# Video of trump sexually humiliating woman on stage **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 29, 2016, 2:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/video-of-trump-sexually-humiliating-woman-on-stage/769994 "2016-10-29T02:58:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2016, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/video-of-trump-sexually-humiliating-woman-on-stage/769994/61 "2016-10-30T18:42:35Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > While Christians have, historically, been so reticent about telling other people how to live, right? How is this relevant? By telling everyone else to live in accord with the teachings of Christ, Christians are generally following those teachings as they understand them. Christianity is not known for “An ye harm none, do as thou wilt.” So those Christians are internally consistent. ---
**Author:** ![Count\_Blucher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c5a1d2/32.png) [@Count\_Blucher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Count_Blucher)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2016, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/video-of-trump-sexually-humiliating-woman-on-stage/769994/62 "2016-10-30T18:47:32Z")
> [@Hector\_St\_Clare](#): > > Since Christianity has been brought up here, Donald Trump is going to go down in history as the topic of innumerable sermons. He’s tailor made for a sermon: the man who got so, so, so close to being the most powerful man in the world (for many reasons, some of them even good) but was undone by his own personal vices, his ‘women problem’ first and foremost. He deserves to not only be branded with a capital “A” on his forehead, but six smaller case letters after it. . . . . “Vanna, could you turn over the letter “S” please…?” ---
**Author:** ![Hector\_St\_Clare](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5ac83/32.png) [@Hector\_St\_Clare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hector_St_Clare)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2016, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/video-of-trump-sexually-humiliating-woman-on-stage/769994/63 "2016-10-30T18:49:00Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > The problem is that however good you think the evidence is for her lack of consent, it derives from her body language and your interpretation. If her ACTUAL WORDS say that she consented, then you cannot say, “I don’t care what her words are; my read of her body language trumps (ha!) her words.” What happens if she changes her mind about the consent after Donald Trump loses? ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2016, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/video-of-trump-sexually-humiliating-woman-on-stage/769994/64 "2016-10-30T20:17:53Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > What does this mean? That I am unshocked you are selective about which parts of scripture to live by or, if you prefer, that the RCC has been selective on your behalf. Truth be told, I’d be shocked at someone who _did_ live their lives according to scripture in its totality, since it contains numerous contradictions and commands that are incompatible with modern civilization. But this isn’t about you, unless you’re making excuses for Trump. As I recall, you’ve already announced you won’t be voting for him, so that’s all that matter to me for the purposes of this thread. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2016, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/video-of-trump-sexually-humiliating-woman-on-stage/769994/65 "2016-10-30T20:32:33Z")
> [@Hector\_St\_Clare](#): > > What happens if she changes her mind about the consent after Donald Trump loses? If she were to say, “The truth is I never consented, and I only said I did because I feared angering the next President of the United States,” then I’d view the situation differently. But I won’t write that dialog into her mouth on my own. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2016, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/video-of-trump-sexually-humiliating-woman-on-stage/769994/66 "2016-10-30T20:35:33Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > But this isn’t about you, unless you’re making excuses for Trump. As I recall, you’ve already announced you won’t be voting for him, so that’s all that matter to me for the purposes of this thread. Correct – I will not be voting for Trump. But that doesn’t mean I endorse every criticism of him. This one, for example, is not well grounded. A fact I find fascinating, given the rich vein of possible critiques to level at Trump. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2016, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/video-of-trump-sexually-humiliating-woman-on-stage/769994/67 "2016-10-30T20:37:11Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > The problem is that however good you think the evidence is for her lack of consent, it derives from her body language and your interpretation. If her ACTUAL WORDS say that she consented, then you cannot say, “I don’t care what her words are; my read of her body language trumps (ha!) her words.” IOW, who am I going to believe, her words or my lying eyes? Her actions aren’t exactly a tough read, you know. And FWIW, throwing up a hand and turning your head away to block and avoid a kiss isn’t ‘body language’; it’s _actions_. It’s a big fucking STOP sign, an unambiguous NO. Fuck that ‘body language’ shit, in this context. Body language is whether the other person’s leaning in towards you or away, whether they’ve got their arms crossed across their chest, stuff like that. We’re not talking about that, here. If my son ever disregards an equally emphatic bit of ‘body language’ and I find out about it, his ass is gonna be toast. Hell, maybe I’ll use this video as instructional material in a few years. She may have excellent reasons to say otherwise. I bet you could even figure out some possibilities. But it doesn’t matter. Her actions at the time were crystal-clear. And once again, agency doesn’t extend to being able to undo the past. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2016, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/video-of-trump-sexually-humiliating-woman-on-stage/769994/68 "2016-10-30T20:47:31Z")
nm, dbl post ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2016, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/video-of-trump-sexually-humiliating-woman-on-stage/769994/69 "2016-10-30T20:53:08Z")
