White House says All The Women Who Say Trump Sexually Harassed Them Are Liars

a reply to: Kandinsky

Please....

there is a principle underlying ALL the expressions of that principle in human behavior. The principle here is personal responsibility and it appears that you are unwilling to assign ANY responsibility whatsoever to victims of "sexual assault".

You yourself defined rape as the "use of force" during sex. Well, i ask you, which allegations include the use of force in their description?

so thats one question.

Heres another question:

if two people associate with each other and at some point the man puts his hand on the woman, say her shoulder, and he rubs it and she doesnt protest or tell him to stop, is that sexual assault? Is it ONLY sexual assault if later on she decides she didnt like what he did?

At WHAT POINT does it become sexual assault? When she decides it is after the fact? Or when it happened but it was not protested?

Those are just a few extremely relevant questions which should be answered to determine what your personal metric is for defining what assault is.

a reply to: spiritualzombie

And how do you think Sarah Sanders feels about having to call those women liars?

We'll know when she quits and goes to work for MSNBC. Shouldn't be more than a few weeks now. How long did Spicey last?

a reply to: tribal

Methinks thou dost protest too much.

a reply to: tribal

there is a principle underlying ALL the expressions of that principle in human behavior. The principle here is personal responsibility and it appears that you are unwilling to assign ANY responsibility whatsoever to victims of "sexual assault".

Fool me once, shame on you! Fool me twice, shame on me.

How many of these women who came forward accusing Donald Trump of assault, went back for more?

I think we're still at the "shame on you" stage.

Sounds more like fantasizing than thinking.

a reply to: windword

I dont know, do you?

the problem with hearsay evidence (he said/she said) is its almost impossible to prove in court. Look at whats happened with the Cosby trial.

Cosby Trial

There is another problem with belated accusations - the time that was allowed to pass since the alleged offense. It raises legitimate questions about what motive the accuser may have for waiting until a certain time to make the allegation. It also calls into question how serious the incident was perceived to be by the alleged victim WHEN it happened. This is why i asked Kandinsky a very salient question: when does sexual assault become sexual assault? When the touch happens and is not protested, or when the person decides LATER that they didnt like what happened?

There is simply no way to know what was or is in the mind of the accuser both when the incident took place as well as the time since it occurred. This leaves the audience no other choice but to CHOOSE what to believe based on their own biases.

Lets be real about this. People are choosing to pile on because it appears the social climate exists to lend more support to alleged victims than earlier. It doesnt mean that the allegations are false across the board, but thinking, SKEPTICAL people should ask reasonable, legitimate questions about WHY the delay. Why wait decades? This does NOT serve the interest of the victims AT ALL! What justice do they hope to get? There is none. And by the way, during the years they stayed silent perhaps many more people were being victimized. I dont know what you call that, but i call it being complicit. Can victims be complicit in the acts of an abuser by remaining silent? Absolutely. Victims become victimizers all of the time. The only sticking point is how and when you define when the victim becomes complicit.

If i am abused as a child by my uncle and when im an adult and i know the uncle is still abusing children and i say nothing am i not complicit? Of course i am. I am STILL a victim....but i am ALSO covering up for abuse which is the same as aiding and abetting.

I personally dont know how rational people can see it any other way. If you know a crime is happening and you say nothing you are complicit. It doesnt change the fact you are a victim, but it does add the additional burden of now being an enabler.

I know this is about Trump but the principle at the heart of this issue in my mind is one thing: personal responsibility.

Do we believe people are responsible for their OWN actions? If yes then you cannot magically take that away as soon as they become victims of abuse by another person who is ALSO responsible for their own actions. Both are responsible for moving their arms and legs in a certain direction where things end up happening.

As i said before, if you voluntarily enter into the spiders den knowing exactly what it is you have a degree of responsibility in creating the circumstances that leads to whatever happens. Some choose to call that victim blaming.

I have sisters, four of them in fact. If my ADULT sister tells me she plans on going to a concert in a part of town KNOWN for being crime central where there is drug dealing, prostitution, robbery, gang shootings and the like and i tell her this and maybe she already knows this, but she goes anyway and has something bad happen to her will i tell her "shame on you, you knew better" ? No, but i will also not divest her of all personal responsibility knowingly putting herself in a guaranteed dangerous situation.

I honestly dont know how people can take away all personal responsibility from victims of assault or anything else when they were fully aware of the risks their actions could bring upon them. It doesnt mean i blame them, but they ARE responsible for putting themselves there. It also doesnt change the fact that the person who perpetrates a crime is ALSO responsible for THEIR OWN actions.

Is this rocket science? do we believe in magical thinking?

a reply to: spiritualzombie

I think we all know who the real liars are here and it’s not Trump’s accusers.

The most documented liar in American history currently resides in the White House, insulated by even more liars that he appointed to his administration.

No surprise that he, or his lying assed press secretary, would insist that everyone else is the liar when nothing could be further from the truth.

Absolutely pathetic.

a reply to: tribal

You do know that the more words you post the worse your argument looks right?

