- The American Conservative - http://www.theamericanconservative.com -

Democratic Women Turn On Franken

Another woman claims that Sen. Al Franken sexually harassed her.  [1] Thus, this statement just released by US Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, Democrat of New York:

Senator Franken Should Step Aside

I have been shocked and disappointed to learn over the last few weeks that a colleague I am fond of personally has engaged in behavior towards women that is unacceptable. I consider Senator Franken to be a friend and have enjoyed working with him in the Senate in our shared fight to help American families.

But this moment of reckoning about our friends and colleagues who have been accused of sexual misconduct is necessary, and it is painful. We must not lose sight that this watershed moment is bigger than any one industry, any one party, or any one person.

The pervasiveness of sexual harassment and the experience women face every day across America within the existing power structure of society has finally come out of the shadows. It is a moment that we as a country cannot afford to ignore.

While a lot of the media focus has been on high-profile cases with powerful leaders in politics, Hollywood, and the media business, we must recognize that this is happening every day to women everywhere, up and down the economic ladder. For many women, including hourly workers in offices, stores, hotels, restaurants, bars, or on farms, with bosses who aren’t famous enough to be held accountable publicly, calling out their abusers is still not an option. To achieve lasting change, we will need to fight this everywhere on behalf of everyone by insisting on accountability and working to bring more women into leadership in each industry to fundamentally shift the culture.

In politics, of course, the problem of sexual harassment and sexual assault is not limited to any one party. There have been Democrats and Republicans accused of misconduct, and I have no doubt that there will be more because Congress is not immune to this scourge. The question is what are we willing to do about it when courageous women and men come forward.

We have to rise to the occasion, and not shrink away from it, even when it’s hard, especially when it’s hard. That is what this larger moment is about. So, I have spent a lot of time reflecting on Senator Franken’s behavior. Enough is enough. The women who have come forward are brave and I believe them. While it’s true that his behavior is not the same as the criminal conduct alleged against Roy Moore, or Harvey Weinstein, or President Trump, it is still unquestionably wrong, and should not be tolerated by those of us who are privileged to work in public service.

As the mother of two young boys, we owe it to our sons and daughters to not equivocate, but to offer clarity. We should not have to be explaining the gradations between sexual assault, harassment and unwelcome groping. And what message do we send to our sons and daughters when we accept gradations of crossing the line? None of it is ok and none of it should be tolerated.

We should demand the highest standards, not the lowest, from our leaders, and we should fundamentally value and respect women. Every workplace in America, including Congress, needs to have a strong process and accountability for sexual harassment claims, and I am working with others to address the broken and opaque system in Congress.

While Senator Franken is entitled to have the Ethics Committee conclude its review, I believe it would be better for our country if he sent a clear message that any kind of mistreatment of women in our society isn’t acceptable by stepping aside to let someone else serve.

In the wake of the election of President Trump, in just the last few months, our society is changing, and I encourage women and men to keep speaking up to continue this progress. At this moment, we need to speak hard truths or lose our chance to make lasting change.

She’s not the only Democratic senator to take this stand against one of their own: [2]

Sens. Mazie Hirono of Hawaii, Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire, Patty Murray of Washington state and Claire McCaskill of Missouri joined Gillibrand in pressing for Franken to quit.

Well. Whether or not Franken is guilty or is being railroaded, this act will make quite a useful contrast if and when Republican Roy Moore takes the open Senate seat from Alabama next year.

UPDATE: More Democratic names now: [3]

Kamala D. Harris (Calif.), Tammy Baldwin (Wis.), Debbie Stabenow (Mich.) and Patty Murray (Wash.), the highest-ranking woman among Senate Democrats, along with Joe Donnelly (Ind.), Robert P. Casey Jr. (Pa.) and Sherrod Brown (Ohio).