Oh, and on a certain long-ago Thursday night, Peter denied three times that he’d been with Jesus. Guess the people who claimed they saw him should have believed him, rather than their own eyes. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2016, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/video-of-trump-sexually-humiliating-woman-on-stage/769994/70 "2016-10-30T21:50:38Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Oh, and on a certain long-ago Thursday night, Peter denied three times that he’d been with Jesus. Guess the people who claimed they saw him should have believed him, rather than their own eyes. Inapt comparison: there, his claim was that he had not physically been with Jesus, and the observations to the contrary do in fact refute his claim. Here, the claim is about what she was thinking and what she consented to, and her body language can only provide clues. When her verbal declarations are explicit and to the contrary, you have no right to inform her that you have decided how she must have felt, and aren’t moved by her mere words. Adopting that view shows that you regard her as fundamentally lacking in agency; you, not she, gets to explain her feelings. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2016, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/video-of-trump-sexually-humiliating-woman-on-stage/769994/71 "2016-10-30T21:53:15Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > IOW, who am I going to believe, her words or my lying eyes? Her words, is the correct answer. > [@](#): > > Fuck that ‘body language’ shit, in this context. Body language is whether the other person’s leaning in towards you or away, whether they’ve got their arms crossed across their chest, stuff like that. We’re not talking about that, here. Yes, we are. And you do not get the right to decide for her how she felt. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2016, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/video-of-trump-sexually-humiliating-woman-on-stage/769994/72 "2016-10-30T23:32:24Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Inapt comparison: there, his claim was that he had not physically been with Jesus, and the observations to the contrary do in fact refute his claim. > > Here, the claim is about what she was thinking and what she consented to, and her body language can only provide clues. Sorry, but wrong answer. There was no ‘body language.’ There were visible actions. A hand raised to fend him off. A face turned away. > [@](#): > > When her verbal declarations are explicit and to the contrary, you have no right to inform her that you have decided how she must have felt, and aren’t moved by her mere words. 1. I have not suggested how she **felt**. You are confused. 2. Could you link to and quote “her verbal declarations” that “are explicit and to the contrary”? So far you’re making assertions, counselor, based on evidence that’s not in the record. ---
**Author:** ![Barrett\_Bonden](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/5e9695/32.png) [@Barrett\_Bonden](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Barrett_Bonden)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2016, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/video-of-trump-sexually-humiliating-woman-on-stage/769994/73 "2016-10-31T00:10:37Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Seriously, this may be a very _mild_ sexual assault, but that’s still what it is: he grabbed her, pulled her to him, and without giving a good goddamn whether she wanted to kiss him or not, tried to kiss her on the lips. She managed to get an arm up in time, and turn her head, so he only kissed her on the cheek. > > The real point here is, though, that he was willing to do a milder version, in public, up on stage, of what a dozen women have accused him of doing in private. > > The point is that if one had doubts about their truthfulness, here he is doing something that’s very much of a piece with what he’s accused of. If he’s willing to do that much in front of an audience, with his face up on a few Jumbotrons, it should be no surprise that he was a bit more forceful and persistent in private. > [@Bricker](#): > > The concern I have with this analysis is that the woman in question seemingly doesn’t agree with it, and since the issue of consent is central to your conclusions, it seems that her revealing that there was consent is fatal to your claim. > > Unless you believe, as **askthepizzaguy** does, that her agency on this cannot be granted – that in fact she lacks the capacity to affirm consent. > > Do you? If one cannot obtain a conviction does that mean that no crime has occurred? Everyone seems to agree that if Ms. Hawkins didn’t want to press charges, then no charges should have been brought. However, pointing out that Trump’s actions were assault does not imply that Ms. Hawkins “lacks the capacity to affirm consent.” It merely emphasizes that it is not worth her while, in her judgment, to make that accusation. I have a friend who has the distinction of having been goosed by Trump. She didn’t make an issue of it either, judging that it would cause an uproar that she didn’t need. My friend’s decision implies _nothing_ about the rightness or legality of what Trump did to her. It merely illustrates the difference between justice for the rich and justice for the rest of us, frankly. ---
**Author:** ![Snarky\_Kong](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a183cd/32.png) [@Snarky\_Kong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snarky_Kong)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2016, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/video-of-trump-sexually-humiliating-woman-on-stage/769994/74 "2016-10-31T00:16:58Z")
Say there’s a woman in a bedroom and the man tells her they’re going to fuck. It’ll happen the easy way or the hard way. Him: So, do you want to have sex? Her: … yes… Consent? ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2016, 2:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/video-of-trump-sexually-humiliating-woman-on-stage/769994/75 "2016-10-31T02:08:29Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Yes, we are. And you do not get the right to decide for her how she felt. I trust our prerogative to decide how this event informs our feelings about Trump remains unmolested. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2016, 3:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/video-of-trump-sexually-humiliating-woman-on-stage/769994/76 "2016-10-31T03:10:29Z")
