Sex assault tsunami

Politics, Religion, Salsa Recipes, etc. Everything you shouldn't bring up at your Uncle's house.

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby burrrton » Fri Nov 24, 2017 2:03 pm

No its wrong, evil incarnate actually.


Up your meds again, tawk. Jeezus.
User avatar
burrrton
Legacy
 
Posts: 2983
Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2013 7:20 am

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby Hawktawk » Fri Nov 24, 2017 3:08 pm

burrrton wrote:No its wrong, evil incarnate actually.

Up your meds again, tawk. Jeezus.


Yeah I think only evil people prey on innocent women and children .

What would you describe the conduct as?
If you don’t think that’s evil conduct you’re the guy who needs the meds.
Hawktawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 2705
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:57 am

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby Hawktawk » Fri Nov 24, 2017 3:24 pm

Come on now ID you can read it :lol: :lol: :lol: .
Honestly Im sorry Im obviously a maroon with this quoting stuff. I'll go back and read the instructions earlier in the thread and try to figure it out. It's much harder on my I phone. I'm just an idiot.

It's just the non Trump voter Asea threw out so many patent trump voter defensive talking points I felt like I had to respond to some of them individually.
Hawktawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 2705
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:57 am

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby burrrton » Fri Nov 24, 2017 4:15 pm

If you don’t think that’s evil conduct you’re the guy who needs the meds.


"Evil Incarnate" is people like Hitler, Stalin, Mao... not some rich asshole who talks a big game and apparently gets you aroused.

Again, up your meds and get a little perspective. You sound like a loon.
User avatar
burrrton
Legacy
 
Posts: 2983
Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2013 7:20 am

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby Aseahawkfan » Fri Nov 24, 2017 5:21 pm

Hawktawk wrote:Burt has accused me twice of being willing to lie on this thread if it would hurt Trump. I do not lie to accomplish anything one way or another. But come on Asea. I have a hard time believing that anyone who didn't vote for this guy would be giving this passionate a dissertation defending him.


I did the same thing for Obama against the Right Wing when they were saying stupid things. I did not vote for Obama. I wasn't in agreement with many of his political stances. But there are plenty of folks believing stupid things about Obama that weren't true like he is a Muslim, wasn't born here, was soft on defense, was a socialist, and even the time they painted him as hating old people when he was discussing medical boards that decide who receives treatment in a socialized system. I saw so many ridiculous comments about Obama, I had to step up and defend a president I didn't vote for. I just can't stand the irrational nature of modern politics.

The media does fake a lot of news or rather likes to stretch the truth. It's far more about ratings than news at this point. They find a talking point and hammer it home to where people are convicted before they have a trial or any kind of real investigation into their doings. Just to be a politician or public figure in this society means you have to be some kind of liberal Jesus-type figure that hasn't done or said anything remotely controversial or the mainstream and social media will come unglued.

If you were attacking Trump for his idiotic Twittering and unbelievable narcissism, I'd be with you. These sexual assault allegations based on behaviors that have obviously been happening for ages is ridiculous. I lived in the 70s and 80s. Women and men were partying up. The bad behavior among that generation has been the pablum of many a movie, book, and the like. Now there is a crusade to destroy a bunch of people that were partying and having fun without any trial. Just the media putting accusation after accusation after accusation out there to destroy anyone even remotely accused of something inappropriate. Let's just say the net is a bit too wide and indiscriminate for my tastes. I'd like some real trials before destroying lives.

I don't like Trump. Don't like him as president. Even one of his recent changes pissed me off. It won't mean much to many, but it does to me. He signed an order allowing the importation of elephant trophies. What kind of challenge is it to kill an elephant with a huge gun? It's a big animal that can't hide that is no real challenge to hunt. This pathetic narcissist is so lacking in empathy that he thinks it's just fine and dandy to shoot elephants. Elephants have graveyards. They adopt the young of their dead. They in general mind their business in their herds. This dumb president thinks it's just great to hunt them because his hunting associate buddies told him it would lead to greater conservation of elephants. I guess we'll see if it truly works like that, though I'm dubious of the logic given the propensity of human beings to over-hunt when doing so for sport.
Aseahawkfan
Legacy
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 12:38 am

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby Hawktawk » Fri Nov 24, 2017 6:04 pm

burrrton wrote:
"Evil Incarnate" is people like Hitler, Stalin, Mao... not some rich asshole who talks a big game and apparently gets you aroused.