UPDATE.2:  Here we see a political nightmare brewing. Sen. Sasse gets it:

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js [6]

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js [6]

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js [6]

82 Comments (Open | Close)

82 Comments To "Democratic Women Turn On Franken"

#1 Comment By TR On December 6, 2017 @ 7:44 pm

I thought if Moore was not seated, there had to be a special election. Which Moore would win. Apparently I;m wrong But If the Governor appoints someone else, rest assured Moore will run again in 2018.

If I were from Alabama and as ornery as some of my Southern in-laws and blood kin, I might vote for Moore just to send a message to Peggy Noonan and every other pompous out-of-state hypocrite that they should keep their noses out of Alabama politics.

If I were an Alabaman and a so-called “evangelical” I would be used to seeing politics as a blood-sport that has no real connection with Christianity. That’s why I could say I was a Christian and cheer the passage of a law making it illegal to give a undocumented farm worker a lift. Sure it’s a disconnect, but so are a lot of things in any culture.

#2 Comment By fizzy physicist On December 6, 2017 @ 7:47 pm

A little off topic, but here is a prime example of the sexual revolution eating its own.

[10]

#3 Comment By RP_McMurphy On December 6, 2017 @ 7:49 pm

bkh:

“As long as you continue to approve of killing children in the womb, you do not have a say in an ethics discussion such as this.”

So the ~60% of the country that believes abortion should be legal under some circumstances has no moral standing? And the remaining ~40% (probably less — see the MS personhood amendment) has license to elect racists and child molesters? I suppose y’all would be justified in voting for a full-blown Nazi, provided s/he were pro-life. Yeah, good luck with that. You’re gonna need that Ben-Op to protect yourselves from the rest of us given the backlash you’re inciting.

#4 Comment By Cynthia McLean On December 6, 2017 @ 7:51 pm

I don’t want Franken to step down, I want to see a full Ethics review and the names of all Congressional abusers who have used taxpayers’ money to pay off accusers. Then they can establish clear and strict Ethics rules going forward with teeth in the enforcement.

It is wrong to tar all “abusers” with the same brush and, I say as a woman, women can lie too.

#5 Comment By H. On December 6, 2017 @ 8:08 pm

Re: Margie and R.D.

Thank you for being better than us, the obnoxious commentators. But maybe, just maybe, you are getting the whole thing wrong. yet being too content with your moral superiority complex to see what is going on in the society. For the record, I have never done anything that amounts to harassment. I have lost a job because I refuse to flirt though. Ha.
I also have no empathy for all the named and accused, because I loathe politicians and Hollywood, except Keillor who is a great radio artist, and a cultural icon in my book.

Anyway, let me help you think:

1-Sexual harassment is an artificial term. Like every other new fake term, it is meaningless and meant to manipulate. The right term is simply harassment, bothersome actions or unwanted advance. Since men are initiators of overt sexual advances(versus complex, indirect and opaque advances of women), the term sexual harassment targets men. Also because it limits the harassment to sex, it targets men. Similarly, if you had ‘deceitful behavior’ or ‘trickery to incite impregnation’, it would almost exclusively target women. Therefore, the whole affair is set up against men from the start. It is another attack on men by women who are hopeless to get attention any other way, by women who are no longer in the game, or by the old hags who want revenge. This is the psychology of what is happening.

2-This is not about harassment. Unlike modern Cairo or Delhi. harassment is not an issue in America, outside of gay circles. It happens, but its occurrence is not beyond the normal range, and is dealt with it decisively. Yes, there is a normal acceptable range of things. If you try to eliminate it, you would need a massive enforcement of brainwashing, control, and ideology. The feminization of men, the taming of men’s rage and turning it to female-like conceit has dangerous consequences. It will make the American women even more narcissistic than what they are now, and it will drive men away, and it will annihilate righteous masculinity too. As Chivalry has died in the age of feminism, soon basic masculine protection can die too. This can only work for a highly synthetic and lifeless society.

