Because the definition of "sexual assault" or what you sometimes call "sexual abuse" is fuzzy.
I'm not familiar with your sexuality or your past experience with assault or abuse on sexuality. You don't seem to want to reference it. I have been out as "gay" for almost 10 years. I was married to a woman and "str8" for 32. I spent many years understanding my sexuality in pray away the gay groups, take responsibility for your sexuality groups, and understand yourself groups. The last all being tied to the mankind project - something I believe is outstanding but at times a little too left leaning.
As part of my gay experience for the last 10 years, I'm now convinced that str8's need to get out of the closet on their sexuality more than any LGBTQ+ person. All people have many desires around sexuality. They all can move between a sexual experience being exciting versus being used easily. When that move happens, does a person decide they were personally responsible for getting themselves into a position of being used or do they say the person they were with was responsible for using/abusing them - playing the victim. Playing victim use to be considered de-powering, Now its consider em-powering. Its no wonder people are playing victim.
The problem with all the consent BS is that it takes away from those people who really are abused. Children being taken advantage of by priests or boy scout leaders. Handicapped people being taken advantage of by their caretakers. Those are clear cases of abuse - we can add sexual to it but its abuse in the same sense as my partner who use to get beaten on by his father when he did something wrong. Those are real problems.
The consent issue is a red herring. If a woman or man is too drunk to "consent", are they being abused if they are used by another woman or man? Maybe getting drunk was a bad idea. The Brock Turner case is that. She was passed out from drinking. He was also drunk and not thinking about his actions. Who was at fault? The answer is very obvious. They both were!
The incidents with Bill Cosby are more clear. He was drugging woman. The woman did not know he was doing it. He didn't have a reputation as an assaulter. They couldn't have known.
The incidents with Harvey Weinstein were clear. Every woman was aware of how Harvey wanted sex in return for career favors. Is requiring sex for career favors OK? Their are many woman who had no issue with it. The most famous being Lucille Ball. Hollywood was well known for that model. Why were woman meeting with Weinstein and then later accusing him? Likely because afterward they felt dirty and wanted to blame him for that. He should never have made the idea of sex for career favors an option. Hollywood has had to change because of #metoo. I know people who were part of that culture that believe it was the woman's own fault. What is the right answer? Society has absolutely shifted because of the #metoo movement. But the reality is that many in society don't have allot of respect for the #metoo movement. They are just too scared of cancel culture to talk about it.
You ignore the reality going on in society based on some grand standing principal that you believe is "truth". You beat on social media and media companies because you don't believe they represent the "truth" that you have an inside track on.
Who is worse? The media companies or your arrogance on the inside track to "truth"?
"You beat on social media and media companies because you don't believe they represent the "truth" that you have an inside track on"
I'm curious why you seem so desperate to argue with me when you're having so much fun arguing with your imagination. But I have to tell you, it's pretty dull from my side.
If you want to take issue with something I've actually said, feel free. Try quoting me. That way there's no room for confusion. If you want to just make silly accusations based on caricatures of my views, go ahead. But I won't play along.
CanтАЩt resist adding Trevor Bauer. His US career was destroyed by тАЬbelieve all womanтАЭ. Now he has proof they were just extorting him.
The тАЬconsent conceptтАЭ has setup men to be extorted by woman. Woman consent but then later decide they didnтАЩt. Brand s looks very suspiciously like that scenario.
IтАЩm less interested in punishing Bill Cosby, Russell Brand, Harvey Weinstein, Johnny Depp, Al Franken, Kevin Spacy, Bill Clinton, Brock Turner, Andrew Tate, Jeffrey Epstein, Brett Kavanaugh et al. IтАЩm a parent, focusing on perpetrators would have done nothing to protect my kids. In the list, as they have played out in court, itтАЩs become clear some of them were accused by people leveraging the be a victim positioning of #metoo. Johnny Depp being the most infamous case but also Kevin Spacy and Al Franken. Many I have to wonder about тАЬwhere were the parents?тАЭ
You represent what I view as the dysfunctional desire to focus on people you view as тАЬsexual assaultersтАЭ. ItтАЩs no different than the conservative positioning of LGBTQ people grooming kids by saying they exist in schools.
