Harvey Weinstein

[Super]

who ever said anything remotely close to that

what exactly are you talking about?
you still watch fox news, don't ya?

I'm waiting.
You don't care about "poor defenseless women"; if you did, you'd be up in arms over O'Reilly, Trump, and Ailes. You decide to, instead, defend, deny, and ignore, because it doesn't suit your politics.
Ailes and O'Reilly shaped conservative politics. You voted for a woman abuser to be the president. Please stop pretending to care about this issue when the only people you go after for it are the liberal offenders. It's incredibly scummy.

 

[thethe]

I'm waiting.

You don't care about "poor defenseless women"; if you did, you'd be up in arms over O'Reilly, Trump, and Ailes. You decide to, instead, defend, deny, and ignore, because it doesn't suit your politics.

Ailes and O'Reilly shaped conservative politics. You voted for a woman abuser to be the president. Please stop pretending to care about this issue when the only people you go after for it are the liberal offenders. It's incredibly scummy.

When have any of us lectured the rest of the country on these issues? We understand that we are flawed humans that need to better ourselves.

The left however reprimands the country seemingly on a pedestal when they are among the worst perpetrators of what they are railing against.

Also - Please let me know when I have 'defended' any of these actions. I'll wait for that.

 

[57Brave]

Let me say, knowing this and still voting for this , to be kind --asshole --- to be blunt --- monster --- your opinion of Weinstein is meaningless.

Or about anything else for that matter - you have no compass

 

[Super]

The left however reprimands the country seemingly on a pedestal when they are among the worst perpetrators of what they are railing against.

Also - Please let me know when I have 'defended' any of these actions. I'll wait for that.

You use "the left" as a catchall far too often. Some on the left are guilty of that, just like some on the right are massive hypocrites when discussing "family values."

Your lack of concern for it relative to when a librul does it is a defense. You only really care when you can use it politically. But it didn't seem to bother you when it was your guys being outed as abusers. In fact, you defended trump when it's pretty crystal ****in' clear that he's done similar things. Either voice your concern for women every time (like most of "the left" here is currently doing) or stop pretending you care about an extremely serious and important issue that you obviously don't actually care about.

Call out the hypocrisy of fox news (hannity and carlson) and of trump, who called o'reilly a "good guy" after being outed. you don't. wonder why that could be?

 

[Runnin]

Here's a good article about Weinstein's so called sex addiction.



If Weinstein were serious about getting help, he wouldn't call himself a sex addict.

Which brings us to the real issue when it comes to Weinstein. The problem is not that Weinstein was having sex with too many people, and that he tried to stop himself and found that he couldn’t—something you might expect from someone struggling with addiction. The problem is that he abused his position of influence and forced many, many women to subject themselves to sexual acts that were obviously nonconsensual or, more complicatedly, could never be truly consensual. And nonconsensual sex is psychologically very harmful—it’s a “violation of human behavior,” as Braun-Harvey put it.

 

[Jaw]

Let me say, knowing this and still voting for this , to be kind --asshole --- to be blunt --- monster --- your opinion of Weinstein is meaningless.
Or about anything else for that matter - you have no compass

What if his opponent wanted to murder millions of black people? Would it be ok to vote for the misogynist then?

 

[thethe]

You use "the left" as a catchall far too often. Some on the left are guilty of that, just like some on the right are massive hypocrites when discussing "family values."

Your lack of concern for it relative to when a librul does it is a defense. You only really care when you can use it politically. But it didn't seem to bother you when it was your guys being outed as abusers. In fact, you defended trump when it's pretty crystal ****in' clear that he's done similar things. Either voice your concern for women every time (like most of "the left" here is currently doing) or stop pretending you care about an extremely serious and important issue that you obviously don't actually care about.

Call out the hypocrisy of fox news (hannity and carlson) and of trump, who called o'reilly a "good guy" after being outed. you don't. wonder why that could be?

How is it hypocrisy when they aren't lecturing the country on privilege/racism/feminism?

Also - Please please please quote just one post where I've defended trump for the comments he has made as you are referencing above. If not then don't post deliberately false things because you are overemotional.

 

[Super]

How is it hypocrisy when they aren't lecturing the country on privilege/racism/feminism?

Also - Please please please quote just one post where I've defended trump for the comments he has made as you are referencing above. If not then don't post deliberately false things because you are overemotional.

You voted for him. He's an abuser. You deny it or ignore it, and voted for him. That is you defending him, or not caring about his past. You didn't come after O'Reilly or Ailes with anywhere near the same language. Why is that? Why is what they did not just as bad to you? Why is that so difficult to get thru your head?

