She apparently also referenced timing her announcementfor maximal political damage against Biden.
Comparing this allegation to Ford’s allegation against Kavanaugh is just silly unless and until there is more information to come out.
Whereas Ford’s allegation came at a more or less random time during Kavanaugh’s career?
AP is reporting that Reade’s lawyer is a #MAGA man.
Starting to add up now.
I’m beginning to doubt she was ever even a harassment victim.
Further down that article:
Republicans have never by and large embraced the #metoo and believe all women nonsense that the Dems have. The Republicans are not subject to accusations of hypocrisy which the Dems clearly are.
This entire thread and the nitpicking of Tara Raede would be forcefully denounced if she made an allegation against a Republican. So she was forced to serve drinks in 1993, that pissed her off, so she made this allegation up?
If a Republican said that, he would be scoffed as saying he just didn’t understand the dynamics of sexual assault and that women do not act like petulant or evil children by making up serious allegations for such a sleight. We would probably be told that was the most sexist thing ever said by anyone ever.
But at least an accused man now has some way of getting the “woke” movement on his side, whereas he was always guilty before. Just espouse liberal policies early and often in life and you are golden!
Were we not told ad nauseum during the Kavanaugh hearings that this is not a court of law, but a job interview? Is it a job interview for Kavanaugh but a court for Biden?
Ha! You must have missed the last 3-4 decades in which the GOP campaigned on “family values” and character.
This article questions how useful the corroborations of Tara Reade’s story actually are:
Tara Reade specifically says she was timing her announcement for maximal political damage. Did Ford do anything like that?
Reade’s statement was literally that SHE isn’t the criminal so Biden should have to take the test (i.e., he IS a criminal)
When your accuser is saying you’re a criminal so you should have to take the test, I think “innocent until proven guilty” applies. “Criminal” isn’t a job interview term.
If we’re agreeing that it’s a job interview, there’s no reason for her to refuse to take a polygraph on her own without the “But I’m not a criminal!” defense.
Ok, it’s true that at different times Tara Reade has publicly told different versions of her story of what Joe Biden did to her. So let’s discuss why that might be. Hypothetically, if Biden did force his fingers into her vagina against her will, why might that be true?
Well, here’s the answer written out at great length: The Attacks on Tara Reade are Unbelievable Bullshit ❧ Current Affairs
But for those who don’t want to read the long answer, here’s a shorter version.
In 1993, Tara Reade knew what happened to women who told the full truth about being raped or sexually exploited by powerful men, and she didn’t want that to happen to her. Therefore, she held back parts of the story for different lengths of time and didn’t tell the entire story in public until 2020.
Maybe it’s hard to understand for people who weren’t around in 90’s, but the whole societal attitude towards rape and sexual assault was totally different then. Back then, respectable people believed that rape was something street thugs and other poor men did to poor women. By and large, they believed that wealthy and powerful men didn’t commit sex crimes. They defined things in such a way that it was impossible. “Sex crime by a Senator, a CEO, a Catholic bishop? We just know that sort of thing doesn’t happen, thank you very much.”
Furthermore, at that time decent people were hesitant to even use the word “rape” in polite society. Decent preferred tiptoeing around questions of rape and sexual assault and child molesting with euphemisms.
So today people are asking, for instance, when Reade’s mother called Larry King, why didn’t she specifically say outright, “A prominent Senator raped my daughter”? Well, the answer is that at that time, no one said such things, certainly not on venues like CNN, which was respectable at the time. If you knew that your daughter’s boss had shoved his fingers into your daughter’s vagina, you didn’t say “My daughter’s boss shoved his fingers into my daughter’s vagina.” Instead you said, “My daughter is having problems with her boss.” That’s the way it was.
So that’s part of the reason, but there’s more to understand. Do you recall during the Monica Lewinsky mess, Bill Clinton defended himself by insisting that oral sex wasn’t sex? That’s exactly the sort of thinking that powerful men used to justify their behavior towards women at that time.
So suppose Tara Reade had stood up public and accused Joe Biden of rape in 1993. Does anyone doubt for a minute that the response from Biden and his defenders would have been basically the same: “Fingers in the vagina isn’t sex, so it isn’t rape, so what are you so upset about, you dumb slut?” That’s the way it worked in the 90’s.
Does anyone think that in 1993, Tara Reade wasn’t aware of what happened in Washington to women who accused powerful men of sex crimes? Does anyone think she didn’t remember the Clarence Thomas hearings, where a certain Senator by the name of Joe Biden was instrumental in silencing women making accusations against a powerful man? Does anyone think she didn’t know that Ted Kennedy, leading Democrat in the Senate, was a serial sex criminal who had actually killed a woman and gotten away with it? Does anyone think she didn’t know that Bill Clinton, U.S. President and leader of the Democratic party, had been accused of various sexual misbehavior, some criminal, some not?
Of course she knew all of these things.
Do we really need more explanation of why Tara Reade might have chosen to not publicly accuse Joe Biden of rape immediately after it happened?
Well, there’s more. Let’s talk about the role of the media. Those who lived through the 90’s will surely recall the names of the women involved in Bill Clinton’s sex scandals: Jennifer Flowers, Paula Jones, Kathleen Willey, Monica Lewinsky, Linda Tripp. And will also recall how the media treated them. Will recall Jay Leno and other alleged comedians, telling us night after night that these women were fat, ugly, slutty, stupid, desperate, crazy, nasty, and aggressive. Will recall The Daily Show showing a picture of two hippos in a mud puddle and saying “Monica and Linda are taking a break”. Will recall that sort of thing continuing day in and day out for years. That’s how it worked. If a woman told the truth–and we know for sure that at least several of the women involved were telling the truth–then the media poured vast effort into utterly destroying her.
