Harvey Weinstein

[Silvestru]

1 minute ago, tar said:

Is there no one on your planet that has any obligations?

You said your daughters are obligated to please you..... I really didn't want to get into this further.

[dimreepr]

All obligations are limited...

[tar]

zapatos,

when I say allow, I mean I exactly do not impose my will on others

I let them know what would please me and what would displease me and let them chose which course to follow.

You say I am part of the problem, meaning that I am an old white sexist male.  Well suppose I am.  It is still your choice as to whether you want to please or displease me.   Being an old white sexist male is not a crime.  It is not wrong to be me.

Regards, TAR 

[Silvestru]

1 minute ago, tar said:

Being an old white sexist male is not a crime.  It is not wrong to be me.

My new signature. Dad of the year.

[swansont]

39 minutes ago, tar said:

  You often berate me for conflating ideas, but in the case of sexual harassment, it is society that is currently confused as to what they are trying to say, and they are conflating rape with me enjoying a pair or breasts on a young lady, and confusing a boss demanding sex for a raise with me telling a dirty joke or telling a woman that her dress was my favorite color and looked very nice.

Since I don't recall "enjoying a pair or breasts on a young lady" coming up before, I don't see how I'm conflating that with anything. As far as "telling a dirty joke" or "telling a woman that her dress was my favorite color and looked very nice" it depends on the situation. If it's with friends who have no objections, it's fine. In a work environment, that's likely inappropriate behavior. And if it's repeated and makes for a hostile work environment, it's sexual harassment.

[zapatos]

2 minutes ago, tar said:

You say I am part of the problem, meaning that I am an old white sexist male.  Well suppose I am.  It is still your choice as to whether you want to please or displease me.   Being an old white sexist male is not a crime.  It is not wrong to be me.

And by taking that attitude you are under no obligation to improve yourself, or to avoid making women uncomfortable in your presence.

[iNow]

1 hour ago, tar said:

I do not now or ever condone bullying or sexual assault or spousal abuse with a "wink".    I do however believe that people can put themselves in high risk situations for certain inevitabilities and need to make their own risk reward calculation as to whether they should be in the situation.

High risk situations like entering a grocery store, going to work in the morning, or walking to their car? Stop equivocating.

I suspect you mean well, tar, and I'm not accusing you of being a bad person, bad man, or a bad father, but there is a magnitude to your obliviousness on this subject that boggles the mind a bit.

We're not talking about women in prison being threatened by a muscly meat head or women taking unnecessary risks like walking naked through construction zones or sitting alone and drunk in a park at 3am, so it's time for you to please stop suggesting we are. 

Thinking a woman looks attractive or giving a sincere and polite compliment is not what's being discussed. 

Edited October 18, 2017 by iNow

[tar]

37 minutes ago, zapatos said:

 

You sound like you are from the era when wives and daughters were essentially the property of men.

Zapatos,

Perhaps a little, but I was brought up to respect women and I in no way treat women as chattel as is done very obviously in many cultures and done more so in say the Spanish culture than the Northern European culture.  Please notice that it is me, standing in the way of society, in your mind.  That I am the problem, being from the 60s.  Well I am also from the 70s and the 80s and the counter culture revolution.  I have seen free love and free sex and drugs and rock and roll and anything goes.  It is important indeed for you to know that Harvey Weinstein is treating women like chattel and we all need to reel in those tendencies, but you are wrong to think I am part of the problem...and simultaneously considering you have solved the problem by calling me out.

It is very dangerous for me to speak my mind in politics.  I always get neg reps.  But neg reps are important, because it tells people they are doing it wrong, that they are displeasing someone with what they are saying.  But suppose I also want women to be treated with respect and dignity and not be objectified.  How does it make me part of the problem, to look at a picture of a woman in a bathing suit, that she  put on, for me to see her in?

What I am trying to point out, or trying to say, is that we are all human, and all have the same desires and needs, in general, and our society has put together a system where we all have equal power under the law, to vote, to pursue happiness and to worship our own god and to respect and protect each other, no matter who we are, or where we come from.

And that telling me all of a sudden, that I am part of the problem, means you just manufactured the problem, and it is no longer me, you wish to please.  There is some other standard, that I have not been consulted on.

Regards, TAR

[zapatos]

5 minutes ago, tar said:

Zapatos,

Perhaps a little, but I was brought up to respect women and I in no way treat women as chattel as is done very obviously in many cultures and done more so in say the Spanish culture than the Northern European culture.  Please notice that it is me, standing in the way of society, in your mind.  That I am the problem, being from the 60s.  Well I am also from the 70s and the 80s and the counter culture revolution.  I have seen free love and free sex and drugs and rock and roll and anything goes.  It is important indeed for you to know that Harvey Weinstein is treating women like chattel and we all need to reel in those tendencies, but you are wrong to think I am part of the problem...and simultaneously considering you have solved the problem by calling me out.

It is very dangerous for me to speak my mind in politics.  I always get neg reps.  But neg reps are important, because it tells people they are doing it wrong, that they are displeasing someone with what they are saying.  But suppose I also want women to be treated with respect and dignity and not be objectified.  How does it make me part of the problem, to look at a picture of a woman in a bathing suit, that she  put on, for me to see her in?

