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 …
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.
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.