I had a 6 month sexual relationship with a 25 yo male teacher when I was 15. It was a positive experience except for one thing. I canтАЩt find the teacher today. HeтАЩs gone underground. Understandably.
When I started discussing it with others, the traditional str8 world worked hard to convince me he was a stalker and I was raped. Especially religious folks who thought the incident was the reason I was attracted to guys. For a while, I tried to adopt that thinking.
The trying to portray me as the victim exists today. It happen by one of the people commenting on my comments to you.
Now that IтАЩm actively gay, the gay world says it was hot. How great I could have that experience! That jives much more with my remembrance.
You push hard to make woman victims of the men I listed. Or in the case of Kevin Spacy- the men. You have a тАЬbelieve all victims until their proven wrongтАЭ view. You are doing that with Brand.
Given my experience of people trying to push me to believe I was a victim, IтАЩm very skeptical. Especially since IтАЩm a parent of two girls. Me focusing on hunting or bringing people like Russel Brand down helps zero in keeping them from being victimized.
The Brand case is a blatant example of that! What were these woman thinking by ever engaging Brand during the time he was publicly promoting being a sexual maniac? That question is the most relevant of all! You never focus on that question. Why?
Playing or wallowing in victimhood is now popular in the divided states. Protect the victims. What happened to teaching people to protect themselves from what has and always will exist-people who want to take advantage of them?
Parents taught their kids to not get in a car with a stranger. Are parents teaching their daughters to not play with a sexual maniac? It might not turn out the way you want!
I guess I should just not get your articles. You and I are an example that the country is very divided. From my perspective-much of that divide is because everyone wants to play victim!
тАЬYou have a тАЬbelieve all victims until their proven wrongтАЭ view. You are doing that with Brand.тАЭ
Once again, you are unable to stop projecting long enough to see that IтАЩve never said anything like this.
In fact, IтАЩve said the opposite.
YouтАЩre so triggered that youтАЩre turning me into an avatar for all the things you disagree with. YouтАЩve spent most of this overly long reply claiming I believe things I donтАЩt believe, you lie about things IтАЩve said, and you engage in ridiculous hyperbole about me wanting you to not exist. ItтАЩs childish.
Do you really not understand why I donтАЩt want to engage with you while you do this?
YouтАЩve read my work for long enough to know that I am very much against a victim mentality. IтАЩm not going to bother defending myself against this silly accusation. But youтАЩre taking it to a ridiculous level where you refuse to accept thereтАЩs ever any such thing as a victim.
One of BrandтАЩs 16 year-old victims reports having to punch him in the stomach repeatedly to stop him forcing his penis down her throat. Another visited a rape crisis centre the same day she accused him of raping her and has text message evidence that he ignored her when she repeatedly said no. Your response to this is to say, тАЬWeLl WhErE wErE tHe PaReNtS?тАЭ Or, тАЬwHy DiD tHeY sPeNd TiMe WiTh HiM?тАЭ And never, not once, тАЬRussell Brand shouldnтАЩt have done those things.тАЭ
And this allows you to take responsibility off of abusers and rapists for abusing and raping, and place it on the people they rape and abuse. You focus exclusively on what the woman could/should have done to prevent her attack, or what the childтАЩs parents should have done to be watching their kid at all times, and never on how the predator shouldnтАЩt have raped them.
Again, IтАЩm pretty sure I understand why you side with the abuser in this way. But IтАЩm not sure what you hope to gain from this conversation. I disagree with you. The legal systems of every developed nation disagree with you. Almost everybody in Earth disagrees with you, in fact. Why canтАЩt you leave it at that? Ranting at me and accusing me of nonsense wonтАЩt change anything for you.
One more thought that came to me. The idea that "believe all woman" even exists is demeaning to woman. It implies that woman are not smart enough to be malicious. Only men are. Its basically misogynistic. I'm glad I know my daughters are smart enough to be malicious. The comment about my youngest daughter using her looks is a case in point.
I'm going to unsubscribe from you "The commentary". You're not really interested in comments unless they support your thought line.
