What's new

Keillor and MeToo

You abandoned the discredited conspiracy theory very quickly, and said it doesn't matter. But, what that did reveal is that you were willing to simply accept those theories uncritically in the first place, because they buttressed your beliefs about Dr. Ford. Which can be seen as demonstrating your beliefs about Dr. Ford are not necessarily based on a rational analysis of Ford or her testimony, as you likely would claim, but more likely on an underlying prejudice against Ford in general.

Your willingness to embrace conspiracy theories reflects poorly on your judgement, you're human, it happens. But, throwing them right out the window that quickly demonstrates you had a preconceived conclusion to begin with, which is your right, but what really needs to be questioned is whether those preconceived conclusions are based in your attitude about women in general. Now, it's not my place to suggest you take a good look at underlying beliefs, that's up to you.
Ok, I will provide my take on this.

First of all, I do believe Ford was part of a plot to sabotage Kavanaugh -- the possible link to the CIA seemed to fit, but I didn't look into it that carefully. Furthermore, I have at times found Snopes to be wrong, which doesn't mean they are wrong in this case as it appears they researched it carefully. The bottomline is that I opposed Kavanaugh, in great part because of the possibility that he could affect the repeal of Roe V Wade. And I think it was this fear that motivated this plot.

Do I believe in conspiracies -- absolutely. They are far more common than people realize, but organizations that are in the business of lying like the CIA, which incidentally masterminded JFK's assassination, try to equate it with lunacy. This is the tactic of applying negative connotations to words to influence opinion (euphemism) -- because people believe a conspiracy was involved in JFK's assassination, then you're a lunatic. If you have read the histories of the CIA, many written by disgruntled former agents, you will find that conspiracy is the general mode of operation of the intelligence agencies -- stealth, subversion, cover-up. This is what the CIA does.

All I am seeking is the truth. Is it true that men often sexually harass women, yes, though it depends on what you mean as often. Is it a constant thing done by many men. I would object to that. Is it common among Hollywood moguls who are in a position to do so, perhaps yes as we know the "legend" of the casting couch (a little quid pro quo going on here, however), but then I can't say for sure because we only hear about the more high profile and sensational cases. I certainly despise people like Cosby but he is mentally-ill and a rare exception.

Do men and women view sexual harassment differently - yes. Would I feel uncomfortable about someone staring at my crotch? Yes, but I wouldn't bring that person to court and charge them with a crime. And let's face it, if a teenage boy with little experience was "harassed" by an older attractive woman, do you think he would welcome it, or not? More than likely, however, a teenage girl would not unless she was infatuated with the man. I actually was on the other end of such situations, not often, but occasionally, during the six years I was a college English teacher. I did not cross the line but I know of colleagues who did. In my opinion, that is sexual harassment but what teacher would charge a student with sexual harassment? More communication is needed about this topic. I think Moe's experience is much more common. The average guy has enough sense not to cross the line.

My beef is people accusing people of something that happened years ago without proof. And it's wrong to convict someone of something only based on hearsay, especially something that happened decades ago. Hey, it has happened to me here on Jazzfanz. No one really knows what happened between myself and One Brow 12 years ago. It's a He said/he said case. But there actually was a member on the board who was in total agreement about One Brow's multiple personality. Of course, we had no proof, only suspicion and maybe I was wrong. Yet because I approached One Brow about it and he denies it, I was harassing him. I only approached him because I was getting harassed and there was strong circumstantial evidence that he was the source. So, I wish all you accusers would just STFU and stop accusing me of something I never did. I did not stalk or harass anyone.

The court of public opinion is often not based on truth but emotion, fear, and a mob mentality. It's such things that caused hundreds or more women to be burned at the stake in the Middle Ages. It's what caused many people to be unjustly accused by Joe McCarthy, destroying their careers. Now we have MeToo, and I believe it engages in the same character assassination because people conflate their own experience with something about which they have no first hand knowledge. I found on FB that the people who were the most hysterical about the Kavanaugh situation were people who confessed to being abused or raped -- this makes a lot of sense to me, whether they're right or wrong.

Finally, we all are human, we all have frailties, and we all make mistakes and sometimes lose self-control. To attack someone for that -- I'm not talking about a pattern of behavior -- is insensitive and cruel. Archie has to admit that I never called him at work. In fact, the more I have read his posts since our dust-up, I actually have to begun to like the guy, though he seems not to recognize that. I was upset with him for his penchant for negging. But he is only human like the rest of us.
 
You haven’t listened to anything anyone has said. You’ve just decided you are going to feel attacked.