Um, O'Reilly didn't lecture the nation on "family values" his whole career? He didn't criticize Bill Clinton for doing what he was doing all along? He didn't warn America of the morally corrupt Mexicans? He didn't proclaim himself a christian man? Ailes, too? You're not even trying here. It's the deliberate obtuseness that leads to a president trump.

 

[Super]

And yes, we should be talking about privilege/feminism/racism. "The left" talks about these issues far more, yes. Just because someone who is liberal is a scum bag doesn't mean these issues shouldn't be discussed and brought up frequently. I agree hollywood in general is massively hypocritical when something like this happens. At no point would I deny that. It's a massive problem, in any arena where there are super powerful men. One of the keys to ending it will be caring as much about it when a republican is outed as you do when a democrat is outed.

 

[Super]

It's just ignorant and incorrect to pretend "the right" doesn't rail constantly against things they themselves do. trump calls mexicans rapists while being one himself (according to his ex-wife) and a sexual abuser. Fox news and right-wing politics is full of "christians" who care about "family values" while on tv, but cheat and abuse while off it. if your point is that both sides are hypocritical, then great! i think everyone is a hypocrite in some regard (even you and i!). but you insistence on making this political simply because the offender was a democrat says a lot about where your priorities lie, and it isn't with sympathy for victims of sexual assault.

 

[thethe]

You voted for him. He's an abuser. You deny it or ignore it, and voted for him. That is you defending him, or not caring about his past. You didn't come after O'Reilly or Ailes with anywhere near the same language. Why is that? Why is what they did not just as bad to you? Why is that so difficult to get thru your head?

Um, O'Reilly didn't lecture the nation on "family values" his whole career? He didn't criticize Bill Clinton for doing what he was doing all along? He didn't warn America of the morally corrupt Mexicans? He didn't proclaim himself a christian man? Ailes, too? You're not even trying here. It's the deliberate obtuseness that leads to a president trump.

My support is on the basis of a pro/con analysis as well as a choice between two people. You want to focus on these immaterial social issues because the MSM has riled you up and you are a emotional person. In reality - The country is in tremendous shape right now and its looking fantastic moving forward. Unfortunately, Trump and his administration has to clean up the disasters left by the last three presidents. IN the long run, when you grow up, you'll see these 8 years will have been beneficial to the country.

 

[Julio3000]

How is it hypocrisy when they aren't lecturing the country on privilege/racism/feminism?

...

[tw]918266657902157825[/tw]

You seriously don't see hypocrisy in something like this?

 

[jpx7]

What if his opponent wanted to murder millions of black people? Would it be ok to vote for the misogynist then?

Sure—but you shouldn't forget or neglect the misogyny, even if it's a better choice than ethnocide.

 

[Jaw]

Sure—but you shouldn't forget or neglect the misogyny, even if it's a better choice than ethnocide.

Exactly! I believe that certain policies supported by Hillary endorse mass murder, and that they disproportionately effect minorities and the poor. So I voted for the other guy. That doesn't mean I like reading his idiocy on twitter, or hearing his embarrassing quotes. I still facepalm when I read most of his statements. But I also try to look at actual policy decisions and outcomes, and those aren't nearly as bad. They are often quite good.

 

[Super]

My support is on the basis of a pro/con analysis as well as a choice between two people. You want to focus on these immaterial social issues because the MSM has riled you up and you are a emotional person. In reality - The country is in tremendous shape right now and its looking fantastic moving forward. Unfortunately, Trump and his administration has to clean up the disasters left by the last three presidents. IN the long run, when you grow up, you'll see these 8 years will have been beneficial to the country.

Sexual assault is immaterial?
You're certainly not treating it as such when it's a democrat that's outed.
The country is not in tremendous shape for those who have been sexually assaulted, especially those by our now-president. And if nothing is done to curb the issue (like maybe not supporting and enabling a sexual abuser like trump) then the country will continue to be not-tremendous for those people.
But I guess as long as your deluded, simple mind is happy, who cares how many women are assaulted?

You pretty much didn't address any issue and just drastically changed the discussion. We weren't talking about the future of the country. We were talking about sexual assault, and why it "bothers" you so much when it's a democrat but not when it's one of the people you support. You went from railing against "the left" for being hypocrites on the issue (that you were pretending to care about) to saying sexual assault is "immaterial." So which is it? Should it be ignored and considered "immaterial" like you do when it's trump, or taken care of it when it's a democrat? Your inconsistency shows your true, scummy colors.

 

[goldfly]

What if his opponent wanted to murder millions of black people? Would it be ok to vote for the misogynist then?

Uh, what?

