The question, as I read it, was about swing voters, so that’s how I answered.
I haven’t read everything Bernie ever wrote, so if he wrote something contrary to the notion of women having the right to control their own bodies, I’d like to read it and I’d like to see Bernie’s present explanation for it.
That stuff is whackadoodle now but the 1960s were a very different era indeed. In 1969 it was…well, still whackadoodle but much, much less of an extreme position (I mean, consider some of the stuff set out in the incredibly popular Stranger in a Strange Land and the whole “free love” movement"). The state of child psychology was likewise in a state of flux and one can find any number of views earnestly expressed by actual medical professionals then that we now find batshit crazy.
The world changes. If you have any evidence that Bernie continues to believe any of that stuff then sure, we should condemn him for it. But if your argument is that someone is wrong now because they believed things over fifty years ago that were actually given serious consideration at the time - and in making it you deliberately misrepresent those views as well - that just smacks of a feeble smear attempt borne of sad desperation.
I think you have that exactly backwards.
Having read that 1969 essay from Bernie, it’s very 60s and flowery/hippie/etc., but I don’t see anything offensive or objectionable. The one line about girlfriends and boyfriends was about the little acts of rebellion that occur in everyday life, and referred to love, not sex. The essay appears to me to be about how much culture and society were changing at the time, and how resistance to that change was entirely futile.
Here’s the snopes article on the rape fantasy essay:
Opening paragraphs:
Just as well this is actually hashed out now, he got a pass in 2015.
Eta: yes, the article was about challenging gender roles. But…
Okay, I hadn’t seen this one. Having read it now, AFAICT, it’s some sort of stream-of-consciousness piece about a fictional relationship. I guess he was trying to make a point about relationships and gender, but what point he was trying to make isn’t clear to me. Definitely weird, as stream-of-consciousness pieces tend to be. But this doesn’t strike me as any more objectionable than a mystery novelist writing about a detective trying to stop a misogynistic killer.
EDIT: Obviously stuff like this could and probably will be used against Sanders. I just don’t buy that stuff this old (and weird!) would matter, especially when the opponent is Trump. But we’ll see. Bernie has potential weaknesses – I still believe that all the other Democrats have potential weaknesses that are worse. Still just a guess, and we won’t know who’s right for a while now, if ever.
But as I’ve said, imho, the problem with stuff like this isn’t that it’ll convince people to vote Trump. Doesn’t matter that Trump is worse. The problem is some women not turning out to vote for anyone, since both candidates apparently think rape fantasies are perfectly normal.
Eta: and a political essay is not a murder mystery.
He’s kind of a big deal.
Yeah, I was typing too fast. He actually said that lack of orgasms can cause cancer. Another ‘proof’ that women weren’t putting out enough for his tastes.
Also causing cancer: being sexually repressed. Bernie thought or thinks that ovarian cancer is a psychosomatic illness, brought on by not having as much sex as your boyfriend wants you to have. This is the guy who also wrote that women can help the revolution by ignoring their mother’s advice and spreading their legs for their boyfriends, that 16 year olds should be exploring their sexuality and mothers should be happy about it, and that young children should run around naked and touch each other’s genitals to avoid sexual repression.
Bernie’s ideas about sex and women are pretty twisted.
Here’s another reason not to vote for Bernie: He’ll make climate change much worse. Bernie plans to shut down all nuclear plants and ban fracking of natural gas. The rapid replacement of coal with cheap natural gas due to fracking is the main reason why the U.S. led the world in CO2 reduction in the past decade, and nuclear power makes up 20% of U.S. power and 50% of the non-fossil energy in the U.S. It is also baseload power that cannot be easily replaced by wind and solar.
If Bernie is elected and follows through on his promises, U.S. CO2 emissions will go up by at least 25%.
In case anyone’s curious, Bernie did not write this, not in 1969 or any other time.
His views on cancer when he was in his 20s do seem rather odd, but I see no indication that those beliefs continued or ever influenced his official actions.
As far as I can find from googling, Bernie never said this either. He did discuss parenting and advised mothers to value their daughter’s happiness over their community reputation, but I saw nothing remotely about advocating “that 16 year olds should be exploring their sexuality and mothers should be happy about it”.
1960s Bernie had some weird ideas about health, but even then they weren’t close to as disgusting and harmful as 2000s Donald Trump. Bernie never bragged about sexual assault and violating the consent of women; Bernie has never had a single credible allegation of rape or sexual assault against him, much less dozens; Bernie has never publicly lusted after his daughter; Bernie has never identified children as future girlfriends; etc.
nm, duplicate
:shrugs: It’s a fair paraphrase, just like Bernie saying that school destroys children.
What you need to understand is that the average voter isn’t necessarily prepared to tie themselves into knots trying to spin away everything Bernie said.
I suspect the Woke Folk are about to experience another bout of cognitive dissonance, where “woman secretly want to be raped” is absolutely disqualifying for public office. Except, um, not for this particular [del]Scotsman[/del] Socialist.
Regards,
Shodan
Trump 2020 - It’s for the climate (?)
Not even close.
I suspect, once again (like your weird misunderstanding of the Cory Booker college essay about how rape/patriarchal culture affected the way he interacted with women) that you really just don’t understand rape/patriarchal culture and the motivations behind the #MeToo movement.
It’s not surprising – huge swaths of America don’t get it, dominated by men of a certain age. If you want to learn about it, there have been lots of good discussions on this board, in GD and IMHO especially.
The average voter can’t tie their own shoes. I’ve always thought that voting is too important to be left to amateurs. What we need is professional voters.
Like I said, you might want to consider it from the POV of someone who is not as desperate to cover up and deny anything that might prevent Sanders from getting into the White House.
The problem (so to speak) isn’t with what I don’t understand, but with what I do. What I understand is that this alleged concern about patriarchal culture and rape and so forth tends to turn on and off depending on whether it’s My Guy or Your Guy.
So I’ve learned a good deal from the discussions in GD and IMHO. Some of what I have learned is how quick “how dare he” turns into “that doesn’t count”.
Regards,
Shodan
That’s a separate discussion from an accurate evaluation of what was written.
LOL. What a joke. I guess you missed all the discussions about Al Franken, Louis CK, John Conyers, Bill Clinton, etc. This stuff really does matter to some of us.
It really is possible to care about this stuff. It’s not a joke, or about political expediency, or whatever. Some of us really actually prioritize this. That doesn’t mean that all discussion about sex is bad or forbidden – we’re adults, and adults sometimes talk about sex. Adults sometimes write about sex. But harassment and assault and rape are very, very different. Violating consent is very, very different. This stuff is awful; it’s been the norm for years; and so many at the top, most notably Trump, not only don’t get it but appear to encourage the mistreatment of women.
You don’t understand, but I hope you’d like to. If so, I hope you’ll take part in the GD discussion I just started.