Again, up your meds and get a little perspective. You sound like a loon.


He’s a molester of women . Not a big talker . I believe the women . You obviously do not which makes you an enabler. Quit changing the subject .

Give me your description of a sexual abuser. Not a big talker. 14 women confirm his confession.
What type of a person is this?
I say evil. What about you Burt ? Pick a side
Hawktawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 2705
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:57 am

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby burrrton » Fri Nov 24, 2017 6:22 pm

I say evil. What about you Burt ? Pick a side


Again, if you think some pampered dumbass talking sh*t to a Hollywood reporter is a "confession", and makes him "evil incarnate", it says *worlds* about you, and literally nothing about him.

Bye, tawk. You need help.
User avatar
burrrton
Legacy
 
Posts: 2983
Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2013 7:20 am

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby Hawktawk » Sat Nov 25, 2017 7:18 am

What about the women Burt? Do you or do you not believe them.you think it was a left wing scheme choreographed perfectly ?

Take trump out of it so you’re not so tongue tied.
Is a molester and rapist evil or what would you call them?

It’s the victimized women who have to turn on the tv and see their perp endorsing Roy Moore that need help.
I’m for them ,you are not

It’s getting a little wierd all this defense of a molester.
And you say I need help.......

As I say it’s very sad where America is and you are part of the problem.
Hawktawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 2705
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:57 am

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby Aseahawkfan » Sun Nov 26, 2017 8:29 pm

Hawktawk wrote:What about the women Burt? Do you or do you not believe them.you think it was a left wing scheme choreographed perfectly ?

Take trump out of it so you’re not so tongue tied.
Is a molester and rapist evil or what would you call them?

It’s the victimized women who have to turn on the tv and see their perp endorsing Roy Moore that need help.
I’m for them ,you are not

It’s getting a little wierd all this defense of a molester.
And you say I need help.......

As I say it’s very sad where America is and you are part of the problem.


I knew guys that grabbed girls asses at parties and men and women that flirted inappropriately, sometimes at work or places they shouldn't. There is cheating and inappropriate behavior in this world between men and women all the time. These people are not evil.

Sure, a child molester or rapist is evil and wrong. But I don't consider some groping at parties the same level. Find me some solid evidence like we have with Weinstein or Cosby, then I'll go with you. I've seen mostly speculation with no actionable evidence.

Trump's not a good guy. He cheated on his wife. He gets married to a new supermodel every time they get too old. He's crass and annoying.

But evil incarnate? He's not even in the same ballpark as evil incarnate like a Hitler, Stalin, various serial killers or rapists, or even someone like Roman Polanski who drugged and raped a 13 year old in a very well-documented case with court substantiated evidence. He's a rich old guy that has been around for a long time that has had women throwing themselves at him for his money for ages. He likely partied and flirted with women at times. So did thousands if not tens of thousands of other men and women. It's a different world nowadays. I'm ok with the change as I never acted this way towards women myself. It doesn't do much good to destroy people from the past unless you have some court actionable evidence or something extreme.
Aseahawkfan
Legacy
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 12:38 am

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby Seahawks4Ever » Mon Nov 27, 2017 7:50 pm

IDH; You must not have read your "Trumptard" talking points directive today. Trump is NOW claiming that those words on that ACCESS Hollywood tape where he said he enjoys grabbing women by their genitals is FAKE and that he never said those words at all!

Trump offers absolutely no excuse as to why he admitted that he said those words and actually APPLIGIZED for those remarks one year ago.

Why IDH? Why? Why would he say he was sorry for something IF he never did it???

You are CONSTANTLY claiming that Trump is not a pathological liar, so how do YOU explain what is so OBVIOUS a LIE???

Go ahead, lets hear YOUR LIES while you attempt to explain away Trump's lies. Oh, I get it, you will just say "so what? All presidents lie. That may be true, but what is also TRUE is that this man lies when he doesn't have to, he lies when he KNOWS everybody knows he is lying. That is SICK behavior. Why would you or anybody else want a leader whom NO ONE CAN TRUST to tell the TRUTH especially when it is especially IMPORTANT that the American people NEED to know the truth?