3-These women were not innocent. They were in it until they grew old. When you turn on the sexual games, to expect to have full control over each outcome is narcissistic. To act provocatively with a guy on one day, show it off, and then expect the other guy not to try? How much of self-serving control and submission do you expect? Coming after 20-30 years to throw a stone at someone? what decent person does that? Especially if they won’t be happy with an apology?

4-Men and women mingle, chat and befriend with each other in ways never seen before in the history of mankind. Even more important, they now share power and money. You can not expect the same strict behavior you have in non-mixed societies. You, of course, can, but you will pay a price.

5-When a habit or a culture is tolerated for many years, you cannot turn around and kill someone’s career sanctimoniously. It is not fair and humane. It is also very pretentious. So this is not a moral victory, it is a moral defeat: sexual behavior was condemned, lies and malice were endorsed. If sincere (no one is ), they could have given a private warning. I mean consider the case of Keillor: the man has created an amazing high-cultured radio show for many years. Then over an incident that happened and handled years ago, they come back destroying his whole reputation and even rename his show? If you don’t know what communism/collectivism is like, this is what it is. If you cannot see that this is wrong and malicious, then we have a problem.

5-This obnoxious reactionary coup can get ugly in many different ways. Think of all the new guns lawyers have. You are probably not working for a large organization to imagine all the treachery that can come out of this, as a result of scheming women and lawyers. You have no idea.

I can go on and on. I don’t have a cent in the fight (no love for Hollywood, and no case of sexual misconduct). But the herd behavior and the numb reaction of bloggers fascinates me. Congratulations for contributing to the construction of the wall between men and women. Please do not complain about homosexuality/heroin ten years from now. Kids go where love is.

Respect women, don’t worship them.

#6 Comment By A DC Wonk On December 6, 2017 @ 8:23 pm

Disgraced Former Senator Al Franken….has a nice ring to it.

Schadenfreude much?

And what to do with two-time-expelled-State-Supreme Court Justice Moore?

Feminists and all the rest of them may not like it but passing a bunch of laws and causing people to resign is not going to change the reality of instinctual biology.

This sounds like your saying that having laws against sexual assault are a bad idea.

I have a better idea: men, and, frankly all of us, ought to be able to exercise self-control over our base instincts.

They won’t stop until they clipped every male’s nuts off for being a male.

No, just the ones who think with their nuts instead of their brains, and thereby think they are entitled to unwanted touching of others: which happens to be the legal definition of the tort of assault.

#7 Comment By A DC Wonk On December 6, 2017 @ 8:30 pm

Rod — you hit the nail on the head with this one.

There was a theory floated a week ago or so by Josh Marshall, pointing out why some politicians are getting in trouble for their sexual assault-ish actions (Franken, Conyers, etc.) and others aren’t (Trump, Moore, etc.)

He said that public opinion doesn’t matter — what matters is the opinion of that particular politician’s base constituency.

Going along with this theory: the constiuency of Franken and Conyers turned on them; while the base constituency of Trump and Moore just don’t care that much.

Which, in itself, says a whole lot. And, what it seems to say is . . . well, that’s the the point of your article here.

Those on the left have caricatures of those on the right. It seems that most those on the right, these days, are doing their best to validate those caricatures.

(Add in to this Franken/Moore comparison, from this week: huge tax breaks for the 1%, and, the very next say, proclamations that we can’t afford the CHIP program, and that we can’t afford to maintain Social Security and Medicare. You couldn’t write a script like this.)

#8 Comment By Mapache On December 6, 2017 @ 8:34 pm

We have been told we shouldn’t discriminate on the basis of sexual preference in selling cakes or in electing candidates. Yet, now Alabama voters are being told they must reject Roy Moore based upon his sexual preference, at least when he was in his early 30s, for young girls, ranging in age from 14 to 18.

We are also told we should be more like Europe. According to Wikipedia, the age of consent there ranges from 14 (e.g. Italy, Austria, Portugal, and Hungary), to 15 (e.g. Monaco, France, Iceland, Denmark, Greece) to 16 (Spain, Finland, Netherlands, UK) to 17 (Cyprus, Ireland).