Read your comment again. You are ranting about me.
Its very possibly I have misinterpreted you. I believe that was your point about the original post that this thread is connected to. You believe that media misrepresents the facts and posts on social media are malicious misrepresentations.
Do I have a passion on the current culture around sex and consent. Absolutely. The concept of formal consent in a sexual encounter is very very very very very complicated especially now that people are much more adventurous about what exploring their sexual fantasies. I listen to Ben Shapiro's podcast everyday. Not because I agree with his conservative religious view of what morality in the country and world should be, but because he is a very smart guy that separates his conservative religious personal perspective from how he interprets what's going on in the world. Yesterday he talked about Trevor Bauer. I didn't know about Trevor Bauer before yesterday.
He and I agree on one thing, in today's morality around sex, consent is a very very very hard concept. His position is that the only way a man can be close safe in today's culture on having sex with woman is in marriage. At least in that relationship their is implied consent. But even their the woman can decide that at some point she not longer is consenting to sex.
Trevor Bauer is a man who was a victim of two woman trying to extort him using the culture of #metoo. Unfortunately both woman were not smart enough (similar to Jussie Smollett) to cover their tracks. In fact there exist texts of them saying their goal is to extort him. As a result of current society and MLBs need to cow-tow to current society on any woman making an accusation of sexual assault especially on a famous person, he can no longer play in the MLB. Have you studied what happened at all? The judicial system never believed the woman, yet the MLB still suspended him and still have to this day. Even though the hoax as been exposed.
You bring up the 16year old who was with Brand. Have you read the details on her. Here's one article describing "https://www.perthnow.com.au/news/crime/russell-brand-sent-car-to-take-16-year-old-lover-he-called-the-child-out-of-lessons-c-11926686" She had all the knowledge she need to not ever engage with Brand. Its especially interesting that the driver who Brand sent to pick her up told her not to meet with Brand. She and Brand conspired to mislead her parents. I'm supposed to believe she was a victim???????? Seriously dude. I'm a father. If she was my daughter and told me what happened to her, I wouldn't tell her to go to the police, I would understand why she didn't know better and what she has learned. I would get her counseling to help her work through why she met with him and tried to mislead me as her father. Going after Brand implies she's not responsible for what happened. She is fully responsible. I as father, I would make her take ownership of that.
My youngest daughter is a stunningly good looking woman. When she was in college, she never paid for drinks in a bar. She told me she was doing this. I warned her that it could turn out badly for her. Some guy might get pissed that he bought her a drink and you didn't deliver on what you know he wanted. Why do I tell you this. First, my daughter was comfortable enough with me as a parent to tell me what she was doing. Second, I was a responsible parent informing her that she was playing with fire.
Do I believe Brand was a good person? No way. As I have said, he was a sexual maniac and made his career being that. Do I believe woman got victimized by him. They played with fire and got burnt.
Your incessant focus on men being pigs - something I taught my daughters when they were in high school - and as a result causing woman to have sexual encounters they regret is not helping the woman or the men. You can give someone a fish or you can teach them to fish. You want to give woman an out by saying their justified in viewing they were victims. Just like the person that was trying to convince me that at 15 having sex with a 25 year old teacher made me a victim being stalked and raped. Society's pressure to push people to being victims of the obvious - humans are not all good - is the worse thing that has come out of #metoo. As a parent, I'm glad both my daughters believe most of #metoo (the Cosby one is clearly different) is just teaching woman to be victim's versus stand in their power.
You and I are so different on our thinking of how the world works and where to go with incidents like Brand. You and I are an example of why the divided states can never be united. You can't have a conversation with me and consider I may have some valid points. The FACTS seem to indicate I do. Including my personal experience of people in the last week trying to convince me I was a victim, I was stalked and raped. It should be clear why I have so much passion against your positioning. Its helping no-one. Especially woman. Its just satisfies your need to judge others as evil and lock them up. Brand was a sexual maniac. Is that evil - no. He was clear about what he was. End of story.