If Trump can lie so easily about unimportant things why should we believe him if he is talking about something important??????

On that OTHER subject, about judge Moore, I noticed that you NEVER answered the question. What about Trump's backing of Moore? If these women are telling the truth and that Moore sexually molested them would YOU still support Moore??? Do YOU believe that it would be better to vote for a child molester instead of a democrat?? Come on IDH, MAN UP and answer the question!

It IS "evil incarnate" to support a child molester over a democrat and IF you cannot agree with that then YOU are evil incarnate yourself, IDH.
Seahawks4Ever
Legacy
 
Posts: 1280
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2014 12:56 pm

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby idhawkman » Mon Nov 27, 2017 8:33 pm

Seahawks4Ever wrote:IDH; You must not have read your "Trumptard" talking points directive today. Trump is NOW claiming that those words on that ACCESS Hollywood tape where he said he enjoys grabbing women by their genitals is FAKE and that he never said those words at all!

Trump offers absolutely no excuse as to why he admitted that he said those words and actually APPLIGIZED for those remarks one year ago.

Why IDH? Why? Why would he say he was sorry for something IF he never did it???

You are CONSTANTLY claiming that Trump is not a pathological liar, so how do YOU explain what is so OBVIOUS a LIE???

Go ahead, lets hear YOUR LIES while you attempt to explain away Trump's lies. Oh, I get it, you will just say "so what? All presidents lie. That may be true, but what is also TRUE is that this man lies when he doesn't have to, he lies when he KNOWS everybody knows he is lying. That is SICK behavior. Why would you or anybody else want a leader whom NO ONE CAN TRUST to tell the TRUTH especially when it is especially IMPORTANT that the American people NEED to know the truth?

If Trump can lie so easily about unimportant things why should we believe him if he is talking about something important??????

On that OTHER subject, about judge Moore, I noticed that you NEVER answered the question. What about Trump's backing of Moore? If these women are telling the truth and that Moore sexually molested them would YOU still support Moore??? Do YOU believe that it would be better to vote for a child molester instead of a democrat?? Come on IDH, MAN UP and answer the question!

It IS "evil incarnate" to support a child molester over a democrat and IF you cannot agree with that then YOU are evil incarnate yourself, IDH.


So who is the child molester in your opinion?
User avatar
idhawkman
Legacy
 
Posts: 455
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2017 7:00 am

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby Hawktawk » Tue Nov 28, 2017 4:46 am

I think everyone misunderstood my comments about evil incarnate and it’s probably my fault . What I was describing is the specific act of sexual assault and molestation.

That’s what trump
Is accused of and admitted on tape and now he says the tape is doctored

Good people can do bad and even horrible things and vice versa.
Chump isn’t evil. He’s too stupid . Putin is evil. Stalin, Hitler etc but their brains haven’t been through the blender.

Trump doesn’t have a decent bond in his body but he’s like the mentally retarded despot wanna be.

I really hope he is called to account under oath to determine if he is a molester of women .
Hawktawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 2705
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:57 am

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby Largent80 » Tue Nov 28, 2017 5:48 am

Rump is endorsing Moore. What else needs to be said?

It's the molesters club.
User avatar
Largent80
Legacy
 
Posts: 983
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 1:38 pm
Location: Magnolia, Texas

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby Sox-n-hawks » Tue Nov 28, 2017 5:57 am

Largent80 wrote:Rump is endorsing Moore. What else needs to be said?

It's the molesters club.



Annnd by not holding them accountable, the gov't is essentially saying it's okay.
User avatar
Sox-n-hawks
Legacy
 
Posts: 56
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2017 6:27 am
Location: Pacific NW

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby RiverDog » Tue Nov 28, 2017 6:51 am

Aseahawkfan wrote:I knew guys that grabbed girls asses at parties and men and women that flirted inappropriately, sometimes at work or places they shouldn't. There is cheating and inappropriate behavior in this world between men and women all the time. These people are not evil.

