Ten oz

When it was Kavanaugh people complained about the timing linked the accusers to a partisan conspiracy designed to deny Trump a SCOTUS pick and questioned why the women waited so long. In this case (Neil DeGrasse Tyson) the timing can't be linked to any sort of high profile event, political partisanship is a non-factor, in 2 of the 3 cases complaints were made years ago, and in the third case a complaint was made directly to Tyson himself. Additionally Tyson admits to knowing all 3 women. I think this conversation should more clearly lay bare how people really feel about these issues.

I have no idea what the numbers are but I'd image many long term relationships stem from the workplace. It is important as you stated that the individuals are peers. It is also important that it is reciprocal. It the case were individuals are already married it is bad news even if the two are peers and its reciprocal. It can be difficult for sure. For those who are single and spend most of their time working it is natural (my opinion) to start flirting among peers. The risk vs reward assessment for that sort of stuff in a professional environment is high.

I don't think a married man flirting with a subordinate alone in an apartment over wine is harmless. The situation was unprofessional. Tyson is responsible for the situation because the assistant was at a power disavantage which impacted her ability to turn down the invitation. No flirting with subordinates.

White Supremacists openly support Trump and despite his comments post Charlottesville Trump appears to encourage their support on social media by throwing the weight of his office and brand behind them by helping to distribute their accounts. The relationship seems to be reciprocal. Can you provide a citiation for an ANTIFA member endorsing Warren, Cortez, or any other Democrat? Or a citation for an elected Democrat responding positively to anything associated with ANTIFA? I have already provided both for White Supremacists and Republicans. To my knowledge ANTIFA are anarchist. I don't think they support any established political ideology or elected politicians.

No, Waston complained directly to Tyson about the incident and resigned over it. What is you definition of underwear? I certainly don't consider a tank top outer wear especially when initially was clothed over it. How many times in your life has a boss invited you privately into their space, gave you wine, and stripped down?

Reconquista and the Nationalist Front of Mexico is not a left or right group which exists in with the U.S.. Steve Bannon had an office in the White House. Steve Bannon campaigns for Republican politicians and helps them get elected. Steve Bannon's opposition are Democrats. Some radical group in Mexico has nothing to do with the left wing of the Democratic party. I am not denying radical groups exist. I am simply pointing out that the groups you are naming (ANTIFA, Reconquista) have no support from or attachment to Democratic party. When White Supremacist wearing Nazis paraphernalia chanting "Jews will not replace us" marched on Charlottesville their organizers made it clear they supported Trump. From Charlottesville in this video David Duke (KKK Grand Wizard) says he and his people are there to fulfill the promises of Trump and speaks to having voted for Trump. Nothing nuanced there. Straight up the KKK and other White Power groups directly associate themselves with Trump and the Republican party. No such relationship exists between ANTIFA and the Democratic Party.

No The Rape allegation has been known to Tyson for several years. I don't think it makes him look guilty but I do think his his response to it all on facebook was distasteful. These accusation have been out there a while. As a public figure and intelligent person surely he knew the day was coming when he'd be asked about them.

One incident happened in 2009 and was initially reported in 2013. In that incident the accuser is Physics Professor at Bucknell University. I could be wrong but I assume a Professor at Bucknell makes a good salary. Also if this was a play for fame and money it makes no sense to have kept the 2013 report discreet. In the more recent allegation Tyson was made aware in short order and had the opportunity to direct the complaint along for review/investigation when the women resigned.

In the case of the colleague at the after party and the assistant all parties agree on the events which took place. Tyson admits to taking interest in the tattoo and admits to bring his assistant into a private residence for wine. The women claim they felt uncomfortable and Tyson claims not to have been aware of their discomfort. To your point no amount of evidence could possibly exist which could read Tyson's or the women's minds. In the case of the rape accusation the 2 accounts vary significantly. Tyson claims the 2 dated for a while and had a few consensual intimate encounters. The women claims the 2 never dated. A photo of the two together, letters/notes between the 2, former classmates accounts, and etc could be evidence that would support Tyson's account that they dated.

