Tweeden is neither a lawyer nor an expert in this area. The reader can follow the link and decide whether she was speaking out of her posterior.
Kevin Drum notes the double standards that are emerging between decent human beings and assholes. Upthread this was alluded to in the context of zero tolerance policies: [INDENT][INDENT]There’s a partisan issue here, but there’s also, for lack of a better phrase, an asshole issue as well. If you’re fundamentally a decent human being, like Franken, you apologize. Then you get investigated. Then you might resign, because lots of your fellow decent human beings think you should.
But if you’re an asshole, not only do you deny the charges, you do your best to smear the accusers. That’s what Moore and Trump have done. This gives your fellow assholes the cover they need to back off while they “wait for more evidence.”
The result is that the more decent you are, the more likely you are to pay the price for sexual misconduct. The more of an asshole you are, the less likely you’ll pay any price.
I vote, “Possible”. It’s also possible that Tweeden wasn’t offended at all by anything Franken did, and this is basically a huge political ratfuck. Evidence against: she hasn’t gone full out Palin on Franken: Tweeden accepted his apology and noted that we all make mistakes.
Intent is very hard to discern, so methinks falling back on the reasonable woman test is appropriate. Also, investigation is good.
Assertion: there’s no real evidence that Franken “grabbed” Tweeden’s breasts, and that Tweeden would say so reflects her habits of imprecision. Again, that doesn’t mean I don’t accept the spine of her story, based on my current evaluation of the evidence. Scare quotes presented without apology.
Yes, I think they could have different impressions of what happened, and I’ve said so at least once in this thread. For example, none of us has seen the script and maybe it says “they kissed passionately, with tongue” or maybe it said “they kissed”. Maybe Franken thought the kiss was supposed to be tongue and maybe she didn’t. Who knows? I’ve also said that because of this, I think the photo is the worse of the two situations.
All good points, but beyond that I go back to what I said yesterday: an entire nation, some 63 million people across large swaths of the nation, voted for someone who almost certainly committed multiple sexual assaults, and they did so with full knowledge. So Al Franken is supposed to resign, but the guy who can launch nukes won’t? Fuck that.
Again, if the people of Minnesota make it clear that this is a game changer and the Senate democrats see that and put pressure on him, I suppose that’s one thing. But I would hope that people like Gillibrand and Pelosi aren’t in a hurry to torch someone who’s been a stalwart over one or two accusations, particularly when the context isn’t clear. Al Franken wasn’t a high school wrestling coach who played with boys’ penises (Hastert. Cough! Hastert). He wasn’t a predator who got banned from a fucking Alabama mall (CHrist, how bad do you have to be to be the fucking DA and get banned from a local mall for perving on HS girls?!?!?!?!). He wasn’t caught on tape bragging about fingering women without their consent.
Seen that video, have my doubts. Seems to me the woman in the video is considerably larger in an overall way. Thing is, kinda like her, like people who like raunchy, funny and sexy. These are good things, they help the light to shine, builds character. A good time is tasteless.
I have also seen vids of her stints as a commentator of Hannity. Besides a somewhat different appearance, she has nothing in common with the other. She’s as raunchy and funny as a business school brochure. There come’s a point where good looking just ain’t enough.
I’m not arguing with any of them. I am arguing with you. And you are doing a poor job of holding up your end. You don’t need to hide behind their skirts. You can make your point yourself.
Also, I now suspect that the someone who failed to get a joke was you. I figured out you were ridiculing my post by pretending to agree with me for slut-shaming Tweeden. I responded in the same vein by pretending to agree with your Nazism to make the point that your interpretation was off.
I’m not saying Ms Tweeden doesn’t have boundaries. I’m saying that it’s reasonable to assume she wouldn’t mind a ribald joke because she is on a tour making ribald jokes.
I don’t believe there is enough here to show that Ms Tweeden has a pattern of faulty characterizations. To me it certainly seems possible and even likely she would believe the photo showed her being molested if she saw it after Frankin forced himself on her as she claims. It’s hard to “unsee” something once you interpret it a certain way. That’s why it’s so devastating that she framed the picture as sexual assault. Look at the people in this very thread who cannot wrap their head around the possibility that it was a joke on Franken.
But we don’t know if Franken forced himself on her. I see that as the crux of the accusation. I’m hoping there will be a formal investigation where we learn more about the rehearsal and Franken’s supposed boorish subsequent behavior. I have fewer questions about the photo though HERE is a link to Leeann Tweeden’s original statement. She says the photo was on a CD given to her “by the photographer” indicating she knew that person yet later claims Franken “had someone take a photo” indicating she didn’t know who took it. I’d like to hear from the photographer.
I’m not sure but I have vague recollections of some politician saying something like this: [INDENT][INDENT] Yeah, that’s her. With the gold. I better use some Tic Tacs just in case I start kissing her. You know, I’m automatically attracted to beautiful — I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. … Grab ’em by the pussy. You can do anything. [/INDENT][/INDENT] Can anyone ID this quote?
It means they don’t stop you, which doesn’t tell us anything about consent. And coming from someone who brags about barging into the changing rooms at beauty pageants (and thus according to himself has violated the consent or dozens or hundreds of women), he has no idea what consent means.
Just because someone who grabs women by the pussy says they, “let him do it,” doesn’t necessarily mean that they actually let him do it, ya know? Especially when the claim comes from someone who lies three times before he opens his eyes every morning.
No, but “I don’t even wait” is interesting. Wait for what: the nachos he ordered? Wait for sunrise? Wait for Godot?
I mean, I guess it could be any of those things. But there’s a different reading: “I don’t even wait [for consent].” And I’m not seeing a different reading that makes nearly as much sense.
If we want to get all technical and shit, just because someone brags about grabbing women by the pussy doesn’t mean they actually do it. It means, at best, that he’s what we (my social group) call a “big talker” and thinks telling people he treats women like sex objects makes him some sort of cool dude or alpha male or whatever. If he he does do it, then he’s a sexual predator. Either way, he’s a douche.
Yes, that’s an excellent analysis, especially since I responded with the totally serious: “You know who else was right?” [This is a test. Am I agreeing with you or laughing at your analysis? Think about it, but not too much.]
Anyway, I don’t see any value in continuing this discussion, so you are free to keep at it, but don’t expect any further responses from me.