Sure, a child molester or rapist is evil and wrong. But I don't consider some groping at parties the same level. Find me some solid evidence like we have with Weinstein or Cosby, then I'll go with you. I've seen mostly speculation with no actionable evidence.

Trump's not a good guy. He cheated on his wife. He gets married to a new supermodel every time they get too old. He's crass and annoying.

But evil incarnate? He's not even in the same ballpark as evil incarnate like a Hitler, Stalin, various serial killers or rapists, or even someone like Roman Polanski who drugged and raped a 13 year old in a very well-documented case with court substantiated evidence. He's a rich old guy that has been around for a long time that has had women throwing themselves at him for his money for ages. He likely partied and flirted with women at times. So did thousands if not tens of thousands of other men and women. It's a different world nowadays. I'm ok with the change as I never acted this way towards women myself. It doesn't do much good to destroy people from the past unless you have some court actionable evidence or something extreme.


That's my take, too. The only place I'd disagree with is that it's never been OK. Back in the 80's, my employer fired a male supervisor for sticking his finger in a female employee's exposed pant hole...sounds bad, but the girl was wearing jeans with holes in them and he stuck his finger in a hole a few inches above her knee, his misinterpreted message being that they were unsafe and not appropriate for factory work.

Some people in here are treating relatively harmless acts, such as pats on the fanny, inappropriate language, infidelity, etc, in the same manner as other more serious acts of sexual misconduct, such as exposing themselves or forcible sex. As in other misdeeds, there's a sliding scale that some are either inadvertently or intentionally choosing to cloud the difference. It would be like clouding the difference between shop lifting and armed robbery.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 7232
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby Hawktawk » Tue Nov 28, 2017 9:06 am

Largent80 wrote:Rump is endorsing Moore. What else needs to be said?

It's the molesters club.

Without a doubt. The Grand Old Pedophiles.

To be fair the Dems are circling the wagons around Franken and especially John Conyers with old bag Pelosi saying "hes'an american icon".
As I say this thread is about men who assault women. Its bipartisan and spreads far beyond politics as well to the boardroom, hollywood, the newsroom etc.
Hawktawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 2705
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:57 am

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby Hawktawk » Tue Nov 28, 2017 9:08 am

[quote="Aseahawkfan"

"Sure, a child molester or rapist is evil and wrong. But I don't consider some groping at parties the same level. Find me some solid evidence like we have with Weinstein or Cosby, then I'll go with you. I've seen mostly speculation with no actionable evidence. "



"Some people in here are treating relatively harmless acts, such as pats on the fanny, inappropriate language, infidelity, etc, in the same manner as other more serious acts of sexual misconduct, such as exposing themselves or forcible sex. As in other misdeeds, there's a sliding scale that some are either inadvertently or intentionally choosing to cloud the difference. It would be like clouding the difference between shop lifting and armed robbery.[/quote]"


I'm not letting you give me the good old boy excuse.Trump admitted on tape that he kisses women without consent. He grabs their Pu**ies. That is the legal definition of rape and sexual assault, more than what Franken is accused of and has admitted.14 women confirmed his confession within a couple of weeks of the tapes release.
Now all of a sudden hes saying the tape he admitted to and apologized for is a fake....Why would he do that?
I think even he is smart enough to realize that this tsunami is going to sweep him out to sea as well if he isn't careful.
Hawktawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 2705
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:57 am

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby Aseahawkfan » Tue Nov 28, 2017 5:12 pm

RiverDog wrote:That's my take, too. The only place I'd disagree with is that it's never been OK. Back in the 80's, my employer fired a male supervisor for sticking his finger in a female employee's exposed pant hole...sounds bad, but the girl was wearing jeans with holes in them and he stuck his finger in a hole a few inches above her knee, his misinterpreted message being that they were unsafe and not appropriate for factory work.

Some people in here are treating relatively harmless acts, such as pats on the fanny, inappropriate language, infidelity, etc, in the same manner as other more serious acts of sexual misconduct, such as exposing themselves or forcible sex. As in other misdeeds, there's a sliding scale that some are either inadvertently or intentionally choosing to cloud the difference. It would be like clouding the difference between shop lifting and armed robbery.