"Including my personal experience of people in the last week trying to convince me I was a victim, I was stalked and raped"
You are apparently too emotionally immature to understand that I didn't say this. So repeatedly telling me about it achieves absolutely nothing. If you have problem without something somebody said to you, tell them. Don't dangle it in front of me like it has anything to do with me.
You are apparently too triggered to understand that I have obviously never "locked anyone up" or even judged anyone as evil. So I have never satisfied a need to do so. My opinion of Russell Brand's behaviour is not a court verdict.
And you're apparently too dense to understand that a man being a "sex maniac", aka pretty much every man in the world, is not the same as a man being a rapist.
I've never called men pigs (I AM a man, you simpleton), I've never said the age of consent should be 25 or 18, I've never said almost any of the garbage you've accused me of.
So no, it's not "possible" that you've misinterpreted me, you haven't even *tried* to understand me. You're carrying the weight of the (doubtless many) times you've been told you're wrong or that your views on this issue are simplistic and repugnant, and you're projecting it all onto me.
The reason it's so difficult to have a conversation is that people like you can't get enough of a handle on their feelings to think about an issue from any perspective but their own.
Again, I engage with comments that go against my thought line literally every day. I just don't engage with stupidity.
Anyway, I see you've unsubscribed. That's fantastic. Now I feel no obligation whatsoever to engage with your nonsense ever again.
"You are apparently too emotionally immature to understand that I didn't say this. "
Seriously, I never implied or said you made that statement.
Your ability to engage is directly embedded in your response.
I call men pigs. Especially in the context of guys my daughters were brining over in high school.
If you have been reading my comments, the guys all agreed with me calling them "pigs". It wasn't controversial. They are young men filled with hormones.
Calling me emotionally immature is about you, not me.
A simple response that would be productive would be: "Clearly what I wrote triggered you. Interesting to see your perspective. Given your personal history, I can understand why".
I know very little of your personal history. I like writers that are comfortable sharing their personal history to help understand their positions. That's not you. That why I unsubscribed. I'm glad I made your life easier. Have a great life.
Why do you feel the need to put sexually assaulted in scare quotes? Is the whole concept of sexual assault somehow questionable to you?
Because the definition of "sexual assault" or what you sometimes call "sexual abuse" is fuzzy.
I'm not familiar with your sexuality or your past experience with assault or abuse on sexuality. You don't seem to want to reference it. I have been out as "gay" for almost 10 years. I was married to a woman and "str8" for 32. I spent many years understanding my sexuality in pray away the gay groups, take responsibility for your sexuality groups, and understand yourself groups. The last all being tied to the mankind project - something I believe is outstanding but at times a little too left leaning.
As part of my gay experience for the last 10 years, I'm now convinced that str8's need to get out of the closet on their sexuality more than any LGBTQ+ person. All people have many desires around sexuality. They all can move between a sexual experience being exciting versus being used easily. When that move happens, does a person decide they were personally responsible for getting themselves into a position of being used or do they say the person they were with was responsible for using/abusing them - playing the victim. Playing victim use to be considered de-powering, Now its consider em-powering. Its no wonder people are playing victim.
The problem with all the consent BS is that it takes away from those people who really are abused. Children being taken advantage of by priests or boy scout leaders. Handicapped people being taken advantage of by their caretakers. Those are clear cases of abuse - we can add sexual to it but its abuse in the same sense as my partner who use to get beaten on by his father when he did something wrong. Those are real problems.
The consent issue is a red herring. If a woman or man is too drunk to "consent", are they being abused if they are used by another woman or man? Maybe getting drunk was a bad idea. The Brock Turner case is that. She was passed out from drinking. He was also drunk and not thinking about his actions. Who was at fault? The answer is very obvious. They both were!
The incidents with Bill Cosby are more clear. He was drugging woman. The woman did not know he was doing it. He didn't have a reputation as an assaulter. They couldn't have known.
