And did so with a giant grin on his face. Yeah that counts as joking about it.
Apparently you need to get your hearing checked if you did not hear the very loud dog-whistle there. It’s quite apparent what he was hinting at.
Agreed, except there’s no “hinting”.
“Having their way” with a woman MEANS EXACTLY ONE THING. Her being “paralyzed” makes it that much more reprehensible, if such a thing is possible.
Unless you were joking, I am really surprised to read this from you. You’ve always been very clear-headed about other people’s bullshit.
In all seriousness, I think what he’s implying is that she’s incompetent and inexperienced and will sit there mute while they conduct whatever military operations they want.
“Paralyzed” means paralyzed with indecision.
Honestly, what, you think he’s saying they’re going to break her spine or shoot her with a tranquilizer dart? He’s making a bullshit argument about her complete inability to serve as Commander in Chief.
As if Trump was some great military leader.
You should have told us exactly what he said and let us work it out for ourselves.
And he also insulted the Joint Chiefs by even suggesting that they would disrespect the President (or the dogwhistle, that they are horny bastards who cannot control their urges).
That was my take. However, everyone else at the table took it the way it’s being taken here, and they started laughing. Which is why I think he started to laugh - it was a tension relief.
But I don’t know any of those fools, and I don’t know what their normal banter is like. So I can’t discount that he tried to be slick and was called out by his cohost.
And yes, I have heard the phrase “had their way” in a non-sexual context, though I couldn’t give an example off the top of my head.
Bingo.
The dog whistle is real. What he’s really trying to infer though is that Kamala Harris is a woman, and a room full of powerful authoritative men are never going to listen to her. Therefore even if she does win the presidency, she won’t really be the president.
Watters phrased it the way he did because that’s the way they naturally think. Meaning Trump supporters of course. I wouldn’t trust this asshole around a woman who’s had too much to drink. His words betray him.
Yes, it’s a comment absolutely dripping with misogyny.
Apparently Twitter link previews are broken again or the text and video would have been right there in my post. I can’t be held accountable for Elon Musk randomly unplugging server stacks to try and figure out what they do.
In any event, I have zero inclination to give anyone at Fox News the benefit of a doubt that they don’t literally mean the worst possible interpretation of anything they say. Remember when Trump tried to claim Megyn Kelly reacted negatively to him because she was on her period and had “blood coming out of her whatever”, then claimed he was only talking about her having a nosebleed? Watters is doing the same thing.
Nobody better tell him about the Chief of Naval Operations, then
Yes.
But “having their way with” a woman means exactly ONE thing.
No, that’s false. It literally means doing whatever you want. It depends on context, and in this case context tells you what is meant.
It’s still disgusting and misogynistic as you’d expect from these clowns. But it’s not a reference to rape. I’m sure there is a double entendre in there, which is red meat for their immature audience, but no, that was not what they meant. He even made sure to clarify to avoid the ambiguity.
If you’re insisting otherwise, you’re just wrong.
ETA: I also got the impression that some of the humor they were expressing was of the, “But what if I meant it the other way?” kind of thought. But no, they absolutely didn’t say that.
Jeanine Pirro’s objection, and the way he was immediately prepared to walk back his word choice when he got called out for it, says otherwise. He didn’t say “What do you mean?” or “I’m just saying they won’t respect her” - he immediately knew she was objecting to the sexual connotation of his words and his response was of an you-weren’t-supposed-to-notice-that variety.
Then there’s his attempt at restating the “joke” later in the show;
There are any number of ways to say “the military leadership won’t respect her” and he chose TWICE to phrase it in terms of sexual violence towards women.
Talk to Merriam Webster.
Yes, it can mean other things, but first and foremost it means have sex with someone.
You can go one of two ways with that statement:
- Holy shit! They are talking about rape!
- Holy shit! somebody find some reference, any reference, where it might somehow mean something else!
The second one smells highly of rancid chickenshit, of course.
I didn’t say otherwise, I said based on context it can mean something else, and we have that context here.
Don’t get me wrong, the “wink, wink” joking stuff with a nod to rape is disturbing and unacceptable in itself.
Or you can be a fucking idiot making something up, which is what we have here.
They’re bad enough without you needing to lie about them for fucks’ sake.
Sorry, you’re the one who has come across as defending him. You wrote
No, that’s false. It literally means doing whatever you want.
and then said that he was NOT referring to rape.
It’s still disgusting and misogynistic as you’d expect from these clowns. But it’s not a reference to rape.
I didn’t lie. I didn’t make anything up-I just said how I would react if it was said. If you have a problem with my reaction, sit and spin.