Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
#1Stunner

Odd CNN exchange with a Republican Gubernatorial Candidate in Mississippi

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Orange said:

So.....women are like children?

No.  Who suggested such a thing?

Certainly not me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Orange said:

If there was a Klan leader being interviewed and a civil rights supporter interviewed, do you similarly feel the reporter should cut the segregationist a break?

I haven't really followed the Klan....

But certainly, you aren't comparing this Republican guy's policy as similar to the Klu Klux Klan, are you?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, #1Stunner said:

No.  Who suggested such a thing?

Certainly not me.

Uh, you literally suggested it with your boy scouts comparison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, smltwnrckr said:

You should find a religious institution. That will help you not attack her, or people in general.

You are trying way too hard to make it all about religion.

I see this more as #MeToo related.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, #1Stunner said:

I remember a college Professor tell our class once:

"One time I had a female student meet with me about her grades in my office.   After I explained to her that I wouldn't change her grades (she wanted an A), she said she was going to make an allegation that I tried to sexually assault her during our meeting, unless she changed the grade to an A."  (this is a true story....inasmuch as the Professor really told it....I can't speak to if it actually happened).

Who said it is always about the man acting bad?   What if the Policy is merely to avoid in appearance of impropriety?

Could be bad for a different Community College Professor to experience such a situation (though unlikely).   Sometimes 20 year old college students don't think things through.... Things that make you go hmmm.....

I don’t have to worry about this thanks to my trusty chastity belt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Orange said:

Uh, you literally suggested it with your boy scouts comparison.

Well, maybe I need to clarify.

I am not suggesting women are like Children, and not EQUAL to MEN (which you seemed to be mischaracterizing me as saying....which is no big shock).

 

I did bring up the Scouts, because they have a policy to protect both the Children and the Scout Leaders, from both false accusations, and actual abuse.   

The only comparison I intended to bring up with the Scouts, is that the Politician's policy has an equal effect-----by having more than one person, there is much less of a possiblity of an assault or a false accusation, right?   And of course, the power dynamic between two adult and EQUAL men and women is not the same as Adults and Children, but obviously, there is a dynamic there, as the #MeToo movement has helped us to all understand.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, #1Stunner said:

"Religion prevents men from ATTACKING women" ---- no one said that about religion...(caricature response about what was actually said)

I was mostly ribbing you a bit a-la the great @#1Stunner but like all comedy, there is truth to my satire. The take that religious institutions are especially good for women because they force men to temper their more aggressive impulses, impulses that come naturally and that they couldn't otherwise avoid acting on, clearly implies that one of those impulses is attacking women. If you are unwilling to state it out loud and/or accept the logical conclusion of your own position, it's not my problem. 

 

Quote

Second, you criticize the guy's personal policy....saying that religion (if it had any value) would not make this policy necessary.  That religion teaches men to respect women.  That religious people wouldn't need such a policy.   

But, If you want to go religion, If the basis of that policy is that guy's religion, then the EFFECT of the policy is that it probably will reduce violence toward women?   The outcome is the same.  Both the guy's values and the guy's POLICY result in less possibility of violence towards women.   (belts and suspenders).   Do you disagree?

Paternalism is not respect. Many would argue that a more respectful way to reduce violence against women would be to demonstrate with your own actions that you can have an encounter with a woman without attacking or harassing her without the need for another man in the room to physically protect her. It's called treating her as an autonomous and equal individual.  

Quote

 

This is no different than the Boy Scouts instituting a policy of "Two Deep Leadership" to curb and prevent all possibility of molestation of boys / girls.   And....it seems like a logical fallacy to argue that the mere fact that they have the policy somehow suggests that ALL Boy Scouts leaders would molest boys / girls if they did no have the policy.  Or that the Boy Scouts shouldn't have such a policy, because most adult leaders are not abusers.

https://www.scouting.org/health-and-safety/gss/gss01/

I think it is different. For one, the Boy Scouts policy is there to protect children - people who are not legally autonomous individuals. There are many rules, regulations and laws that exist to protect children that we wouldn't apply to adults because we assume that autonomous individuals have the right to take care of themselves. It seems you are saying that we need to protect this woman as we would a child. I would find that to be insulting if someone said that about me or my wife. Edit: It seems the candidate is saying that. It's unclear if you agree with him or if you think the criticism is unfair, which is different to be fair.

Second, the Boy Scouts policy exists as a protection against liability, and while it may be a logical fallacy to suggest ALL Boy Scout leaders molest people because the policy is in place, it wouldn't be a fallacy to suggest that either 1) more Boy Scout leaders than we would want have indeed molested Boy Scouts, or 2) the Boy Scouts are instituting unnecessary policies due to fear of litigation. Either way it is reasonable to suggest the policy does reflect poorly on the Boy Scouts in some ways because either they have a history of abuse within their ranks or they are bending to a litigious wold in the same way that parks rip do when they out their teeter-totters for no good reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, SJSUMFA2013 said:

I don’t have to worry about this thanks to my trusty chastity belt.