I’m confused.

#9 Comment By Glaivester On December 6, 2017 @ 9:25 pm

There was a theory floated a week ago or so by Josh Marshall, pointing out why some politicians are getting in trouble for their sexual assault-ish actions (Franken, Conyers, etc.) and others aren’t (Trump, Moore, etc.)

He said that public opinion doesn’t matter — what matters is the opinion of that particular politician’s base constituency.

Going along with this theory: the constiuency of Franken and Conyers turned on them; while the base constituency of Trump and Moore just don’t care that much.

Which, in itself, says a whole lot. And, what it seems to say is . . . well, that’s the the point of your article here.

No, it’s not that we don’t care, it’s just that the stakes are higher in our case.

With Trump, it was either Trump, or Hillary – and in the primary, it was either Trump, who agreed with a lot of the base on trade, immigration, etc., or one of the other candidates who basically told us to go fly a kite (the only other candidate who pushed the same issues was Cruz, and he came in second).

With Moore, the primary consideration is keeping Doug Jones out of the seat. If there were a way to replace Moore on the ballot, and to preserve already-cast votes for him for whomever his replacement was, I think forcing him to resign would be a lot more popular.

That’s also why I don’t think that refusing to seat him or asking him to resign once he is in office would be such a huge insult to the GOP base – it’s not really about having to elect him, per se.

#10 Comment By Glaivester On December 6, 2017 @ 9:39 pm

(Glaivester, don’t you live in TN4? do you hear anything? DDHQ got nothin’)

Way off. I live in ME1.

#11 Comment By A DC Wonk On December 6, 2017 @ 10:54 pm

Men and women mingle, chat and befriend with each other in ways never seen before in the history of mankind. Even more important, they now share power and money. You can not expect the same strict behavior you have in non-mixed societies.

Lemme get this straight: because men and women mingle and share power, we can’t expect men to refrain from grabbing the breasts (or genitals) of women?

I hope you are warning your daughters not to take jobs where they might have male co-workers. Or, if she does, and is grabbed without consent, or flashed by a masturbating boss, then, in your words:

These women were not innocent. They were in it until they grew old.

And if your daughter complains about it, I’m sure you’ll repeat your words to her: It is another attack on men by women who are hopeless to get attention any other way

Yeah — it’s always the woman’s fault. Men have earned their “male privilege” right? After all, we have stronger sex drives and stronger bodies, right? That’s just nature. They don’t call women “the weaker sex” for nothin’, eh?

Oh, and thanks for mansplaining that American women are narcissistic. Yet another reason that it’s women’s fault, no doubt.

#12 Comment By Fran Macadam On December 6, 2017 @ 11:08 pm

There is a certain hypocrisy to tolerating all this from allies, until you think it’s worth outing and exiling them in service of the ultimate goal of removing Trump… Whatever it takes, like the madness of Russiagate.

#13 Comment By Siarlys Jenkins On December 6, 2017 @ 11:31 pm

We are told…

By who? OR by whom? You may be confusing a cacophony of opinionated voices for a single Authority.

#14 Comment By Siarlys Jenkins On December 6, 2017 @ 11:35 pm

If it’s a propensity toward lewd and crude that you object to, would you also consider it a poor idea to elect e.g. athletes or soldiers to the Senate?

Depends on how lewd and crude they are. I didn’t say all actors are lewd and crude either, just that this one certainly was.

I did mean Coleman. I missed a quarter century of midwestern history, being on a coast or two at the time.

#15 Comment By William Dalton On December 7, 2017 @ 12:01 am

“In Alabama, I think the GOP calculation is to elect Moore, counting on the GOP majority in the Senate to refuse to seat him or force his resignation through ethics investigations. The Republican governor of Alabama will then appoint a replacement, who can run as an incumbent.”