So I’ll pass. Evaluate your life.
The problem is that you can't effectively rebut some of my comments. Maybe you need to do your own evaluation. Maybe your beliefs are based on emotion rather than fact. I am only questioning things because I want the truth, the facts, not some emotional reaction to it. The same thing happened to Socrates because he wouldn't go along with the crowd and stuck to his beliefs. I never said I'm 100 percent correct but I am questioning the mob mentality that is occurring and the dangers that it engenders.
 
The problem is that you can't effectively rebut some of my comments. Maybe you need to do your own evaluation. Maybe your beliefs are based on emotion rather than fact. I am only questioning things because I want the truth, the facts, not some emotional reaction to it. The same thing happened to Socrates because he wouldn't go along with the crowd and stuck to his beliefs. I never said I'm 100 percent correct but I am questioning the mob mentality that is occurring and the dangers that it engenders.
Comparing yourself to Socrates? Are you going to follow that to the logical conclusion?

Not everyone who faces opposition is a misunderstood genius. Some are just jerks.
 
Comparing yourself to Socrates? Are you going to follow that to the logical conclusion?

Not everyone who faces opposition is a misunderstood genius. Some are just jerks.
There are a lot of others who agree with my take -- just go online and you will find them. No, I don't plan to kill myself, though I could simply stop posting here. If I did, as I have taken breaks periodically, I would still read the Jazz news. I do learn things, especially about the Jazz. It should be a fun pastime but some people turn it into a place to vent hostility.
 
There are a lot of others who agree with my take -- just go online and you will find them. No, I don't plan to kill myself, though I could simply stop posting here. If I did, as I have taken breaks periodically, I would still read the Jazz news. I do learn things, especially about the Jazz. It should be a fun pastime but some people turn it into a place to vent hostility.
Like the first post of this thread, for instance.
 
What is that supposed to mean, that the court of public opinion is not based on facts, but emotion, and we're supposed to accept that? Unsympathetic? No, not at all. I've been sexually "harassed" by both men and women. Nothing overt, but nothing to sue someone over or convict them for their natural feelings. And the women were mostly just trying to get something from me, not that they had a desire to be with me. In some cases, there certainly has been a quid pro quo. On the other hand, we all know that human biology has caused men to be more pro-active in seeking sex. Things are changing. But are we to convict all men for their sexuality? Not all men sexually harass women. I know that for a fact because I am one of them.

Nothing better than a dumb mysoginist amiright?
 
Nothing better than a dumb mysoginist amiright?
You think women crave sex more than men? Maybe there are some, especially after menopause. But they're usually not as aggressive. Let's face women are from Venus and Men are from Mars, so that's why they generally don't see eye-to-eye on this issue. Now watch the crazies jump on me for that statement.
 
You think women crave sex more than men? Maybe there are some, especially after menopause. But they're usually not as aggressive. Let's face women are from Venus and Men are from Mars, so that's why they generally don't see eye-to-eye on this issue. Now watch the crazies jump on me for that statement.
Holy ****ing ****...

labido is not a men = high, women = low. That is so far from how that works.

Just as a stupid story, a place I used to work where there was tons of downtime but I had to be in a place with very little in the way of distractions had PCs and a very restrictive network. I could basically read Bloomberg news or WebMD. I think there were one or two other non-blocked sites, but it was VERY restricted. So I found on WebMD a forum for all sorts of different topics, like this condition or that condition or whatever other medical thing. One of them was "Sex and Relationships" which is where I spent most of my reading time. People posted about their sex and relationship issues. MANY MANY MANY threads were about mismatched labidos, generally within the context of established relationships. Almost no relationship is made up of two people with the exact same labido, and one of the bits of wisdom I picked up is that in many cases the person in the relationship with the lower labido has a power advnatage based on that. Basically the person with the lower labido controls access to sex for the other partner. Anyway, long story short, about half the posts from women on the topic was that they wanted sex much more often than their husband, the other was that their husband pestered them for sex constantly when they didn't feel like having sex.

The way desire to have sex manifests itself can vary from person to person, man or woman, relationship to relationship. Your 1950s notion of men always want sex and women sometimes begrudgingly give it to them is just flat out false. Just plan *** ****ing false. You have made yourself into an even bigger fool than you have been for years and years. Bravo.
 
I don't want to spend any more time defending my opinion.

Then stop. You are spewing ignorance, based on a misunderstanding of the nature of harassment, its prevalence, any actual punishment that happens (usually temporary), and the difficulty women have with being believed.
 
Last edited:
There are a lot of others who agree with my take -- just go online and you will find them. No, I don't plan to kill myself, though I could simply stop posting here. If I did, as I have taken breaks periodically, I would still read the Jazz news. I do learn things, especially about the Jazz. It should be a fun pastime but some people turn it into a place to vent hostility.
Stop posting and take some time to read some books. You've got some extremely toxic opinions. You need to spend your time to fix that rather than posting on here.
 