Glad to hear this, and that your Community College issues out the chastity belts.

But, unfounded accusations of racism and sexism are all the rage with College Students these days. 

Maybe you are more mature and sophisticated, and you won't need to worry about a "close door" meeting with students----however unlikely it might be of a false accusation. 

 

I guess the guy in the news story said he meets with people with an open door, or with someone in the next nearby room.   If that's what he is comfortable with, I don't think it is that unreasonable, personally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, smltwnrckr said:

 

Second, the Boy Scouts policy exists as a protection against liability, and while it may be a logical fallacy to suggest ALL Boy Scout leaders molest people because the policy is in place, it wouldn't be a fallacy to suggest that either 1) more Boy Scout leaders than we would want have indeed molested Boy Scouts, or 2) the Boy Scouts are instituting unnecessary policies due to fear of litigation. Either way it is reasonable to suggest the policy does reflect poorly on the Boy Scouts in some ways because either they have a history of abuse within their ranks or they are bending to a litigious wold in the same way that parks rip do when they out their teeter-totters for no good reason.

I think the Boy Scouts policy is to protect both the boys/girls AND the leaders.   Protects against abuse AND false accusations.

I agree, it is to prevent liability....but also the damage of actual abuse.   Who wants abuse to ever happen?   It isn't just about preventing litigation, but also preventing harm.

 

I think you are going to see more institutions doing a similar policy as the Boy Scouts /. this guy.   We can all make fun of him.   But the fact is, that he has this policy probably means he is much less likely to ever have a #metoo moment, or possibly a false accusation. 

The sad trade off to that, is this underlying feeling that somehow telling people of this policy is like making a statement that "I don't trust you / or myself, and so I need you to ride with another adult in the car".   I don't think that is what the guy in the news story wanted to say to the female reporter.....but it is unavoidable.   

Of course, some people are much more mature themselves / completely immune to any false accusations, and won't ever need to worry about instituting such a policy in their lives, and can mock people that do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, #1Stunner said:

I think the Boy Scouts policy is to protect both the boys/girls AND the leaders.   Protects against abuse AND false accusations.

I agree, it is to prevent liability....but also the damage of actual abuse.   Who wants abuse to ever happen?   It isn't just about preventing litigation, but also preventing harm.

 

I think you are going to see more institutions doing a similar policy as the Boy Scouts /. this guy.   We can all make fun of him.   But the fact is, that he has this policy probably means he is much less likely to ever have a #metoo moment, or possibly a false accusation. 

The sad trade off to that, is this underlying feeling that somehow telling people of this policy is like making a statement that "I don't trust you / or myself, and so I need you to ride with another adult in the car".   I don't think that is what the guy in the news story wanted to say to the female reporter.....but it is unavoidable.   

Of course, some people are much more mature themselves / completely immune to any false accusations, and won't ever need to worry about instituting such a policy in their lives, and can mock people that do.

It's crazy how I've been alone with all different kinds of women throughout my life and yet somehow none have ever accused me of rape/harassment.  I must be lucky, I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Orange said:

It's crazy how I've been alone with all different kinds of women throughout my life and yet somehow none have ever accused me of rape/harassment.  I must be lucky, I guess.

That's what happens when you pay hookers. 

  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Orange said:

It's crazy how I've been alone with all different kinds of women throughout my life and yet somehow none have ever accused me of rape/harassment.  I must be lucky, I guess.

OK.

You are usually the smartest guy in the room.  Just ask you----you'll tell us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's ridiculous for the candidate to assume that the reporter is going to accuse him of sexual misconduct.

I'm also opposed to segregating women socially or professionally based on any religious beliefs, including Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, etc.

But you can rest assured that if this were a Muslim Democrat asking for a male chauffeur, CNN would see no controversy. They would frame it as a "respect for his beliefs" issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, #1Stunner said:

Glad to hear this, and that your Community College issues out the chastity belts.

But, unfounded accusations of racism and sexism are all the rage with College Students these days. 

Maybe you are more mature and sophisticated, and you won't need to worry about a "close door" meeting with students----however unlikely it might be of a false accusation. 

I guess the guy in the news story said he meets with people with an open door, or with someone in the next nearby room.   If that's what he is comfortable with, I don't think it is that unreasonable, personally.

Look, in all seriousness, if a female student tried to do that to me, my job as an educator doesn’t end just because a student says something to offend me. Our conversation isn’t over until I at least try to make her see that this course of action doesn’t solve her problem, and that hurting others to get what you want is an evil thing to do.