From the Patheos article: Have you ever been in a supervisory position before? If so would you seriously behave this way with someone under you? I have been and currently am. I would never bring a subordinate to my place, offer them alcohol, get undressed, and etc. It is very unprofessional behavior. I see nothing innocent in this account. The assistant left her job over it. If one of my people quit over such I would be investigated and most likely lose my job or be frozen out of future advancement. In Tyson's response to to the 2009 incident he describes learning of the complaint 9yrs later without acknowledging the complaint was made known to others in 2013. Tyson instead implies via omission that the women had waited 9yrs to complain. Tyson is a very intelligent person. I believe Tyson understand what is implied by his words. His response totally ignores that in 2013 adjustments were made to keep him away from small groups of female students. Neither of these 2 incidents are criminal. I am not claiming otherwise. Rather I am put off by the manner in which Tyson selected to respond to them. Both incidents were more substantial than what he describes. A person quit their job and a campus made special recommendations regarding his visit.

I am accusing Tyson of a crude response. I am not claiming to he is guilty of rape. Tyson posted on social media about it specifically to speak with his fans and the public at large. As part of the target audience Tyson was speaking to I am able to have my own opinion about the response. I found it distasteful.

So he didn't do it but even if he did it's okay? She worked for him. He was her boss. Tyson says as much in his post on the matter. Your speculation doesn't align with either the assistant's Tyson's version of events. The only difference between Tyson's version and the assistants version is that the assistant claims Tyson stripped down to his underwear. If the assistant story is true it is troubling behavior. In my opinion it is normal to accept an invitation from one's boss. I think most employees are intimidated by their bosses and would be fearful of declining. No one in that sort of position of authority over another should be taking advantage of that to make sexual overtures. I said that the fact that the women would confront Tyson and give up her job over the matter strongly implies she believes her version of events. I didn't say her version was correct. Tyson's version of events as he wrote and posted them read a but troubling as well for the reasons posted early. Yes, if a married person in a position of power takes advantage of their position to get sexual favors it is harrashment. Tyson and his assistant weren't two young single people who met at a bar. Tyson is married and the assistant was assigned to him. Working for Tyson was her job. How she paid her bills. She wasn't palling around with him because she thought he was cool. She was an employee paid to assist him..

His former assistant confronted him soon after and resigned her job for him due to what happened. That strongly implies she believes her versions of events. Tyson is still dismissive of her. So I don't know if I believe he would do the right thing. At least in the case of his assistant he may have already failed to do the right thing.

That is just some of what he said. Here in the full post. I already mentioned a few things that bothered me about his remarks. Here are some additional things: Here Tyson reminds us (the reader) he is a celebrity by referencing the flattering chore of taking pics with thousands of people. He then goes on to point out that the women waited nine years to come forward and basically blames her for the whole things be saying what he "would" have done "had" she reacted differently. Tyson acknowledges the women notified him that she felt he was inappropriate and even resigned over the matter. Tyson claims to be sorry yet prefaces the encounter be stating she freely chose to come in and he had even mentioned another place she could go. Tyson finishes by noting that they had hugged. It comes across to me as obtuse. I quoted the whole portion here because there is a lot of shade tossed around. Tyson opens by pointing out how difficult Grad school is and how hard he worked. He then references have several girlfriends. Saying one of them he was intimate with a few times but there was no chemistry. After that Tyson begins tossing shade. First he recalls seeing her pregnant "with who I think was the father by her side". To me Tyson is trying to imply it may not have been the father and muddy the water. Tyson then states she had dropped out of school. Another meaningless detail. He follows by saying he "nonetheless" wished her well. By using "nonetheless" Tyson is saying that in-spite of her being a pregnant drop out accompanied by who knows who he was still nice to her. Ugly stuff. Next Tyson mentions his fame "visibility level" to imply motive then proceeds to basically call her stupid writing about stuff he saw on her blog. Tyson doesn't need to be on social media doing this. He could have made far simplier remarks via a publicists. Instead he took to the more proactive platform of FaceBook. I think this sort of response is beneath him.

