Women Protesting Trump

[acd]

I don't understand the emotions people have about some issues, but I know that they are what they are, and are not subject to contrary considerations. The religious right can deal with killing combatants, or threats... but usually in defense of innocents.

It's like trying to get someone to like Brussels sprouts by telling them about their nutritional value... it doesn't change the dislike. The same kind of thing applies on this topic, but 100 x more intensely.

Keeping abortion legal is not an infringement on the rights of those who oppose it. It may offend people, but it's not stripping them of any autonomy. You can't say it's legally your right to force someone to comply with your convictions.

 

[Flavus Aquila]

Keeping abortion legal is not an infringement on the rights of those who oppose it. It may offend people, but it's not stripping them of any autonomy. You can't say it's legally your right to force someone to comply with your convictions.

That's looking at it from rights. If you look at it in terms of responsibilities, passive observation of perceived injustices isn't an option for some.

If an evangelical type thinks a fetus has rights which aren't being recognized, or respected, there's going to be no swaying when you balance right to life vs right to choose. I think the public discussion about fetus rights hasn't had sufficient attention and has been subsumed to women's rights. If that issue could be settled to everyone's satisfaction, it's implications would probably settle the tension about abortion. (I don't think Americans are capable of real dialogue on the issue of fetus rights, because of vested interests, so I don't really waste much time on it).

...

My own view of laws is not a rights based one, so I can't really hold either side on most US political-constitutional issues.

I hold to virtue ethics and think laws should both incentivize the best course of action and disincentivize the worst course of action. In respect of abortion the departure point is pregnancy: what is the best thing a pregnant mother can do, and what is the worst? To me personal choices (rights) only have value insofar as they are exercised well, or ill, and are not absolute goods in themselves.

 

[brightmoon]

Wrong. Saying "I'll do it even if they don't let me" is sexual assault. Saying "They let you do it" is not. Trump said the latter, oh and he also apologized, but even the most anti-Trump Democrat could see be able to use a brain of logic and conclude that it was nothing more than inappropriate banter

No sorry. "They let you do it" only implies consent and there is no such thing as implied consent. In a scenario regarding sexual assault either consent was given or it wasn't. The apology was insincere and half hearted at best based upon the tape being revealed and nothing more. Even the most pro-Trump Republican should be to see that this was an expression of Trump's true self, of how he sees himself and his privilege. To dismiss it as mere banter shows a willful blindness to the man's obvious character flaws.

 

[CindyLou]

You can recognize and protect the rights of a fetus and still be pro-choice. An embryo becomes a fetus at around 8-10 weeks pregnancy if I remember correctly - the majority of abortions are performed during that time. Not ideal for the hard core pro-choice people and not ideal for the life begins at conception folks, but, yeah. Seems reasonable to me though.

 

[CindyLou]

No sorry. "They let you do it" only implies consent and there is no such thing as implied consent. In a scenario regarding sexual assault either consent was given or it wasn't. The apology was insincere and half hearted at best based upon the tape being revealed and nothing more. Even the most pro-Trump Republican should be to see that this was an expression of Trump's true self, of how he sees himself and his privilege. To dismiss it as mere banter shows a willful blindness to the man's obvious character flaws.

It's the definition of bantering to me. I've made some really distasteful jokes while I'm bantering that are waaaay worse than this. I'd hate for someone to take what I've said literally as an expression of my true self.

 

[Eventhorizon]

..

 

[JJJA]

No sorry. "They let you do it" only implies consent and there is no such thing as implied consent. In a scenario regarding sexual assault either consent was given or it wasn't. The apology was insincere and half hearted at best based upon the tape being revealed and nothing more. Even the most pro-Trump Republican should be to see that this was an expression of Trump's true self, of how he sees himself and his privilege. To dismiss it as mere banter shows a willful blindness to the man's obvious character flaws.

Everybody has character flaws. Even you must have some lying around, and his apology was seen as somebody with a character flaw admitting his behaviour was inappropriate - every single person I have ever known has had this happen in their life at some point. So what exactly is your argument that proves he sexually assaulted someone?