If that doesn’t work, I’m protected just as much as she is. What she just said constitutes a threat and I am well within my rights to report her, which I would do immediately. If she’s willing to go to these lengths to extort me over a lower-division course grade, she obviously has some mental health issues that need to be addressed. Our campus provides these services free of charge, and a mental health professional would likely be able to diagnose and treat her. 

Also, if she really was out to get me because I didn’t hand her an A (community college students are typically not this entitled but for the sake of example), she doesn’t ever have to be alone with me in order to do it. She could just make the report. If she’s going to lie anyway, what’s the point?

Additionally, idk what you’re imagining when you picture a community college, but I definitely share my office in a crowded hallway used by at least 15 others. Theres no rich mahogany nor leather-bound books. There’s no way I could commit a sexual assault without witnesses. Open door meetings are the norm. A student would have to work really hard to get me into this situation (ask to meet late at night or somewhere off-campus), and the inconvenience alone would be enough for me to say no.

Finally, false accusations are exceedingly rare, especially if the accused and accuser had no prior romantic relationship. The idea that women commonly use them as a way to get what they want or to take revenge is as specious as it is sexist. The goofball in this video had nothing to worry about unless he cant keep his hands to himself, which, I’ll say again, is likely the reason for this “policy.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, CV147 said:

It's ridiculous for the candidate to assume that the reporter is going to accuse him of sexual misconduct.

I'm also opposed to segregating women socially or professionally based on any religious beliefs, including Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, etc.

But you can rest assured that if this were a Muslim Democrat asking for a male chauffeur, CNN would see no controversy. They would frame it as a "respect for his beliefs" issue.

I don't think I'll rest assured on this, thanks.  I believe until recently Keith Ellison was the only Muslim in Congress and I can't remember him saying women should not be allowed to accompany him alone on campaign trips.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Orange said:

I don't think I'll rest assured on this, thanks.  I believe until recently Keith Ellison was the only Muslim in Congress and I can't remember him saying women should not be allowed to accompany him alone on campaign trips.

You're right. Keith Ellison loves to be alone with women. 

https://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2018/08/14/keith-ellison-attorney-general-bid-domestic-abuse/

https://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2018/09/20/keith-ellison-doctors-note-ex-girlfriend/

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Orange said:

I don't think I'll rest assured on this, thanks.  I believe until recently Keith Ellison was the only Muslim in Congress and I can't remember him saying women should not be allowed to accompany him alone on campaign trips.

I think you're incorrect. The left media is turning a blind eye toward abuses on women in different cultures. I found this interesting regarding modern-day feminism, written by a former Muslim woman.

Quote

The progress of Muslim reformers, dissidents and apostates is hindered by leftists that use cultural relativism as a basis for their activism. Within this framework, Western progress and improving standards of equality, justice and freedom is naively attributed to white privilege rather than a long and bloody struggle towards enlightenment values. To take responsibility for their imperialist past and its impact on other cultures, leftists operate under a perceived obligation to remain impartial to practices they wouldn’t accept for themselves. These double standards undermine the principle of international human rights and has been termed as “the bigotry of low expectations.” Refusing to acknowledge social justice issues where prevalent among Muslims allows the disparities in quality of life to continue while they pat themselves on the back for being “culturally sensitive.”

https://quillette.com/2019/04/28/how-intersectionalism-betrays-the-worlds-muslim-women/

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SJSUMFA2013 said:

Finally, false accusations are exceedingly rare, especially if the accused and accuser had no prior romantic relationship. The idea that women commonly use them as a way to get what they want or to take revenge is as specious as it is sexist. The goofball in this video had nothing to worry about unless he cant keep his hands to himself, which, I’ll say again, is likely the reason for this “policy.”

This is worth reiterating... and every time I've come across dubious accusations that became high-profile Title IX cases that actually threatened to impact the individual accused and were not just investigated and immediately deemed false or without merit, those accusations were related to people who were in a sexual relationship or did have a sexual encounter - they were just about whether or not the encounter was consensual and/or appropriate.

If you don't eff around with your students, you're not going to be extorted. Even if it's not against the rules, which it often isn't at universities, it is bad judgement to mess around with a student.

I think the same holds true for most situations. Even when accusations are dubious, it almost always means that something did happen. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, CV147 said:

I think you're incorrect. The left media is turning a blind eye toward abuses on women in different cultures. I found this interesting regarding modern-day feminism, written by a former Muslim woman.

https://quillette.com/2019/04/28/how-intersectionalism-betrays-the-worlds-muslim-women/

The +++++ does this have to do with American politicians refusing women a seat on the campaign bus?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Orange said:

The +++++ does this have to do with American politicians refusing women a seat on the campaign bus?

It has to do with what I posted, and you bolded/responded to. You can go back and look if you don't remember.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×