It's never been ok at work. Is Trump accused of doing this at work? I read mostly social settings likely with alcohol. Once alcohol or drugs are involved, all bets are off. They are known for lowering inhibition. Unless we want to once again go down the path of making alcohol illegal again because once it is introduced to the situation stuff like this is going to happen. Toss drugs in the mix and all bets are off.

Unless these same liberals attacking Trump plan to start backing legislation to get rid of alcohol consumption and drugs at parties, I'm not sure this kind of stuff is going to stop any time soon. The extreme stuff like Harvey at Work is completely illegal, but crazy stuff at social gatherings is par for the course. I've seen so much crazy stuff at parties or in social situations involving booze and drugs by both men and women, I don't know how you legislate it or figure it out in court.

Another thing I noticed is this is mostly women going after ugly dudes with money. It's like being a party and the girls are fine with the pretty boys going after them, but once old, ugly pig goes after them, they start going after old ugly pig. It's like a public lambasting of physically unattractive males that went after the pretty girls. It's sad because some of these charges are very real involving very real crimes like rape and abuse of power rather than drunk rich guys at a party being rude and obnoxious. Once you get so many of these, people are going to start tuning them out and the real crimes will get ignored or glossed over as they try to lump everyone under the same umbrella.

Amusingly enough, I don't touch drugs or alcohol for reasons like this. The behavior I've seen from drunk and high people is egregiously bad. I've seen people on drugs and alcohol change from people I like and respect turn into total fools and scum. I don't go to parties or associate much with people when they are drinking or drugging as I don't like the change. Some like to pretend they don't change or it has no effect, but I haven't met the person I liked more on drugs and alcohol than I liked them sober. Once men and women are in a social environment drunk, I walk away. Any insane thing can happen from death to rape and the person may not even remember or have been lucid enough to realize what they were doing. No one wants to go back to illegal drugs and alcohol. Some people even make excuses for the scumbag behavior of drug addicts considering the victim/s as less than the addict. If I had my way (and people would hate it), I'd treat drug addicts and dealers like China. I'd make the environment so strict that people would despise me.I understand that most don't want this because they're too touchy feely, whereas I prefer an environment where responsible, sober people are well-protected.
Aseahawkfan
Legacy
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 12:38 am

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby idhawkman » Tue Nov 28, 2017 9:48 pm

Hawktawk wrote:Without a doubt. The Grand Old Pedophiles.

To be fair the Dems are circling the wagons around Franken and especially John Conyers with old bag Pelosi saying "hes'an american icon".
As I say this thread is about men who assault women. Its bipartisan and spreads far beyond politics as well to the boardroom, hollywood, the newsroom etc.


I agree it is bipartisan but I also think it is not just against the men. Now I don't mean the women are forcing sex on a man but what they are doing is enabling the men. How many knew about this stuff and said absolutely nothing? How many made it the victims fault? There's a real awakening going on about all of this and I don't really want it to swing too far the other way but I want it to stop. NO MEANS NO! No matter when a man hears it, they need to stop, go get in a cold shower or think of Yule Brenner naked or whatever it takes to stop.
User avatar
idhawkman
Legacy
 
Posts: 455
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2017 7:00 am

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby idhawkman » Tue Nov 28, 2017 9:57 pm

Aseahawkfan"

"Sure, a child molester or rapist is evil and wrong. But I don't consider some groping at parties the same level. Find me some solid evidence like we have with Weinstein or Cosby, then I'll go with you. I've seen mostly speculation with no actionable evidence. "



"Some people in here are treating relatively harmless acts, such as pats on the fanny, inappropriate language, infidelity, etc, in the same manner as other more serious acts of sexual misconduct, such as exposing themselves or forcible sex. As in other misdeeds, there's a sliding scale that some are either inadvertently or intentionally choosing to cloud the difference. It would be like clouding the difference between shop lifting and armed robbery.[/quote][quote="Hawktawk wrote:
"


I'm not letting you give me the good old boy excuse.Trump admitted on tape that he kisses women without consent. He grabs their Pu**ies. That is the legal definition of rape and sexual assault, more than what Franken is accused of and has admitted.14 women confirmed his confession within a couple of weeks of the tapes release.
Now all of a sudden hes saying the tape he admitted to and apologized for is a fake....Why would he do that?
I think even he is smart enough to realize that this tsunami is going to sweep him out to sea as well if he isn't careful.


