Nofo @ 3/11/2017 10:50

Chris25 @ 3/11/2017 11:48 Nofo @ 3/11/2017 10:41 Chris25 @ 3/11/2017 11:39 Nofo @ 3/11/2017 10:37 Curtis @ 3/11/2017 11:35 If we had any sorta rules you would’ve been banned 4 years ago Nofo At least Igor and Chris wouldn't be huge cunts. Your troll game needs work. I'm not trolling, I don't hide my shitty opinions behind excuses. No, you put your shitty opinions right out there in the open. So do you, you just pretend you were trolling. Notice you've only gotten hostile to Maddie and I.

I guess your free to interpret my actions any way you want to but if you thought i was being hostile to anyone then you're so much more of a snowflake than I couldve ever imagined.

Mittens @ 3/11/2017 11:52

My biggest beef in that type of scenario, is that we have a system set up to protect victims identities, but why not for the alleged perpetrator? Innocent until proven guilty, but if the story is out that you are guilty before all the information is sifted through, then it has already ruined your life. Of course, it is far worse for a woman to be raped than a man to be falsely accused of rape, but there should still be protection to both parties until the facts of the case have been determined.

You could say that for any alleged perpetrator no matter what the crime and that would be fine, but victims should absolutely have their identities protected by the legal system. I don't think it's an all or nothing thing.

Mittens @ 3/11/2017 10:52

I also think it's bullshit that Brock Turner only got a 3 month sentence (or whatever it was). There is far too much leniency for guys like him within the criminal justice system, but it's also fucked up that women will cry foul (specifically when the alleged perpetrator is famous or rich) looking for a paycheck. My biggest beef in that type of scenario, is that we have a system set up to protect victims identities, but why not for the alleged perpetrator? Innocent until proven guilty, but if the story is out that you are guilty before all the information is sifted through, then it has already ruined your life. Of course, it is far worse for a woman to be raped than a man to be falsely accused of rape, but there should still be protection to both parties until the facts of the case have been determined.

Agree 100%

Chris25 @ 3/11/2017 11:56

Nofo @ 3/11/2017 10:50 Chris25 @ 3/11/2017 11:48 Nofo @ 3/11/2017 10:41 Chris25 @ 3/11/2017 11:39 Nofo @ 3/11/2017 10:37 Curtis @ 3/11/2017 11:35 If we had any sorta rules you would’ve been banned 4 years ago Nofo At least Igor and Chris wouldn't be huge cunts. Your troll game needs work. I'm not trolling, I don't hide my shitty opinions behind excuses. No, you put your shitty opinions right out there in the open. So do you, you just pretend you were trolling. Notice you've only gotten hostile to Maddie and I. I guess your free to interpret my actions any way you want to but if you thought i was being hostile to anyone then you're so much more of a snowflake than I couldve ever imagined.

Were you dropped on your head as a child?

JJ @ 3/11/2017 9:56

Mittens @ 3/11/2017 11:52 My biggest beef in that type of scenario, is that we have a system set up to protect victims identities, but why not for the alleged perpetrator? Innocent until proven guilty, but if the story is out that you are guilty before all the information is sifted through, then it has already ruined your life. Of course, it is far worse for a woman to be raped than a man to be falsely accused of rape, but there should still be protection to both parties until the facts of the case have been determined. You could say that for any alleged perpetrator no matter what the crime and that would be fine, but victims should absolutely have their identities protected by the legal system. I don't think it's an all or nothing thing.

I'm not saying that we shouldn't be protecting victim identities at all.

Nofo @ 3/11/2017 10:57

Chris25 @ 3/11/2017 11:56 Nofo @ 3/11/2017 10:50 Chris25 @ 3/11/2017 11:48 Nofo @ 3/11/2017 10:41 Chris25 @ 3/11/2017 11:39 Nofo @ 3/11/2017 10:37 Curtis @ 3/11/2017 11:35 If we had any sorta rules you would’ve been banned 4 years ago Nofo At least Igor and Chris wouldn't be huge cunts. Your troll game needs work. I'm not trolling, I don't hide my shitty opinions behind excuses. No, you put your shitty opinions right out there in the open. So do you, you just pretend you were trolling. Notice you've only gotten hostile to Maddie and I. I guess your free to interpret my actions any way you want to but if you thought i was being hostile to anyone then you're so much more of a snowflake than I couldve ever imagined. Were you dropped on your head as a child?

Were you molested as one?