 

[jpx7]

Exactly! I believe that certain policies supported by Hillary endorse mass murder, and that they disproportionately effect minorities and the poor. So I voted for the other guy. That doesn't mean I like reading his idiocy on twitter, or hearing his embarrassing quotes. I still facepalm when I read most of his statements. But I also try to look at actual policy decisions and outcomes, and those aren't nearly as bad. They are often quite good.

This is where we substantially diverge. I'm not a fan of Clinton's, and her policy platform left much to be desired; but it was leagues better than the current President's set of initiatives.

 

[Jaw]

Uh, what?

https://www.nyu.edu/projects/sanger/webedition/app/documents/show.php?sangerDoc=238946.xml

The Eugenic Value of Birth Control Propaganda

By Margaret Sanger

Seemingly every new approach to the great problem of the human race must manifest its vitality by running the gauntlet of prejudice, ridicule and misinterpretation. Eugenists may remember that not many years ago this program for race regeneration was subjected to the cruel ridicule of stupidity and ignorance. Today Eugenics is suggested by the most diverse minds as the most adequate and thorough avenue to the solution of racial, political and social problems. The most intransigent and daring teachers and scientists have lent their support to this great biological interpretation of the human race. The war has emphasized its necessity.

The doctrine of Birth Control is now passing through the stage of ridicule, prejudice and misunderstanding. A few years ago this new weapon of civilization and freedom was condemned as immoral, destructive, obscene. Gradually the criticisms are lessening-–understanding is taking the place of misunderstanding. The eugenic and civilizational value of Birth Control is becoming apparent to the enlightened and the intelligent.

In the limited space of the present paper, I have time only to touch upon some of the fundamental convictions that form the basis of our Birth Control propaganda, and which, as I think you must agree, indicate that the campaign for Birth Control is not merely of eugenic value, but is practically identical in ideal, with the final aims of Eugenics.
....
As an advocate of Birth Control, I wish to take advantage of the present opportunity to point out that the unbalance between the birth rate of the "unfit" and the "fit", admittedly the greatest present menace to civilization, can never be rectified by the inauguration of a cradle competition between these two classes.

 

[jpx7]

https://www.nyu.edu/projects/sanger/webedition/app/documents/show.php?sangerDoc=238946.xml

The Eugenic Value of Birth Control Propaganda

By Margaret Sanger

Seemingly every new approach to the great problem of the human race must manifest its vitality by running the gauntlet of prejudice, ridicule and misinterpretation. Eugenists may remember that not many years ago this program for race regeneration was subjected to the cruel ridicule of stupidity and ignorance. Today Eugenics is suggested by the most diverse minds as the most adequate and thorough avenue to the solution of racial, political and social problems. The most intransigent and daring teachers and scientists have lent their support to this great biological interpretation of the human race. The war has emphasized its necessity.

The doctrine of Birth Control is now passing through the stage of ridicule, prejudice and misunderstanding. A few years ago this new weapon of civilization and freedom was condemned as immoral, destructive, obscene. Gradually the criticisms are lessening-–understanding is taking the place of misunderstanding. The eugenic and civilizational value of Birth Control is becoming apparent to the enlightened and the intelligent.

In the limited space of the present paper, I have time only to touch upon some of the fundamental convictions that form the basis of our Birth Control propaganda, and which, as I think you must agree, indicate that the campaign for Birth Control is not merely of eugenic value, but is practically identical in ideal, with the final aims of Eugenics.
....
As an advocate of Birth Control, I wish to take advantage of the present opportunity to point out that the unbalance between the birth rate of the "unfit" and the "fit", admittedly the greatest present menace to civilization, can never be rectified by the inauguration of a cradle competition between these two classes.

One person's horrific opinions regarding one possible utility of birth control does not make birth control a bad idea, nor does it make anyone who supports birth control a eugenicist.

 

[Jaw]

One person's horrific opinions regarding one possible utility of birth control does not make birth control a bad idea, nor does it make anyone who supports birth control a eugenicist.

Her legacy, the legacy of her movement, and the legacy of Roe v Wade is eugenics.

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/09/abortions-racial-gap/380251/
An African-American woman is almost five times likelier to have an abortion than a white woman, and a Latina more than twice as likely, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
....
Yet black women still have higher rates of abortion even when controlling for income, according to a 2008 report by the Guttmacher Institute. At almost every income level, African-Americans have higher unintended pregnancy and abortion rates than whites or Hispanics.
....

60 million abortions since Roe v Wade.
http://www.nrlc.org/uploads/factsheets/FS01AbortionintheUS.pdf

And we're screaming about how racist Trump or the police are.