> [@Snarky\_Kong](#): > > Say there’s a woman in a bedroom and the man tells her they’re going to fuck. It’ll happen the easy way or the hard way. > > Him: So, do you want to have sex? > Her: … yes… > > Consent? You know, at one time in my life I would have simply abandoned the point after reading this, because it would have been clear to me that the point was being deliberately misrepresented with questions like these. Now, though, I am happier to assume that your question results from inexplicably-remaining genuine confusion, and clear it up for you. Here, your question is not a useful analogy to the Trump event, because the woman’s still in the peril that was threatened, so we’re certainly entitled to regard her “Yes,” as lacking any indicia of genuine consent. In the case of the Trump video being discussed in this thread, Hawkins is not asked about her consent while standing next to Trump. She’s asked about the event years later, while Trump is halfway around the world, and she’s surrounded by an audience eager to support her in agreeing that Trump acted poorly. It’s curious to me that you did not see that essential difference between the Trump video with Hawkins’ five-years-later event and an attempted analogy in which the woman has been physically threatened and moments later, in the same room, is asked about her consent. Why is that? Why do you suppose that I disliked Ted Kennedy but was able to defend him on this board when posters suggested he was a murderer? Why do you suppose that I was able to defend Hillary Clinton when the e-mail server story broke, well before it became obvious I had no choice but to vote for her? Why is it, do you think, that I am able to take even a strongly disliked political figure and still accurately recognize when a given attack is ungrounded, but you cannot? Why, for you, does every attack become justified simply because the target is Trump? You’re not the only one. You’re in good company here. But step outside yourself for a moment and ask yourself why you needed to misrepresent this argument so dramatically. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2016, 3:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/video-of-trump-sexually-humiliating-woman-on-stage/769994/77 "2016-10-31T03:14:18Z")
> [@Barrett\_Bonden](#): > > If one cannot obtain a conviction does that mean that no crime has occurred? > > Everyone seems to agree that if Ms. Hawkins didn’t want to press charges, then no charges should have been brought. However, pointing out that Trump’s actions were assault does not imply that Ms. Hawkins “lacks the capacity to affirm consent.” It merely emphasizes that it is not worth her while, in her judgment, to make that accusation. I have a friend who has the distinction of having been goosed by Trump. She didn’t make an issue of it either, judging that it would cause an uproar that she didn’t need. My friend’s decision implies _nothing_ about the rightness or legality of what Trump did to her. > > It merely illustrates the difference between justice for the rich and justice for the rest of us, frankly. There are no “charges” to be pressed. Its doubtful the video depicts a crime, and even if it did, the statute of limitations is long past. Your friend may not wish to make an issue of it, but does she say that Trump always treated her with respect, as Ms. Hawkins did? This is not merely declining to “press charges;” this is affirmatively stating that there was no assault. ---
**Author:** ![Snarky\_Kong](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a183cd/32.png) [@Snarky\_Kong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snarky_Kong)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2016, 3:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/video-of-trump-sexually-humiliating-woman-on-stage/769994/78 "2016-10-31T03:17:34Z")
I’m not misrepresenting the argument, I’m simply showing that a verbal consent isn’t the end of the conversation. I didn’t address the argument at all. I’m just wondering if a verbal consent is the only thing that’s needed or if there are be extenuating circumstances. Clearly the answer is that there can be, dismissing them out of hand is inappropriate. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2016, 3:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/video-of-trump-sexually-humiliating-woman-on-stage/769994/79 "2016-10-31T03:18:24Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Sorry, but wrong answer. > > There was no ‘body language.’ There were visible actions. A hand raised to fend him off. A face turned away. And those are actions included in the term “body language.” > [@](#): > > 1. I have not suggested how she **felt**. You are confused. Sure you have. > [@](#): > > 1. Could you link to and quote “her verbal declarations” that “are explicit and to the contrary”? So far you’re making assertions, counselor, based on evidence that’s not in the record. [Here:](http://www.smh.com.au/world/us-election/video-shows-donald-trump-publicly-humiliating-jennifer-hawkins-20161028-gsdk5l.html) > [@Hawkins](#): > > Jennifer Hawkins has defended Donald Trump after a video of an awkward exchange between the pair in front of a live audience emerged. > . > . > . > Hawkins said her only response to the story was to reflect on how Trump had treated her during the course of their association. > > “I’ve said it before, he has treated me with respect, and so has his family. Beyond that, what else am I going to comment on,” she said. You cannot harmonize that statement with a claim of assault. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2016, 3:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/video-of-trump-sexually-humiliating-woman-on-stage/769994/80 "2016-10-31T03:22:01Z")
> [@Snarky\_Kong](#): > > I’m not misrepresenting the argument, I’m simply showing that a verbal consent isn’t the end of the conversation. I didn’t address the argument at all. I’m just wondering if a verbal consent is the only thing that’s needed or if there are be extenuating circumstances. > > Clearly the answer is that there can be, dismissing them out of hand is inappropriate. As an absolute matter, it’s true that verbal statements may not always be insufficient. But this particular verbal statement, made five years after the event, safely separated from Trump by thousands of miles and a sovereign nation’s national borders, does not suffer from the infirmities that your example did. So my question to you is: did you know that when you posted your question? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/video-of-trump-sexually-humiliating-woman-on-stage/769994.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/video-of-trump-sexually-humiliating-woman-on-stage/769994.md?page=5)