Chris25 @ 3/11/2017 12:01

Nofo @ 3/11/2017 10:57 Chris25 @ 3/11/2017 11:56 Nofo @ 3/11/2017 10:50 Chris25 @ 3/11/2017 11:48 Nofo @ 3/11/2017 10:41 Chris25 @ 3/11/2017 11:39 Nofo @ 3/11/2017 10:37 Curtis @ 3/11/2017 11:35 If we had any sorta rules you would’ve been banned 4 years ago Nofo At least Igor and Chris wouldn't be huge cunts. Your troll game needs work. I'm not trolling, I don't hide my shitty opinions behind excuses. No, you put your shitty opinions right out there in the open. So do you, you just pretend you were trolling. Notice you've only gotten hostile to Maddie and I. I guess your free to interpret my actions any way you want to but if you thought i was being hostile to anyone then you're so much more of a snowflake than I couldve ever imagined. Were you dropped on your head as a child? Were you molested as one?

Yes.

Thankfully I am in a position where I cannot even imagine being raped and how difficult that would make all sorts of social and romantic interactions. There needs to be a societal change where women are not seen as objects for men's enjoyment and pleasure. In my opinion this is where all of these issues stem from.

Can't agree more Mittens

AngirOn Creating New Thread in General Discussion One minute ago
I'm moving my residency to that thread.

Wikey @ 3/11/2017 10:22

Okay, I had a bit of time left, I read Vlady's post. I will read the Atlantic article. But something tells me none of us are going change our minds on this subject. Which is fine. This is a touchy subject for a lot of people (no pun intended). And we have strong opinions on this either side of the issue. Tbf, it does seem that we are all misunderstanding each others position a fair bit.

No, I think you (and Igor) have a perspective that is understandable given your experience. I don't think you (or Igor) is truly bad or sexist; I think you are just ignorant of what women truly experience on a day to day basis. And you are not alone in this experience- most men don't even have an inkling, which is why some women started stuff like the #MeToo thing, which was about creating awareness about how prevalent sexual harassment and assault is.

I did have one issue with your discussion earlier: the hand on knee being a "what if she reciprocates" situation. Again- look at it form you being in prison and a guy starts rubbing your shoulders. After all, what if you reciprocate, right? Do you feel comfortable saying no? Do you feel he'll just stop and respect your boundaries if you do?

Wikey @ 3/11/2017 10:26

Yeah, a boss touching his employee's knee is wrong. I agree with you there. That would be taking advantage of his position and putting his employee in a position they should never be put in. It is worth mentioning that in the example cited so many times in this thread, the UK Defense Minister was accused by a journalist, not somebody who worked for him. So it's a big difference imo.

Not really- again, it is her job involved and it is a professional environment. They weren't on a date, they weren't friends hanging out; she was there to interview him. Period. She wasn't there to try to "catch a minister". Again, this is why I had the interview of a death row inmate as an example to try to explain. You have to do the interview or you have to explain to your boss why the interview got stopped. And if the boss is a man who says "This is no big deal; why'd you stop?" suddenly it looks bad on you from his perspective. And it's downhill from there.

vladykins @ 3/11/2017 11:18

Wikey @ 3/11/2017 10:26 Yeah, a boss touching his employee's knee is wrong. I agree with you there. That would be taking advantage of his position and putting his employee in a position they should never be put in. It is worth mentioning that in the example cited so many times in this thread, the UK Defense Minister was accused by a journalist, not somebody who worked for him. So it's a big difference imo. Not really- again, it is her job involved and it is a professional environment. They weren't on a date, they weren't friends hanging out; she was there to interview him. Period. She wasn't there to try to "catch a minister". Again, this is why I had the interview of a death row inmate as an example to try to explain. You have to do the interview or you have to explain to your boss why the interview got stopped. And if the boss is a man who says "This is no big deal; why'd you stop?" suddenly it looks bad on you from his perspective. And it's downhill from there.

This seems more like an abuse of power thing than just a "all men abuse women" thing. These are things that should be addressed by human resources and I feel in a lot of cases are although you're not going to catch every skeeze ball before shit happens.

I also feel like a lot of this stuff is happening from guys like 40-50+ when that sort of shit was more the norm. I think younger men are a lot more cognizant of what can happen if they act inappropriately towards women.

In other news

http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/house-of-cards-staff-accuse-kevin-spacey-of-sexual-assault-and-harassment-20171103-gze3zs.html

Curtis @ 3/11/2017 11:37

In other news http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/house-of-cards-staff-accuse-kevin-spacey-of-sexual-assault-and-harassment-20171103-gze3zs.html

Yeah but what were they wearing?