Stop posting and take some time to read some books. You've got some extremely toxic opinions. You need to spend your time to fix that rather than posting on here.
LOL ... I spend a lot of time reading books, B_Line. I have a graduate degree in English and used to teach it. I did and still do a lot of reading. It may be toxic to you, but that's a bit arrogant of you to tell me I need to read more. Many posters here are very poor readers, especially the ones who spew venom and resort to name-calling when they have nothing of substance to say. They only read what they want to hear and jump to false conclusions. I fully agree that women are often sexually harassed. I just think you need to be more discriminating about who to believe, especially when it involves money and politics, and that is based on a deep reading of politics and American political history. How much do you know and have read about McCarthyism and what took place in the U.S. during the 1950s?

Have you ever read Norman Mailer's, The Prisoner of Sex? Though written nearly 50 years ago -- I read it in the 1970s -- it is a probing analysis of women's liberation that still resonates today.
 
In the United States, women were granted the right to vote less then 100 years ago. Think about that. Less then 100 years ago. For many decades preceding the passage of the 19th amendment women suffragists campaigned for this most basic right. The #MeToo movement can be seen as part of a long term movement representing the empowerment of women in society. It isn't anything to be afraid of at all. They deserved the right to vote. They deserved equal pay for equal work. They deserve the right to be free from sexual harrassment. And we're bound to have a woman president one day. All part of a long term process, and not something that need throw fear into the hearts of men.
 
In the United States, women were granted the right to vote less then 100 years ago. Think about that. Less then 100 years ago. For many decades preceding the passage of the 19th amendment women suffragists campaigned for this most basic right. The #MeToo movement can be seen as part of a long term movement representing the empowerment of women in society. It isn't anything to be afraid of at all. They deserved the right to vote. They deserved equal pay for equal work. They deserve the right to be free from sexual harrassment. And we're bound to have a woman president one day. All part of a long term process, and not something that need throw fear into the hearts of men.
This doesn't conflict with anything I believe, but I'm not going to elaborate and start another pissing war.
 
I don't even know what to say. I'm having an anxiety attack from reading this thread.

I have yet to meet a woman who has not been sexually harassed in her lifetime, and far too many have experienced much worse. I've been testing the 1-in-4 theory, and so far every group of women I have been in where we are free to talk about these issues has had at least 1-in-4 that have been raped. So far 4-in-4 have been sexually harassed in many ways and in many incidences. Some of them don't recognize it until it is explained to them because they have been so conditioned to accept it as their lot in life and as the way that men treat women.

When I first asked my 80-year-old mother about her experiences, she denied it had ever been an issue in her life. As we continued our conversation and I gave her examples of other women, she realized that she had dealt with many episodes of it. Some of you may not be comfortable knowing that women are finally finding their voice and are realizing that they do not have to accept the bad behavior of many men. Too bad.
 
It seems to me a lot of people have a hard time telling the difference between the way things were and the way things ought to be.

People think that because you didn't hear about this issue a few decades ago it didn't exist, and we are only earing about them today because of special interest groups or SJWs run amok trying to be divisive.

It's similar to how black lives matter is treated by certain contingencies. It's easier for these people to find reasons to dismiss these movements than to take what they are saying seriously, because that might require some introspection on their part.
 
I don't even know what to say. I'm having an anxiety attack from reading this thread.

I have yet to meet a woman who has not been sexually harassed in her lifetime, and far too many have experienced much worse. I've been testing the 1-in-4 theory, and so far every group of women I have been in where we are free to talk about these issues has had at least 1-in-4 that have been raped. So far 4-in-4 have been sexually harassed in many ways and in many incidences. Some of them don't recognize it until it is explained to them because they have been so conditioned to accept it as their lot in life and as the way that men treat women.

When I first asked my 80-year-old mother about her experiences, she denied it had ever been an issue in her life. As we continued our conversation and I gave her examples of other women, she realized that she had dealt with many episodes of it. Some of you may not be comfortable knowing that women are finally finding their voice and are realizing that they do not have to accept the bad behavior of many men. Too bad.
But you did get my point about using MeToo to advance a political agenda, personal aggrandizement or character assassination? I still think there is a disconnect in what men and women believe to be sexual harassment, which is part of the problem. I found the following comment to be at the heart of the problem--some women do not recognize it either:
So far 4-in-4 have been sexually harassed in many ways and in many incidences. Some of them don't recognize it until it is explained to them because they have been so conditioned to accept it as their lot in life and as the way that men treat women.

In other words, we all need to be better educated about this issue. What should we consider sexual harassment? Tell us in your own words. I'd like to know.
 
Back
Top