Any attempt by Republicans to deny Moore his Senate seat, where he to be elected, would be as successful, and as well received, as the aborted help to deny Donald Trump the GOP Presidential nomination. And for the same reason. Republicans are sick and tired of their leadership in Washington telling them the leadership knows better what is good for the country and what is good for the Party. Whether or not the leadership is right. As in 2016, any decision to dump Roy Moore would bring the house down. And, yes, seating him may bring the same results. But it won’t be because Roy Moore is a sexual predator. More likely a predator upon other Senators.

#16 Comment By GreenOaks1234 On December 7, 2017 @ 12:05 am

Can’t we agree across the spectrum that a 30+ year old who performs sexual acts with a 14-year old can’t be a U.S. Senator?

But it’s the Christians who prevent us from reaching this consensus, with slimy defenses in Alabama and even on this site by people like Buchanan.

I know that’s not a fair comment since there are Christians like Rod who really care about morality as opposed to the ends justifying the means… but that’s how it looks to your average blue stater.

And then you wonder why people turn against the religious.

#17 Comment By Edward Dougherty On December 7, 2017 @ 8:28 am

William Dalton,

What if Roy Moore (or anyone, for that matter) had murdered someone 40 years ago? Would you still take the same attitude?

As for Trump and his allies being the only ones with wisdom and maturity, you must have a pretty low bar for that.

#18 Comment By ginger On December 7, 2017 @ 9:56 am

“Can’t we agree across the spectrum that a 30+ year old who performs sexual acts with a 14-year old can’t be a U.S. Senator?”

Nah, apparently not.

“And then you wonder why people turn against the religious.”

Because Christian persecution, that’s why.

The capacity for shortsightedness in political movements/institutions never fails to astound. One would think that sheer self-preservation would induce more clever behavior. But for many people, it’s all about surviving today, forget what this means for tomorrow.

I remember when the Catholic Church sex abuse scandals were breaking in the early 2000s, and some Catholics were trying to sound the alarm about how it was going to destroy the credibility of the Church if bishops weren’t held accountable for shuffling around pedophiles and perverts of all stripes, thus aiding and abetting the further sexual molestation of minors for decades. For every Catholic trying to make the case for the importance of doing the right thing and long-term moral credibility, there were at least 10 more willing to say, “Nothing to see here, folks, move along…”

We see how well that panned out. The Repubs will reap similar rewards over how they handle the Roy Moores of the world.

#19 Comment By EngineerScotty On December 7, 2017 @ 10:45 am

We have been told we shouldn’t discriminate on the basis of sexual preference in selling cakes or in electing candidates. Yet, now Alabama voters are being told they must reject Roy Moore based upon his sexual preference, at least when he was in his early 30s, for young girls, ranging in age from 14 to 18.

Conservatives have long claimed that a danger of mainstreaming and accepting homosexuality, would be that pederasts and pedophiles might soon become treated as an oppressed minority, rather than as predators.

I’m just surprised to see it’s now conservatives advancing this line of argument. Moore’s “sexual orientation” leads him to prefer teenagers? What utter rot.

NAMGLA (the North American Man-Girl Love Association, in case you haven’t figured it out) is proud to endorse Roy Moore for the US Senate.

#20 Comment By bayesian On December 7, 2017 @ 12:18 pm

@Glaivester –

Serious apologies. I don’t know who I confused you with. Ugh, creeping senility.

#21 Comment By JonF On December 7, 2017 @ 12:23 pm

Re: With Moore, the primary consideration is keeping Doug Jones out of the seat.

Jones can be voted out in 2020, and given Alabama’s political makeup almost certainly would be. And although “senator” is a fairly exalted position, it is not anywhere near as lofty as “president”, or even “Secretary of…”. A first-term senator of the minority party elected under dubious circumstances and very unlikely to be reelected is going to be the Senate’s least powerful member– really, he’d have no more power than his single vote, which is a mere 1/100 of the total Senate. Seems to me that Jones being elected would be no big deal to the GOP and for the sake of long-term strategy a short term loss like that could be written off easily.