What I am trying to point out, or trying to say, is that we are all human, and all have the same desires and needs, in general, and our society has put together a system where we all have equal power under the law, to vote, to pursue happiness and to worship our own god and to respect and protect each other, no matter who we are, or where we come from.

And that telling me all of a sudden, that I am part of the problem, means you just manufactured the problem, and it is no longer me, you wish to please.  There is some other standard, that I have not been consulted on.

Regards, TAR

I agree with iNow's last post; you are oblivious. And I believe it is done willfully for some reason.

You looking at a picture of a woman in a bathing suit is not the problem, and you acting like that is what we are talking about is infuriating.

I don't for a second believe you when you say you don't know what the "standard" is. That sounds more like Weinstein than anything else you've said.

It seems to me you are either trolling, or you are the type of person I want to keep my family away from.

[tar]

iNow,

So you are saying that a woman is not safe in America and that is wrong.  It depends completely on which grocery store you are walking into and on the clients in the grocery store.

There are neighborhoods where women can walk down the street at night, and there are neighborhoods where they can not.

Don't blame society in general for particular problem areas.  And don't be afraid to note the age, race and sex of the more dangerous clients.   How a person is raised and how much they respect women will make a difference.   One should beware of old white rich guys who have enough power to buy their pleasure, as one should beware of a young Spanish gang member who has enough knives and fellow gang members, to force your submission.

Regards, TAR

[Silvestru]

2 minutes ago, zapatos said:

It seems to me you are either trolling, or you are the type of person I want to keep my family away from.

I think we are taking it a bit too far. Soon people will be afraid to express themselves if we make such assertions.

While I do not agree with tar at all, we should try to disagree with him with arguments not labels.

[swansont]

25 minutes ago, tar said:

 It is very dangerous for me to speak my mind in politics.  I always get neg reps.  But neg reps are important, because it tells people they are doing it wrong, that they are displeasing someone with what they are saying.  But suppose I also want women to be treated with respect and dignity and not be objectified.  How does it make me part of the problem, to look at a picture of a woman in a bathing suit, that she  put on, for me to see her in?

Avoiding straw man arguments would probably help. 

[zapatos]

10 minutes ago, Silvestru said:

I think we are taking it a bit too far. Soon people will be afraid to express themselves if we make such assertions.

While I do not agree with tar at all, we should try to disagree with him with arguments not labels.

Sorry, but I stand by my statement. Either he is trolling and not really a sexist who sees nothing wrong with that, or he really is an unapologetic sexist and thus someone I'd feel better staying away from.

 

Edited October 18, 2017 by zapatos

[swansont]

8 minutes ago, tar said:

iNow,

So you are saying that a woman is not safe in America and that is wrong.  It depends completely on which grocery store you are walking into and on the clients in the grocery store.

Right. Don't believe the women that tell you their story. Stick with your own model of how things work, even though you do not experience what they experience. 

8 minutes ago, tar said:

There are neighborhoods where women can walk down the street at night, and there are neighborhoods where they can not.

The problems being discussed are more prevalent that you are acknowledging. 

8 minutes ago, tar said:

Don't blame society in general for particular problem areas.  And don't be afraid to note the age, race and sex of the more dangerous clients.   How a person is raised and how much they respect women will make a difference.   One should beware of old white rich guys who have enough power to buy their pleasure, as one should beware of a young Spanish gang member who has enough knives and fellow gang members, to force your submission.

And how do you avoid white men with power in today's society?

[tar]

So, if it is true that women are weaker than men and  therefore at their mercy, then it is also true that good men and women have an obligation to protect the weak from the oppression of the strong.  This is already the law, and the moral grounding upon which our society is built.  It was that way in 1953 when I was born, and it is that way now.   I was not wrong in 1963 when I was 10...that is society was not wrong then and now and needs to be fixed.  I am not now, and never was part of the problem.  Not unless you think the whole place needs to be redone.

[swansont]

16 minutes ago, zapatos said:

I agree with iNow's last post; you are oblivious. And I believe it is done willfully for some reason.

I think people are too quick to conclude things like this are being done willfully.

"Never assign to malice that which can be assigned to incompetence."

The corollary in this case would be a lack of empathy, or selection bias, or just flat-out denialism.

[tar]

2 minutes ago, zapatos said:

Sorry, but I stand by my statement. Either he is trolling and not really a sexist who sees nothing wrong with that, or he really is an unapologetic sexist and thus someone I'd feel better staying away from.

 

Zapatos,

There is a middle ground.  I accept the reality that I have sexist tendencies, but I am using the word as it is currently defined.   I just don't agree with the definition.  SwansonT  states that it is well defined what harassment in the workplace consists of, and I have taken the courses, and know the definitions.  I just make a distinction between the wrongness of demanding sex for employment, and the wrongness of making someone feel uncomfortable because you think they are sexy.

I would never abuse your family or a child... however I have been known to have sex with females.  None, other than my wife, for the last 35 years...yet I retain the right to harmlessly flirt and enjoy the presence of women.  I like women better than I like men, in general, and am therefore not a hater of women.  I in no way look to own women or tell them what to do.   I am the kind of sexist that every once in a while forgets my place and opens a door for a woman.  