I was just laying out the various scenarios. I don't claim to know what Tyson think or remembers. Rather, I simply found his response distasteful. The Drug & Rape accusations was made a few years ago. This isn't something Tyson just learned about and is responding reflexively to.

I have no said he was guilty. I have no way of knowing if if he is guilty. Neither of us can know that at this point.

Do you know for a fact Tyson thinks he is not guilty? Whether Tyson is not guilty, remembers events differently, or is guilty I think "the stick" is a bad approach. No amount of of stick proves one is innocent or undoes an accusation.

Am I guilty or innocent while standing in Tyson's shoes? Countless guilt people have claimed innocence and some innocent people have even claimed to be guilty. Tyson is a very smart person. He understand that the only reason to say anything is for public relation. Nothing he says changes what did or did not happen. So his social media response was purely public relations. The media attention of his response is trending greater than the initial reports. I feel Tyson purposely sought to take control of the conversation. It is an aggressive move that diminishes the voices of his accusers. I would have preferred a more muted response, perhaps through a representative, where he stated his innocence while asking for the process to be respected. Instead he came out defensively swinging implying himself a victim. Maybe I just think too highly of Tyson intellect. I read his response as manipulative. For example there are 3 unrelated accusers yet Tyson introduced He said She said iconography which frames the conversation as though it were just his word vs another. Rather is it his word vs the words of a few others. A nuanced difference I believe Tyson is intelligent enough to understand. Likewise there is no need for him to speak to his reputation and the possible damage of reputations following accusation ahead of an investigation. Doing so implies that his accusers are liars. To me his response was too aggressive.

If you read up on the history of Chain migration you see that the U.S. has been operating on the quota based enforcement Policy which favors European immigrants, see the Chinese Exclusion Act, since the Immigration Act of 1924 became law. Prior to the 1924 borders had been virtually open. Chain Immigration as both a process and the laws which enable far pre-date the modern political climate. As such it is inaccurate to label it "too liberal". Steve Bannon is entitle to his opinion and can seek to overhaul policies that have stood for a century but is is disingenuous to pretend the laws are liberal or that the situation is different today. Immigration has not increased. Immigrants as a percentage of the population are no greater today than in the a hundred years ago Link. I thought we were discussing the countries Steve Bannon campaigns for Politicians in.No elected officials in the U.S., UK, France, or Italy supports that group? They are superfluous to this conversation. Right, you can't name a single ANTIFA leader and you can't name any Politicians (Democrat or Republican) who supports them. They are in no way an equivalent to the Alt-Right. I wouldn't care is every member of ANTIFA out doing whatever it is they do were arrested and charged with disturbing the peace. No Democrats would come to their defense. ANTIFA is irrelevant to this conversation. Republicans support the Alt-Right and vice versa. Democrats do not support ANTIFA and since no one even knows who ANTIFA members are their is no way to know what ANTIFA supports.

Neil DeGrasse Tyson has been accused of sex misconduct by 3 women . Tyson denies any wrong doing. I personally find Tyson's response troubling. In a social media post captioned with a photo of 2 faceless figures pointing at each other Tyson wrote of the damage which can be done to a reputation when one is accused, referenced the need for evidence, and questioned why anyone would believe him. Tyson is a very intelligent person. I think the image he used purposely invokes the spirit of he said vs she said to imply the whole situation is a nonstarter of sorts. Tyson further diminished his accusers voices by talking about the need for evidence. Then ends the post with what I consider to be a bit of sarcasm by asking why he as the accused should be believed. Questions designed to position himself as the real victim here. I am disappointed by his response. Has anyone been following this story? I placed this in politics because Tyson referenced himself as a public servant and most of the other similar discussions regarding sexual misconduct have been political.

By accepted I meant believed at face value. Trump has a well established history of stacking his lies on top of other lies.