You have some really disgusting views regarding sexual assault and women.

It seems pretty clear just now that such views are not really in line with the thinking of the other members participating in this thread.

Blaming the victims of sexual assault is the lowest of the low arguments, you are not going to change any minds on this no matter how many walls of text full of rapist excuses you post.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

refusing to engage in genuine rational discussion of the principles underlying the issue will only guarantee more of the same.

Is that what you want?

I mean, you are surely welcome to enjoy the company and succor of those who agree with you, i would never deny you that pleasure. However you have consistently failed or refused to specifically discuss the most salient and relevant questions i have put forth. That makes you look like youre acting more out of emotion than rationality. I get it...the "left" for lack of a better word, often acts as though if it FEELS right then it IS right. Logical and rationality dont work that way. If you want to convince anyone of your view there is no other way to do it than make a well structured argument. So far i have yet to see that.

Instead i see alot of ad homs and straw manning which accomplishes NOTHING.

Also you have yet to demonstrate you understand the difference between responsibility and blame.

Do you believe in personal responsibility at all? Or only when it suits you?

a reply to: tribal

I dont know, do you?

According to their accounts, none of them!

the problem with hearsay evidence (he said/she said)

"He said/she said" and these women's personal accounts are not hearsay. In a "He said/she said" case we listen to what was said and weigh the character of the one that said it. We don't throw out a case because there are 2 sides to a story.

In this case, besides the women's accounts we have Trump's own words, in which he brags about sexual assault, more than once. Who are you going to believe? Trump or Trump?

Lets be real about this. People are choosing to pile on because it appears the social climate exists to lend more support to alleged victims than earlier.

The climate is changing and people are less tolerant of sexual crimes in high places and willing to listen now, where in the past society has commonly looked the other way and blamed the victims who do come forward.

You keep talking of personal responsibility. It's time for Donald Trump to take responsibility for his own confessions, then denial, which prompted women to come forward to testify to his character; the character of a man asking to be trusted with representing the moral authority of the Untied States of America to the rest of the world.

originally posted by: Mandroid7

I would take them to court and sue for slander, then interrogate them and find out who attempted to hire them, and attack them too.

I would bet if we could get an itemized account of the billion dollars the Queen Criminal blew losing her ass last year, there would be a paper trail to every one of these 16 women.
Follow anything that had to do with Gloria Allred and Lisa Bloom.

When did a president sexually harassing women become a problem?
Or should I say, why not till trump?

a reply to: windword

have you ever made out with someone? was it sexual assault when they "grabbed you" ?

the access hollywood tape has two different narratives represented, one in which Trump is describing hanging out with a woman and taking her shopping and the other where he describes those who are around him because hes a "star".

Ill ask you the same question i asked earlier: do you know what a groupie is? do you know what a "star effer" is? And how do you know thats not exactly what Trump was talking about?

Do you know for a certainty that Trump wasnt talking about women who pursued being in his company because he is a star? If you know this, how do you know it?

a reply to: tribal

Are you trying to say that all those women hanging around high hefner were not there because of his good looks and witty personality?

a reply to: tribal


You seem to have a problem, just like Trump does, with the concept of "consent".

a reply to: Bluntone22


How many women who hung out with Hugh Hefner came forward to accuse him of sexual assault?

When did Hugh Hefner run for President of Untied States, and ask the American people to elect him to represent the moral authority of the USA on a global stage?

a reply to: windword

Not my point.
People with power and money attract a certain type of attention.
Some abuse that power some don't.
Trump and clinton did.
Hefner did not.

a reply to: Bluntone22

When did a president sexually harassing women become a problem?
Or should I say, why not till trump?

When the presidential candidate bragged about it, and when the candidate became president and called the woman, who confirmed his boasts were true, liars.

originally posted by: spiritualzombie
a reply to: DBCowboy

Listen... You’re missing something over and over. I’m not talking about locking up. Get the “locking up” thing out of your head. You and I agree on legalities. We both agree judges and juries decide that.

I’m talking about assessments... much like we do with Harvey Weinstein’s or Hillary Clinton’s or Bill Clinton’s.

Look at what trump has said. Look at what the women have said. Is Trump lying or are all 16 women lying? What’s your gut say?

My gut?

My "gut" says that the anti-Trumpers have a history of being irrational. This appears to stay within the narrative of hatred and being irrational.

a reply to: tribal

You talk about personal responsibility as if it is the fault of the women for putting her self in that situation.

What a bunch of crap!

A women (or man for the sake of clarity) should be able to go just about anywhere with out the risk of being sexually assaulted.

The blame is always on the attacker, there is never going to be a situation during which a women is raped or sexually assaulted where saying "well she shouldn't have been there" is going to be a excuse.

Regardless of the situation the attacker should not be doing what is quite clearly morally wrong and force or extort a person into having sex. Such situations are never the fault of the victim that is why you are facing so much criticism on this because you seem to have this delusion that in cases of sexual assault both the attacker and the victim share the blame.