what I think when I see these dire predictions that, Yikes, a man may be treated unfairly, we mustn’t ever let that happen? Good. Let them feel, how awful it is to be treated with disbelief, skepticism and outright hostility when they deny these allegations. Women have forever had this treatment heaped upon them when telling the truth about what has happened to them.
When this situation starts to be as unfair for men as women have always had it, then we can start to think about those poor, poor men. Maybe after they’ve been treated like this for a long, long time, maybe then I will actually start giving a crap about them.
When men (general) start caring about what actually happens to women, I’ll return the favor.
You think it’s easy to suborn perjury?
What do you think is happening here? That DNC operatives are trolling the trailer parks with hundred dollar bills looking for women willing to smear upstanding Republican men?
If that’s happening, don’t you think the Republican insistence that no investigations of the accusations are possible is a little short sighted? If this is all phony stuff instigated by George Soros, why not put the FBI on the case? Yes, if it’s just he-said she-said stuff from 30 years ago the FBI isn’t going to find anything. But if it’s a smear job orchestrated by political fixers? Maybe the FBI can find evidence of that kind of stuff?
You don’t have to take all accusations at face value. You can fucking investigate accusations. Orchestrating a fake accusation smear campaign leaves a fucking trail, especially if you’re recruiting the kind of person who’d be willing to make up fake accusations for money.
Taking accusations seriously isn’t remotely the same thing as taking all accusations at face value, or dismissing all accusations out of hand.
Yes. There is a direct correlation between an inclination toward power seeking and being an entitled jerkwad.
Um, which part of that post doesn’t ring true to you?
I saw a headline: Republican Women; "What teenage boy didn’t do that?"
I thought, “What kind of beasts did those GOP women date? I was a teenage boy, just as horny as the rest, and I never tried to tear off any girl’s clothes or put a hand over her mouth to stop the screaming.”
Same here. Me and my peers would have called a guy like that a douchebag rapist.
These 11th hour accusations are being portrayed as sooooo unfair.
You know what I think when I see these dire predictions that, Yikes, a man may be treated unfairly, we mustn’t ever let that happen? Good. Let them feel, how awful it is to be treated with disbelief, skepticism and outright hostility when they deny these allegations. Women have forever had this treatment heaped upon them when telling the truth about what has happened to them.
When this situation starts to be as unfair for men as women have always had it, then we can start to think about those poor, poor men. Maybe after they’ve been treated like this for a long, long time, maybe then I will actually start giving a crap about them.
When men (general) start caring about what actually happens to women, I’ll return the favor.
I get what you’re saying, but bitterness and resentment are not healthy, and revenge doesn’t do anybody any good.
Are 11th hour #metoo accusations going to become a regular thing (like for Kavanaugh)? I predict we will see many, against multiple candidates, right before the midterms. What do you think?
What’s the “11th hour” stuff about? When’s the stroke of midnight, and why?
John Oliver just did a segment on Kavanaugh (not officially online yet) where he happened to have done an old interview with Anita Hill way before any of this controversy, that was sadly on topic.
Oliver asked Anita Hill if she thought this could happen to anyone else in the future. Anita Hill said that she thought that things have come a long way, and that it wouldn’t happen because people doing this kind of behavior would be taken out during the vetting process.
Anita Hill must be horrified with how little progress has been made.
To the OP, I hope that 11th hour allegations continue to happen for people who are not vetted thoroughly enough not to have these allegations be necessary. If the candidate is thoroughly vetted with full information, the accuser can be interviewed by the FBI and the candidate can be pulled or the allegation can be explained away without there being a public spectacle.
Since not every candidate since Clarence Thomas has had this happen, I don’t think all candidates are equally likely to have this happen.
Completely arbitrary aside:
This is not the first time I have seen on this board that the Anita Hill episode was not online… but I watched it “officially online” last week…
I get what you’re saying, but bitterness and resentment are not healthy, and revenge doesn’t do anybody any good.
Speak for yourself.
I see it as ANGER, not bitterness and resentment, but thanks for you assessment.:rolleyes:
Anger is very motivating and revenge is highly underrated.
There were no 11th hour sexual abuse allegations against Merrick Garland, Neil Gorsuch, Samuel Alito, etc.
I know that some accusations are false. But when you have multiple accusations with multiple witnesses, and they discussed the accusations years before the person was being considered for a position of power and influence it needs to be investigated. People (women and men) deserve to feel safe in our society.
… and revenge is highly underrated.
I don’t know. There’s certainly not much money in it.
Are 11th hour #metoo accusations going to become a regular thing (like for Kavanaugh)?
We’ll soon find out. We have a Congressional election coming up very soon. If you are right, every candidate will face MeToo accusations in the next few weeks, right? Or at least every candidate in a tight race?
Completely arbitrary aside:
This is not the first time I have seen on this board that the Anita Hill episode was not online… but I watched it “officially online” last week…
The one that wasn’t online from the official Last Week account was the Kavanaugh episode, not the Hill episode. In the Kavanaugh episode, Ms. Hill has a cameo, and the video you watched, while certainly online, was from any of the multitude of pirates who hang up talk show videos without the show’s authorization.
As of right now, 7:31 CET on September 26, 2018, the last episode that’s fully uploaded to the official Last Week account is the Facebook/Myanmar one.
Um, which part of that post doesn’t ring true to you?
Thanks for asking. This part:
Rapists are a different type; they desire sex with women but they have too much self-loathing to believe women want to have sex with them. So their sexual fantasies involve situations where they can force unwilling women to have sex with them.
I’m not going to argue that rape is not about sex. I will argue, though, that it’s simplistic to argue that rapists rape because they feel like losers who can’t get women any other way. Nope. It’s not that they resort to rape because they feel they can’t get women otherwise; it’s revenge against the women who scorned them in high school that turns them on. The expression, “rape is not an act of aggressive sex but a sexual act of aggression” is true.
From anNYTarticle a year ago:
Dr. Malamuth has noticed that repeat offenders often tell similar stories of rejection in high school and of looking on as “jocks and the football players got all the attractive women.”
As these once-unpopular, often narcissistic men become more successful, he suspects that “getting back at these women, having power over them, seems to have become a source of arousal.”
It’s about revenge and rage, not low-self-esteem.
For some. For others, it’s about low self-esteem (and hey, it may even be about revenge and rage against the people who gave them that low self-esteem, the two aren’t contradictory). For yet others, it’s about not seeing the object of their lust at anything except objects. Rapists are people; they have more than one brain among them, they have different circumstances, they have different motivations. Hell, those people Dr. Malamuth examined? They’re different from the millions of rapists who never went to high school!
Little Nemo was generalizing; I don’t know whether the majority of rapists meet his description, have that motivation, but either they do (in which case other generalizations will be further from the truth) or they don’t (in which case other generalizations which don’t look at actual numbers will be closer to the truth only by chance). As a prisons officer I expect him to have better information on the subject than I do.
If you have problem with relationships in high school and don’t have desired intimacy, you might already have issues by that time. It’s a sign of problems, not a cause of problems. Further, a lot of men who are poor at such matters do not go on to become rapists.
This Dr. Malamuth guy doesn’t sound all that helpful.
I think everyone has problems with relationships in high school - that’s what it’s for.
Further, a lot of men who are poor at such matters do not go on to become rapists.
Further even than that - even in high school, where men and women are figuring out how relationships are done, sexual assault is usually not included. Yes, there’s a lot of awkwardness and missed communication and boundary-pushing. But it is not my experience that people in high school, even the popular ones who had a lot of dates, had everything figured out on a mature level.
Regards,
Shodan