#22 Comment By connecticut farmer On December 7, 2017 @ 2:44 pm

Lemme get this straight: Franken is out of the US Senate due to allegations of sexual misconduct. Roy Moore may be ELECTED to that same body despite allegations of sexual misconduct lodged. Will Gillibrand etal then demand that HE resign? And will the Republicans object? If so, on what grounds? Talk about role-reversal.

Welcome to the Twilight Zone folks.

#23 Comment By bkh On December 7, 2017 @ 3:22 pm

*RP_MCMurphy
“So the ~60% of the country that believes abortion should be legal under some circumstances has no moral standing? And the remaining ~40% (probably less — see the MS personhood amendment) has license to elect racists and child molesters? I suppose y’all would be justified in voting for a full-blown Nazi, provided s/he were pro-life. Yeah, good luck with that. You’re gonna need that Ben-Op to protect yourselves from the rest of us given the backlash you’re inciting.”

Actually, I am not involved in politics. I could care less if Washington DC burned down today taking the right and the left with it. And I could care less about what the majority of sheep believe about abortion. It is wrong as is many other things on both sides of the pathetic political spectrum. As we all circle the drain as this once great nation empties into the sewer of history, I know how it all ends for me and I truly hope it ends just as well for you.

#24 Comment By JCM On December 7, 2017 @ 4:41 pm

We usually decry that the “culture” has turned for the worst. But sometimes, it seems it has changed for the better. Can anyone imagine a James Bond movie coming out now where the name of the leading female character is “Pussy Galore.” In fact, I am not sure we will see another James Bond film. Fine.

#25 Comment By Rusty On December 7, 2017 @ 4:49 pm

… they should keep their noses out of Alabama politics.

An Alabama senate seat is Alabama politics: a U.S. senate seat is national politics.

#26 Comment By Adam On December 7, 2017 @ 5:24 pm

I was thinking through a comment on this post, to the effect that we have abandoned our “old rules”– you know, the prudish the ones that were clear– in favor of what has become a shifting mosaic of whatever one can get away with for now– but beware later. I thought “we’re reaping the whirlwind” for dropping our standards 50 years ago, so I decided I should look that up to make sure I wasn’t quoting someone I shouldn’t, and found something instructive on permissive societies in Wikipedia:

“Bad art was as good as good art. Grammar and spelling were no longer important. To be clean was no better than to be filthy. Good manners were no better than bad. Family life was derided as an outdated bourgeois concept. Criminals deserved as much sympathy as their victims. Many homes and classrooms became disorderly – if there was neither right nor wrong there could be no basis for punishment or reward. Violence and soft pornography became accepted in the media. Thus was sown the wind; and we are now reaping the whirlwind” (Norman Tebbit, “Back to the old traditional values”, The Guardian Weekly, 24 November 1985).

You know, the crazy thing is, I saw a quote recently from an old hippie who said that “free love” really was an opportunity for the men to mac on, or worse, the women… There! I found it! In the Washington Post no less:

“As one aging hippie recounted decades later, that [free love] was more legend than fact. “We had parties where people would smoke too much or drink too much and sleep with their friends, but there were emotional repercussions the next day. Free love is like a free lunch — there’s no such thing. . .  Even nudity was rare.”… Even within open relationships, hippie men often seized the freedom to sleep with multiple women but discouraged their girlfriends and wives from doing the same. Sadly, sexual relations in the counterculture weren’t always consensual. Women in hippie neighborhoods — especially teenage girls who had run away from their parents — were often vulnerable to sexual assault as they faced peer pressure to embrace drugs and abandon sexual restraint. Chester Anderson, a writer associated with San Francisco’s legendary Diggers collective, painted a devastating picture of sexual relations in the Summer of Love: “Rape is as common as bullsh– on Haight Street.””
( [11]).