So why didn’t Tara Reade stand up earlier and publicly say that Joe Biden had raped her?
Maybe she didn’t want every comedian on television calling her an ugly slut every night for the next five years.
Maybe she didn’t want The Daily Show to tell viewers that she was a hippo.
Maybe she didn’t want to put up with the ocean of vile abuse that comes immediately for any woman who tells a story about being raped or abused by a powerful male politician.
Maybe. I don’t have the ability to read her mind. I can only speculate. But certainly there are probable answers to the question.
Forget “publicly”. By her own admission, she didn’t call it harassment or assault on her official complaint to her office. Probably not because the Daily Show might say things about her.
Neither Reade, nor her friend, nor her brother, called it assault or harassment originally when asked about it in 2019, long after the puritan 90s and people being too afraid to say “rape”.
But as long as they cast a shadow over his campaign it is alright with you, correct? Otherwise you wouldn’t post that bit about “lackeys” and “talking points” then try to wash your hands of guilt with that last sentence.
Why is Reade’s account of the alleged encounter so similar to a paragraph in a novel by her father (Loss: A Love Story, self-published in 2010)?
I couldn’t disagree more. They forever tried to impale Bill Clinton on his apparent lack of sexual restraint only to be exposed for “youthful indiscretions” of their own.
Time and better reporting will hopefully tell us the truth, one way or the other.
I agree that there’s probably some hypocrisy to go around, but there’s a difference between Kavanaugh and Biden in that nobody voted for Kavanaugh. That’s not required by the Constitution, of course, but there’s a difference between a question over whether someone’s behavior disqualifies him from a lifetime appointment and whether someone’s earlier behavior should effectively throw out the will of millions of voters. With the former, it’s more important to investigate the nominee, which we did not unfortunately. In the second question, it’s important to investigate the presumptive nominee, but it’s also important -perhaps more important - to really show some healthy skepticism.
In any case, I don’t care. I voted for Biden because I know he’s generally fit for the office and he will represent not only my interests but the interests of almost everyone in this country better than the bozo we have now. Good enough for me.
What I hope comes from this is a more intelligent discussion about what voting means, what democracy means, and when we really need to consider disqualifying someone from public office. Biden has probably, ahem, accidentally copped a feel. So fucking what? I vote for interests, not individuals.
Yes. And I have already linked to one article that discusses at great length why that might be. Here’s another article on the subject, written by a social worker and professor specializing in sexual violence.
As someone who has spent most of his career working with victims of sexual violence and currently teaches about this type of trauma at the university level, I can say that Tara Reade’s story rings true, like so many other stories of sexual assault I have heard throughout my professional career. That she waited so long to tell her full story, only disclosing part of the story last year, has been a criticism of detractors, but this is exactly how so many victims of sexual trauma handle their disclosures.
The trauma of sexual violence can affect mind, body and soul. A victim’s sense of time and place can be turned upside down. Memories often enter consciousness in pieces, unlike memories of non-traumatic events which are easier to recall fully and in a linear fashion. In the account, Ms. Reade remembered seemingly innocuous details: her legs hurting from walking on the marble floor on her way to meet Biden the day of the assault; wearing a skirt and no stockings because it was hot; the coldness of the wall she was pinned against.
Reade’s recollection of what was said during the encounter is spotty, with two chilling exceptions. The first: “C’mon, man, I heard you liked me,” Biden’s preemptive suggestion that she was to blame for what was happening to her. The second, simply: “You mean nothing to me.”
Many people who believed Dr. Blasey Ford when she came forward with her allegations against Brett Kavanaugh are the same people now attempting to dismantle Tara Reade’s story. They only need to turn to Blasey Ford’s testimony before the Senate to understand why Reade’s story should be taken seriously.
When Senators asked why she couldn’t remember linear details of her account with Kavanaugh, Blasey Ford, a professor of psychology at Palo Alto University and a research psychologist at the Stanford University School of Medicine, explained how the brain responds to trauma, sometimes creating disjointed memories, and how seemingly unimportant details can stand out while other key details may be lost. When Republicans criticized Blasey Ford for taking so long to come forward with her story, Democrats rightly came to her defense, pointing out that victims often take decades to come forward with their stories. Why the same deference is not given to Tara Reade is as perplexing as it is troubling.
In the sexual violence advocacy community it is well understood that survivors take time to tell their full stories. While I was a director at an advocacy agency, a young girl who was sexually abused by a male relative told police he fondled her above her clothing. Months later she spoke about the penetration. This is typical for victims of trauma. Rarely does the story come out all at once.
I read the article you originally linked. It was a bunch of “Here’s A Question” followed by “Answer: This is why women don’t come out, aren’t you the REAL monster for not just accepting it??”
Sorry, I didn’t find it convincing and believe there are a LOT of questions to be answered before her claims hold merit. I also don’t think the psychology part explains why Reade supposedly told her neighbor about this in the 90s but then neither her, her friend nor her brother related it in 2019. You are free to believe Reade, of course, but I find plenty of reasons to question her.
Yes, according to her lawyer:
Polygraphs are worthless. And it would have been easy as pie for her russian handlers to impart a false memory. And so under oath she says he remember such & such- how do we disprove that? Her accusations are essentialy unprovable and impossible to disprove.
Do we really need another thread on this?
Reade didnt mention any of this until Biden was running for President in 2019, and she changed her story when Biden was the presumptive nominee.
I love Phillip K. Dick, too!