Regards, TAR

[swansont]

2 minutes ago, tar said:

So, if it is true that women are weaker than men and  therefore at their mercy, then it is also true that good men and women have an obligation to protect the weak from the oppression of the strong. 

It's always been that way, but it doesn't actually happen as often as it should. How do the people without power protect other people without power?

Quote

This is already the law, and the moral grounding upon which our society is built.  It was that way in 1953 when I was born, and it is that way now.   I was not wrong in 1963 when I was 10...that is society was not wrong then and now and needs to be fixed.  I am not now, and never was part of the problem.  Not unless you think the whole place needs to be redone.

Oh, please, let's not go there. The Civil Right Act and Voting Rights Act were not in place in 1953. If it "was that way" in 1953, Rosa Parks would not have had to refuse to move (further) to the back of the bus. And many other events would not have happened. 

Let's not fall into any trap of thinking that 1953 was any sort of moral utopia (society was not wrong then?), or that the social issues we have were somehow less of a problem. It may seem like that, because how socially aware are you when you are a kid? Things have gotten better over time, because people have fought for it, but let's not pretend that it's always been thus, and there wasn't a massive amount of resistance along the path of progress.

[zapatos]

8 minutes ago, swansont said:

I think people are too quick to conclude things like this are being done willfully.

"Never assign to malice that which can be assigned to incompetence."

The corollary in this case would be a lack of empathy, or selection bias, or just flat-out denialism.

Maybe. That's a good point. 

But when we keep talking about sexual assault and battery, and he responds with things like "How does it make me part of the problem, to look at a picture of a woman in a bathing suit, that she  put on, for me to see her in?", I find it difficult to accept that maybe he really doesn't think there is a difference.

[tar]

swansonT,

Well exactly.  I have been in the fight for the last 45 years, since I stood with my cousin who demanded to be allowed to wear jeans to school like the males.

It is you who conflate sexual abuse with normal sexuality.

 

Regards, TAR

[iNow]

ob·liv·i·ous

əˈblivēəs/

adjective

 

1. not aware of or not concerned about what is happening around one.

   "she became absorbed, oblivious to the passage of time"

   synonyms:

   unaware of, unconscious of, heedless of, unmindful of, insensible of/to, unheeding of, ignorant of, incognizant of, blind to, deaf to, unsuspecting of, unobservant of;  insensitive to, unconcerned with, impervious to, unaffected by, indifferent to;  informal clueless "oblivious to the conversation around the table"

[tar]

iNow,

Close to how I feel about people that give Trump no love.  He is our president and 46 million of our fellow citizens voted him in.   Yet people remain oblivious to why he won the election, and remain oblivious to the swamp in Washington, and the swamp in Hollywood.  Raqqa just fell, Iran is on notice as a supporter of terrorism, North Korea's nuclear ambitions are censored by the world, NATO troops are in place to counter Russian territorial desires, the stock market is at all time highs, criminal gangs from central America are being fought openly and our immigration laws are being enforced.  Yet Hillary likens Trump to Weinstein and Zapatos likens me to someone he would protect his family from.   Some people here are oblivious but some are oblivious to PC thinking and some are oblivious to reality.

Regards, TAR

Edited October 18, 2017 by tar

[swansont]

55 minutes ago, tar said:

swansonT,

Well exactly.  I have been in the fight for the last 45 years, since I stood with my cousin who demanded to be allowed to wear jeans to school like the males.

It is you who conflate sexual abuse with normal sexuality.

Where in my posts have I mentioned "normal sexuality"?  And called it abuse?

[zapatos]

9 minutes ago, tar said:

iNow,

Close to how I feel about people that give Trump no love.  He is our president and 46 million of our fellow citizens voted him in.   Yet people remain oblivious to why he won the election, and remain oblivious to the swamp in Washington, and the swamp in Hollywood.  Raqqa just fell, Iran is on notice as a supporter of terrorism, North Korea's nuclear ambitions are censored by the world, NATO troops are in place to counter Russian territorial desires, the stock market is at all time highs, criminal gangs from central America are being fought openly and our immigration laws are being enforced.  Yet Hillary likens Trump to Weinstein and Zapatos likens me to someone he would protect his family from.   Some people here are oblivious but some are oblivious to PC thinking and some are oblivious to reality.

Regards, TAR

Oh my God! Do you have any idea at all what the topic of this thread is?!?! It's like talking to a pinball machine.

[tar]

The conflation of actual sexual abuse and abuse of power with making a woman feel uncomfortable.

8 minutes ago, zapatos said:

Oh my God! Do you have any idea at all what the topic of this thread is?!?! It's like talking to a pinball machine.

Um...it is a thread about Harvey Weinstein taking sexual advantage of young starlets, where Hilary has used the fact to say that we voted a sexual abuser into the Oval office and the PC on this thread have used my old white somewhat sexist maleness to impugn my society and my president.   I am defending myself and my president and my age group and sex against such silly comparisons.

 

Edited October 18, 2017 by tar