I think many feminists on here are quick to jump to a conclusion that every woman on earth has a purity about them that can only be taken away from them by a man like Trump. This utopian delusion is why you don't also think that perhaps those women, who also relied on rich and powerful men to advance their careers, wouldn't think twice when Trump kisses them. And that doesn't even prove he did what he said, you heard the laughter and the obvious implied banter. It was a joke, and until a woman comes out and proves (in a court case) he did what he said he was allowed to do, then you can keep your feminist sophistry in tumblr.

This was merely a well-timed hit-piece by the Washington Post back in October because Hillary was exposed by the Podesta Emails. It shouldn't surprise anyone that Trump's biggest fans are still trying to call him a rapist, like they call any man nowadays that so much as winks at them.

 

[Flavus Aquila]

^

 

[JJJA]

^

The sad case of Rudy Pantoja (the man filmed) has gotten a bit happier in recent months. That crazy bitch was trying to ruin his life further-still with more defamation videos on YouTube (which were funded by people she immediately made anonymous). Around the same time, Pantoja was suffering from cancer and could not afford medical treatment, and still her daughter was suffering a heroin addiction to add to the stress of being called a rapist on a daily basis by feminist zealots. He has managed to fund for himself and many people donated, the last I checked he earned over $130,000.

 

[Milktoast Bandit]

Fact: Trump has been accused of sexual harassment/misconduct by several women (15?) since the 1980's
Fact: Trump was recorded saying he grabs women by the pussy and just kisses them.
Fact: There is no undeniable evidence that proves he sexually assaulted or harassed anyone. (There are a few eye witnesses)
Fact: There is no undeniable evidence to debunk the allegations.

Opinion: The undeniable evidence of his "locker room banter" in 2005 at the very least, gives some credibility to the allegations brought against him prior to his being recorded.

Unless there is dna, video, or a voice recording, the nature of sexual harassment/misconduct/assault, is such that it is always word against word. A victim will never, nor should they be expected to tell the perpetrator, "Before this goes any further, please allow me to gather everything I need to document this experience in a way that is satisfactory to a court of law."

 

[brightmoon]

Everybody has character flaws. Even you must have some lying around, and his apology was seen as somebody with a character flaw admitting his behaviour was inappropriate - every single person I have ever known has had this happen in their life at some point. So what exactly is your argument that proves he sexually assaulted someone?

I think many feminists on here are quick to jump to a conclusion that every woman on earth has a purity about them that can only be taken away from them by a man like Trump. This utopian delusion is why you don't also think that perhaps those women, who also relied on rich and powerful men to advance their careers, wouldn't think twice when Trump kisses them. And that doesn't even prove he did what he said, you heard the laughter and the obvious implied banter. It was a joke, and until a woman comes out and proves (in a court case) he did what he said he was allowed to do, then you can keep your feminist sophistry in tumblr.

This was merely a well-timed hit-piece by the Washington Post back in October because Hillary was exposed by the Podesta Emails. It shouldn't surprise anyone that Trump's biggest fans are still trying to call him a rapist, like they call any man nowadays that so much as winks at them.

Sure I have character flaws but that's hardly the point. The purity argument makes no sense, at least it doesn't to me. The banter argument makes no sense, as it doesn't conform to my experience. Feminist sophistry? The essence of your defense of Trump is based on the idea his comments were just a joke about sexual assault. I didn't find it funny.

Strange how a Trump support should complain about "hit-pieces" given the help the Trump was given by WikiLeaks and their source the Russians.

As for the rest of it you can see @Milktoast Bandit last post. That says what needs to be said.

 

[JJJA]

Sure I have character flaws but that's hardly the point. The purity argument makes no sense, at least it doesn't to me. The banter argument makes no sense, as it doesn't conform to my experience. Feminist sophistry? The essence of your defense of Trump is based on the idea his comments were just a joke about sexual assault. I didn't find it funny.

Strange how a Trump support should complain about "hit-pieces" given the help the Trump was given by WikiLeaks and their source the Russians.

As for the rest of it you can see @Milktoast Bandit last post. That says what needs to be said.

I'm sorry to hear you didn't find his joke funny, but I'm afraid to say that it is no crime to say sexual and rather rude jokes to a friend in private. I actually think the sexual assault non-argument is just a cover (hence why I used the word sophistry; it implies deception) to actually advocate hate-speech laws in the United States. It's not going to happen, people are allowed to joke about whatever they wish. An argument does not have to conform to your life as long as there are experiences in other people's lives, you give yourself far too much self-importance.