The incidents with Harvey Weinstein were clear. Every woman was aware of how Harvey wanted sex in return for career favors. Is requiring sex for career favors OK? Their are many woman who had no issue with it. The most famous being Lucille Ball. Hollywood was well known for that model. Why were woman meeting with Weinstein and then later accusing him? Likely because afterward they felt dirty and wanted to blame him for that. He should never have made the idea of sex for career favors an option. Hollywood has had to change because of #metoo. I know people who were part of that culture that believe it was the woman's own fault. What is the right answer? Society has absolutely shifted because of the #metoo movement. But the reality is that many in society don't have allot of respect for the #metoo movement. They are just too scared of cancel culture to talk about it.
You ignore the reality going on in society based on some grand standing principal that you believe is "truth". You beat on social media and media companies because you don't believe they represent the "truth" that you have an inside track on.
Who is worse? The media companies or your arrogance on the inside track to "truth"?
"You beat on social media and media companies because you don't believe they represent the "truth" that you have an inside track on"
I'm curious why you seem so desperate to argue with me when you're having so much fun arguing with your imagination. But I have to tell you, it's pretty dull from my side.
If you want to take issue with something I've actually said, feel free. Try quoting me. That way there's no room for confusion. If you want to just make silly accusations based on caricatures of my views, go ahead. But I won't play along.
CanтАЩt resist adding Trevor Bauer. His US career was destroyed by тАЬbelieve all womanтАЭ. Now he has proof they were just extorting him.
The тАЬconsent conceptтАЭ has setup men to be extorted by woman. Woman consent but then later decide they didnтАЩt. Brand s looks very suspiciously like that scenario.
You and I are on different pages in our thinking.
IтАЩm less interested in punishing Bill Cosby, Russell Brand, Harvey Weinstein, Johnny Depp, Al Franken, Kevin Spacy, Bill Clinton, Brock Turner, Andrew Tate, Jeffrey Epstein, Brett Kavanaugh et al. IтАЩm a parent, focusing on perpetrators would have done nothing to protect my kids. In the list, as they have played out in court, itтАЩs become clear some of them were accused by people leveraging the be a victim positioning of #metoo. Johnny Depp being the most infamous case but also Kevin Spacy and Al Franken. Many I have to wonder about тАЬwhere were the parents?тАЭ
You represent what I view as the dysfunctional desire to focus on people you view as тАЬsexual assaultersтАЭ. ItтАЩs no different than the conservative positioning of LGBTQ people grooming kids by saying they exist in schools.
I had a 6 month sexual relationship with a 25 yo male teacher when I was 15. It was a positive experience except for one thing. I canтАЩt find the teacher today. HeтАЩs gone underground. Understandably.
When I started discussing it with others, the traditional str8 world worked hard to convince me he was a stalker and I was raped. Especially religious folks who thought the incident was the reason I was attracted to guys. For a while, I tried to adopt that thinking.
The trying to portray me as the victim exists today. It happen by one of the people commenting on my comments to you.
Now that IтАЩm actively gay, the gay world says it was hot. How great I could have that experience! That jives much more with my remembrance.
You push hard to make woman victims of the men I listed. Or in the case of Kevin Spacy- the men. You have a тАЬbelieve all victims until their proven wrongтАЭ view. You are doing that with Brand.
Given my experience of people trying to push me to believe I was a victim, IтАЩm very skeptical. Especially since IтАЩm a parent of two girls. Me focusing on hunting or bringing people like Russel Brand down helps zero in keeping them from being victimized.
The Brand case is a blatant example of that! What were these woman thinking by ever engaging Brand during the time he was publicly promoting being a sexual maniac? That question is the most relevant of all! You never focus on that question. Why?
Playing or wallowing in victimhood is now popular in the divided states. Protect the victims. What happened to teaching people to protect themselves from what has and always will exist-people who want to take advantage of them?
Parents taught their kids to not get in a car with a stranger. Are parents teaching their daughters to not play with a sexual maniac? It might not turn out the way you want!
I guess I should just not get your articles. You and I are an example that the country is very divided. From my perspective-much of that divide is because everyone wants to play victim!
тАЬYou have a тАЬbelieve all victims until their proven wrongтАЭ view. You are doing that with Brand.тАЭ
Once again, you are unable to stop projecting long enough to see that IтАЩve never said anything like this.
In fact, IтАЩve said the opposite.