Trump's rhetoric places him on every side of everything. Ask Trump a direct question about any number of issues and he responds with some version of "Some people are for it, I am looking into it, but it can be a terrible thing, but I think maybe it is worth looking at, if it doesn't happen I am okay with that, so we will all just have to see what happens. Either way is fine." It is best to focus on what actually happens and ignore the rest. The extent to which Trump lies and masks reality is staggering. Trump's falsehoods are larger than we can even wrap our heads around. Take the issues going on with Saudi Arabia. Trump has been running around touting a $110 billion Arms deal with Saudi Arabia as a primary reason to not respond too aggressively in the wake of Khashoggi's murder. Most of of find such reasoning in and of itself reprehensible. There has been countless op-eds and debates about whether or not that excuse is acceptable. Turns out Saudi Arabia isn't even purchasing anywhere near $110 Billions. The real amount is less than $15 billion. Saudi Arabia has agreed to 14.5 billion worth of potential sales if we add up all pending agreements. So not only has the excuse been a poor one but it was a lie anyway. Who knows WTF Trump's true motivations are on the subject. Point being that only what happens can be considered. Nothing Trump advocates can or ever should be accepted. It is nearly always some combination of exaggeration, confabulation, conflation, misdirection, and bold face lie. As for Steve Bannon's predictive skills one week before the midterm election Steve Bannon said only 25 House seat were in play, polls under represented Trump's support, and the GOP would keep the House if Trump voters turnout Here. As of today Democrats picked up 39 House seat and I believe one race still hasn't been called. Any number of political pundits called it better than Steve Bannon did. You should confuse a goal with a talking point. Trump's trade war has been hurt manufacturing. If we focus on the actual policies which have come out of Trump's White House rather than the sh!t Trump talks it is clear that manufacturing jobs don't matter to Trump.

Every country Steve Bannon advocates and lobbies in already have "controlled" immigration. ""unchecked" or "mass" immigration isn't on the rise or happening at increased rates.. Here in the U.S. we have immigration laws, borders, and numerous Agencies charged to enforce and protect both. Steve Bannon specifically singles out Asians , Muslims , and Mexicans as the groups which he wants to be limited. As linked (Asian, Muslims, Mexicans) Steve Bannon wants to end work visa programs which he links to Asia, limit travel from Muslim majority countries which he links to terrorism, and limit any and all programs imaginable to limit immigration into the U.S. from Mexico. Steve Bannon is not trying to combat illegal immigration. Steve Bannon is combating legal and controlled immigration. We can discuss the pro and cons of it but please to do not mis-characterize it. No one is pro illegal, unchecked, or mass immigration. Can you name one ANTIFA leader or one Politician in office who supports ANTIFA?

Breitbart News Network is a real and tangle thing. Steve Bannon's "The Movement" is a real organization which partners with political parties and candidates across Europe. Steve Bannon worked as Chief Strategist for the President of the United States. Steve Bannon had an office in the White House. ANTIFA doesn't run candidates of fund political campaigns. ANTIFA to my knowledge doesn't have any formal funding, own any sort of media platforms, have supporters in govt, or etc. I can't name a single member of ANTIFA. Seriously, I can't name one ANTIFA supporter. They literally get arrested when they show up and disrupt protests. No elected Politicians I am aware of on the left or right claim to support or defend them. ANTIFA is not the lefts version of the Alt-Right. On ANTIFA's wiki page, here , it just list the group as being "autonomous". No one is associated with ANTIFA and its numbers are unknown. Mentioning ANTIFA only poisons this conversation. ANTIFA isn't a tangible group worth discussion. Maybe you are right. As I pointed out I lack the ability to distinguish between them. From what I have seen, very little, they all appear to report news is an very hyperbolic anxiety inducing many designed to create panic.

I don't have cable and am years removed from the day to day B.S. of cable news. While I understand FoxNews to be worse I honestly no longer have the ability to tell the difference between it and the rest. Every time I catch a bit of cable news playing what I see and hear always seems very irresponsible. Not just hyperbolic but legitimately dangerous. I suppose it is like anything though. I can't distinguish between country music artists either because I don't listen to it. To each their own. I rather do just about anything else rather than watch FoxNews or cable news in general.