Also, saying "your argument makes no sense" is not an argument. Trump hit-pieces have been proven false, which you know is what I was getting at - the Buzzfeed/CNN fake news about Trump's sexual deviance is a core example of this. And as for Wikileaks "helping Trump" - you know very well that Wikileaks never releases its sources and there is not a shred of evidence that proves Russia has anything to do with the leaks. Yes, they did help him because they helped EVERYBODY by exposing the TRUTH about Hillary's campaign and how it planned on implementing a regime of demoralized propaganda and subversive, anti-democratic and borderline-illegal collusion with press associates.

 

[brightmoon]

I don't find bragging about sexual assault funny. The very fact this behaviour is being defended represents the degenerate age we are currently living in, as far as I am concerned.

Now we denying that the tape exists and is a part of a hit piece designed to swear Trump? What kind of alternate reality populated with alternative facts are we living in?

Conflating CNN and Buzzfeed is exactly what I would expect a Trump supporter to do. CNN did not report on the contents of the dossier, merely that it existed and was a part of a briefing given to both Trump and Obama.

WikiLeaks doesn't have to release its sources. There is enough evidence to confirm that Russia hacked and released the information to Wikileaks. The Russians chose to release information to WikiLeaks at specific times during the campaign to assist Trump. They also have information on Trump which they are hanging onto gleaned from the RNC and other sources. Wikileaks exists at the pleasure of the Russian government.

WikiLeaks—citizens of the world that they are—never seem able to leak anything damaging to the interests of the Russians. They likewise avoid antagonizing the Chinese or any other autocratic regime that might take umbrage or engage in retaliation. Almost every leak of any consequence is aimed squarely at the United States and its allies, and never as assistance to noble activists anywhere else.

http://thefederalist.com/2016/09/09/julian-assange-is-a-russian-front-man-not-a-freedom-fighter/

 

[Flavus Aquila]

I don't find bragging about sexual assault funny. The very fact this behaviour is being defended represents the degenerate age we are currently living in, as far as I am concerned.

Now we denying that the tape exists and is a part of a hit piece designed to swear Trump? What kind of alternate reality populated with alternative facts are we living in?

Conflating CNN and Buzzfeed is exactly what I would expect a Trump supporter to do. CNN did not report on the contents of the dossier, merely that it existed and was a part of a briefing given to both Trump and Obama.

WikiLeaks doesn't have to release its sources. There is enough evidence to confirm that Russia hacked and released the information to Wikileaks. The Russians chose to release information to WikiLeaks at specific times during the campaign to assist Trump. They also have information on Trump which they are hanging onto gleaned from the RNC and other sources. Wikileaks exists at the pleasure of the Russian government.

WikiLeaks—citizens of the world that they are—never seem able to leak anything damaging to the interests of the Russians. They likewise avoid antagonizing the Chinese or any other autocratic regime that might take umbrage or engage in retaliation. Almost every leak of any consequence is aimed squarely at the United States and its allies, and never as assistance to noble activists anywhere else.

http://thefederalist.com/2016/09/09/julian-assange-is-a-russian-front-man-not-a-freedom-fighter/

Almost everything Trump brags about is highly exaggerated to the point that his bragging doesn't bear much connection with real events/accomplishments.. try and prove otherwise.

If he finds it fun/funny to paint himself as a sex-conqueror, it is kind of irrelevant if you and I don't. He hasn't bragged this way with anyone who was uncomfortable with it. Billy Bush was having a great old time.

 

[Pin]

If Roe v Wade gets overturned, I'm lukewarm about it.

 

[Scientia]

If Roe v Wade gets overturned, I'm lukewarm about it.

You have likely never had to think about a pregnancy you weren’t sure you wanted or could handle. Having had children, I personally could not do it but I believe everyone should have the choice.

 

[Pin]

You have likely never had to think about a pregnancy you weren’t sure you wanted or could handle. Having had children, I personally could not do it but I believe everyone should have the choice.

I'll admit, being a man, it's not an issue that is as close to home. If abortions are inevitable, I'd rather they be done in safe, medically-up-to-par, hygienic, circumstances. That said, I would prefer they didn't happen at all.