YouтАЩre so triggered that youтАЩre turning me into an avatar for all the things you disagree with. YouтАЩve spent most of this overly long reply claiming I believe things I donтАЩt believe, you lie about things IтАЩve said, and you engage in ridiculous hyperbole about me wanting you to not exist. ItтАЩs childish.
Do you really not understand why I donтАЩt want to engage with you while you do this?
YouтАЩve read my work for long enough to know that I am very much against a victim mentality. IтАЩm not going to bother defending myself against this silly accusation. But youтАЩre taking it to a ridiculous level where you refuse to accept thereтАЩs ever any such thing as a victim.
One of BrandтАЩs 16 year-old victims reports having to punch him in the stomach repeatedly to stop him forcing his penis down her throat. Another visited a rape crisis centre the same day she accused him of raping her and has text message evidence that he ignored her when she repeatedly said no. Your response to this is to say, тАЬWeLl WhErE wErE tHe PaReNtS?тАЭ Or, тАЬwHy DiD tHeY sPeNd TiMe WiTh HiM?тАЭ And never, not once, тАЬRussell Brand shouldnтАЩt have done those things.тАЭ
And this allows you to take responsibility off of abusers and rapists for abusing and raping, and place it on the people they rape and abuse. You focus exclusively on what the woman could/should have done to prevent her attack, or what the childтАЩs parents should have done to be watching their kid at all times, and never on how the predator shouldnтАЩt have raped them.
Again, IтАЩm pretty sure I understand why you side with the abuser in this way. But IтАЩm not sure what you hope to gain from this conversation. I disagree with you. The legal systems of every developed nation disagree with you. Almost everybody in Earth disagrees with you, in fact. Why canтАЩt you leave it at that? Ranting at me and accusing me of nonsense wonтАЩt change anything for you.
One more thought that came to me. The idea that "believe all woman" even exists is demeaning to woman. It implies that woman are not smart enough to be malicious. Only men are. Its basically misogynistic. I'm glad I know my daughters are smart enough to be malicious. The comment about my youngest daughter using her looks is a case in point.
I'm going to unsubscribe from you "The commentary". You're not really interested in comments unless they support your thought line.
Read your comment again. You are ranting about me.
Its very possibly I have misinterpreted you. I believe that was your point about the original post that this thread is connected to. You believe that media misrepresents the facts and posts on social media are malicious misrepresentations.
Do I have a passion on the current culture around sex and consent. Absolutely. The concept of formal consent in a sexual encounter is very very very very very complicated especially now that people are much more adventurous about what exploring their sexual fantasies. I listen to Ben Shapiro's podcast everyday. Not because I agree with his conservative religious view of what morality in the country and world should be, but because he is a very smart guy that separates his conservative religious personal perspective from how he interprets what's going on in the world. Yesterday he talked about Trevor Bauer. I didn't know about Trevor Bauer before yesterday.
He and I agree on one thing, in today's morality around sex, consent is a very very very hard concept. His position is that the only way a man can be close safe in today's culture on having sex with woman is in marriage. At least in that relationship their is implied consent. But even their the woman can decide that at some point she not longer is consenting to sex.
Trevor Bauer is a man who was a victim of two woman trying to extort him using the culture of #metoo. Unfortunately both woman were not smart enough (similar to Jussie Smollett) to cover their tracks. In fact there exist texts of them saying their goal is to extort him. As a result of current society and MLBs need to cow-tow to current society on any woman making an accusation of sexual assault especially on a famous person, he can no longer play in the MLB. Have you studied what happened at all? The judicial system never believed the woman, yet the MLB still suspended him and still have to this day. Even though the hoax as been exposed.
You bring up the 16year old who was with Brand. Have you read the details on her. Here's one article describing "https://www.perthnow.com.au/news/crime/russell-brand-sent-car-to-take-16-year-old-lover-he-called-the-child-out-of-lessons-c-11926686" She had all the knowledge she need to not ever engage with Brand. Its especially interesting that the driver who Brand sent to pick her up told her not to meet with Brand. She and Brand conspired to mislead her parents. I'm supposed to believe she was a victim???????? Seriously dude. I'm a father. If she was my daughter and told me what happened to her, I wouldn't tell her to go to the police, I would understand why she didn't know better and what she has learned. I would get her counseling to help her work through why she met with him and tried to mislead me as her father. Going after Brand implies she's not responsible for what happened. She is fully responsible. I as father, I would make her take ownership of that.