Perhaps love has never been free despite the partners’ consent. Perhaps there is something organic about the power disparity in sexual matters between men and women. Perhaps that is why God gave, and society repeated, some strict rules for managing our unruly urges. These rules had the effect of protecting women.

The development of rule of law has done a lot to decrease violence, including sexual violence, as our societies have become more modern. But the protections of religion and custom are important, too, particularly where the law will have difficulty determining the truth. We should not have abandoned these.

#27 Comment By Mapache On December 7, 2017 @ 9:03 pm

Two things can be true at the same time: Pederasts and pedophiles can be predators and, at the same time, members of an oppressed minority. Maybe they are not predators at all but just people in search of love.

Aren’t our age of consent laws just arbitrary limits like our former legal prohibitions against homosexual conduct or same-sex marriage?

Don’t we just need to move past the ick factor associated with man-girl love and embrace new ways of liberated sexual expression?

If a young boy or girl is capable of deciding he or she really belongs to the opposite gender or sex, isn’t a young teenage girl equally capable of consenting to sexual congress with a man twice her age?

Progressives unite! Progress toward more love!! Love wins!!!

#28 Comment By RP_McMurphy On December 7, 2017 @ 9:49 pm

@bkh:

“I could care less about what the majority of sheep believe about abortion. It is wrong as is many other things on both sides of the pathetic political spectrum.”

While I admire your fanaticism, you must realize that electing a child molester on account of his pro-life bonafides will earn you moral opprobrium everywhere apart from the fringe. So I have to assume you take abortion very seriously — you’re not one of those ‘misdemeanor’ or ‘murder-lite’ pro-lifers. Abortion is premeditated homicide, and women and their doctors should be charged accordingly. Because I think we can agree that pedophilia is far more serious than any crime for which the proposed penalty is a finger-wag or a fine.

#29 Comment By Skip On December 8, 2017 @ 11:38 am

Peter H: The wild dogs are the male and female SJWs who support Democratic Senators.

#30 Comment By pepi On December 8, 2017 @ 3:46 pm

[Mapache says: December 7, 2017 at 9:03 pm
Progressives unite! Progress toward more love!! Love wins!!!]

I have not seen this approved on any progressive site. In fact, the left is definitely taking sexual abuse far more seriously than the right. So this is what my father would call pure sh*t-stirring. Absolutely nothing good every comes from it.

#31 Comment By pepi On December 8, 2017 @ 3:51 pm

[Adam says: December 7, 2017 at 5:24 pm
Perhaps love has never been free despite the partners’ consent. Perhaps there is something organic about the power disparity in sexual matters between men and women. Perhaps that is why God gave, and society repeated, some strict rules for managing our unruly urges. These rules had the effect of protecting women.
The development of rule of law has done a lot to decrease violence, including sexual violence, as our societies have become more modern. But the protections of religion and custom are important, too, particularly where the law will have difficulty determining the truth. We should not have abandoned these.]

Maybe you should study up some on the history of women or patriarchy, even Wiki would be better than nothing. Then you can find out that the huge majority of women were NEVER protected by any of these conventions or even laws. Working women (and just about all of them were working women) were at least as subject to sexual assault as they are today, especially those who worked in any sort of service position (in the “big houses”) or in inns or pubs. It was LEGAL for a man to beat his wife to whatever extent he felt like it and it was considered impossible for a man to rape his wife. If a woman divorced her husband, he got the kids and every last bit of the property including any dowry that she brought to the marriage.

Even just got back and look at the ads and shows from the 40s and 50s. Women were objectified and degraded constantly. “One more time Alice and POW! Right in the kisser!” as Jackie Gleason was constantly saying.

A little knowledge can be a dangerous thing.

#32 Comment By Outsider On December 9, 2017 @ 12:52 am

Between Roy Moore and Al Franken, some (many?) have missed this politician. According to this article he has a reputation back in Nevada.
[12]