My youngest daughter is a stunningly good looking woman. When she was in college, she never paid for drinks in a bar. She told me she was doing this. I warned her that it could turn out badly for her. Some guy might get pissed that he bought her a drink and you didn't deliver on what you know he wanted. Why do I tell you this. First, my daughter was comfortable enough with me as a parent to tell me what she was doing. Second, I was a responsible parent informing her that she was playing with fire.
Do I believe Brand was a good person? No way. As I have said, he was a sexual maniac and made his career being that. Do I believe woman got victimized by him. They played with fire and got burnt.
Your incessant focus on men being pigs - something I taught my daughters when they were in high school - and as a result causing woman to have sexual encounters they regret is not helping the woman or the men. You can give someone a fish or you can teach them to fish. You want to give woman an out by saying their justified in viewing they were victims. Just like the person that was trying to convince me that at 15 having sex with a 25 year old teacher made me a victim being stalked and raped. Society's pressure to push people to being victims of the obvious - humans are not all good - is the worse thing that has come out of #metoo. As a parent, I'm glad both my daughters believe most of #metoo (the Cosby one is clearly different) is just teaching woman to be victim's versus stand in their power.
You and I are so different on our thinking of how the world works and where to go with incidents like Brand. You and I are an example of why the divided states can never be united. You can't have a conversation with me and consider I may have some valid points. The FACTS seem to indicate I do. Including my personal experience of people in the last week trying to convince me I was a victim, I was stalked and raped. It should be clear why I have so much passion against your positioning. Its helping no-one. Especially woman. Its just satisfies your need to judge others as evil and lock them up. Brand was a sexual maniac. Is that evil - no. He was clear about what he was. End of story.
"Including my personal experience of people in the last week trying to convince me I was a victim, I was stalked and raped"
You are apparently too emotionally immature to understand that I didn't say this. So repeatedly telling me about it achieves absolutely nothing. If you have problem without something somebody said to you, tell them. Don't dangle it in front of me like it has anything to do with me.
You are apparently too triggered to understand that I have obviously never "locked anyone up" or even judged anyone as evil. So I have never satisfied a need to do so. My opinion of Russell Brand's behaviour is not a court verdict.
And you're apparently too dense to understand that a man being a "sex maniac", aka pretty much every man in the world, is not the same as a man being a rapist.
I've never called men pigs (I AM a man, you simpleton), I've never said the age of consent should be 25 or 18, I've never said almost any of the garbage you've accused me of.
So no, it's not "possible" that you've misinterpreted me, you haven't even *tried* to understand me. You're carrying the weight of the (doubtless many) times you've been told you're wrong or that your views on this issue are simplistic and repugnant, and you're projecting it all onto me.
The reason it's so difficult to have a conversation is that people like you can't get enough of a handle on their feelings to think about an issue from any perspective but their own.
Again, I engage with comments that go against my thought line literally every day. I just don't engage with stupidity.
Anyway, I see you've unsubscribed. That's fantastic. Now I feel no obligation whatsoever to engage with your nonsense ever again.
"You are apparently too emotionally immature to understand that I didn't say this. "
Seriously, I never implied or said you made that statement.
Your ability to engage is directly embedded in your response.
I call men pigs. Especially in the context of guys my daughters were brining over in high school.
If you have been reading my comments, the guys all agreed with me calling them "pigs". It wasn't controversial. They are young men filled with hormones.
Calling me emotionally immature is about you, not me.
A simple response that would be productive would be: "Clearly what I wrote triggered you. Interesting to see your perspective. Given your personal history, I can understand why".
I know very little of your personal history. I like writers that are comfortable sharing their personal history to help understand their positions. That's not you. That why I unsubscribed. I'm glad I made your life easier. Have a great life.