Hey HawkTawk, you are really close to getting the quote thing down. The only thing you are doing wrong is that when you have an open bracket you have to have a closed braket. I can't actually show you what I mean but do you see the quote you did from ASEAHAWKFAN above your quote. All you need to do is put the end braket after his username.

So it would look like this:

open braket then the word "quote" then the = sign and the username in quotation marks and then the close bracket. After that you have everything the other user said. At the end of their words, put in an open bracket then /quote and a close bracket. You have to have the / in front of the word quote like you see above.

To do multiple quotes, well, let's get there after you are comfortable with this part first. NOTE: You can not have two open quotes in a row in this forum. So what that means is you have to have a closed quote (/quote) for every open quote before you can open a new quote.
User avatar
idhawkman
Legacy
 
Posts: 455
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2017 7:00 am

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby idhawkman » Tue Nov 28, 2017 9:59 pm

Aseahawkfan wrote:
It's never been ok at work. Is Trump accused of doing this at work? I read mostly social settings likely with alcohol. Once alcohol or drugs are involved, all bets are off. They are known for lowering inhibition. Unless we want to once again go down the path of making alcohol illegal again because once it is introduced to the situation stuff like this is going to happen. Toss drugs in the mix and all bets are off.


Trump doesn't drink or smoke. Never has.
User avatar
idhawkman
Legacy
 
Posts: 455
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2017 7:00 am

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby Largent80 » Wed Nov 29, 2017 6:52 am

User avatar
Largent80
Legacy
 
Posts: 983
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 1:38 pm
Location: Magnolia, Texas

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby Hawktawk » Wed Nov 29, 2017 10:18 am

Indeed. Matt friggin Lauer . And NBC is trying to play the shocked card but several news organizations have been working stories on his reported serial behavior . That’s why they got a credible allegation on Monday and Lauer was gone on Tuesday.
Unquestionably Fox is far from the only network protecting predators . The tsunami sweeps another iconic figure out to sea.....
Hawktawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 2705
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:57 am

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby Seahawks4Ever » Wed Nov 29, 2017 10:26 am

Uh, Trump wouldn't LIE about not drinking alcohol, EVER would he?? It isn't like he has never lied before so I find this claim to be very dubious at best. I do believe him when he says he has never smoked tobacco, I know tons of people who have never used tobacco products.

He tells a really heart rending story about his brother Fred and how alcohol destroyed his life and how his brother warned him away from going down the same road. Then I look at D.J.T. and his OBESE body and BLOATED face especially around the eyes and if he isn't a HEAVEY ALCOHOL DRINKER I will eat my hat. I suspect he is also heavy into COCAINE too.

But, maybe it is just vikes and percs. you know, doctor prescribed pain medication he is abusing to give him that bloated look. Then there is his incoherent way of talking that is NOTHING like the coherent INTELLIGENT way he used to talk before he became a big star on T.V. So, if that IS the case then he wouldn't be "lying" when he says he doesn't drink alcohol. But, I seriously doubt that he has NEVER drank ANY alcoholic beverage EVER. That statement I find really hard to believe.

The man also probably has type 2 diabetes because of his penchant for over eating (gluttony) the junk food he so loves.
Seahawks4Ever
Legacy
 
Posts: 1280
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2014 12:56 pm

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby Largent80 » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:28 pm

The guy that stars in "the Presidents Show" does a much better Rump than the real one.
User avatar
Largent80
Legacy
 
Posts: 983
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 1:38 pm
Location: Magnolia, Texas

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby Aseahawkfan » Wed Nov 29, 2017 4:30 pm

idhawkman wrote:Trump doesn't drink or smoke. Never has.


He doesn't even have the excuse of alcohol or drugs, eh. So this guy was grabbing ps and harassing women sober? Pretty lame. Then again Trump is a pretty narcissistic man that probably thinks all women are attracted to him.
Aseahawkfan
Legacy
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 12:38 am

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby RiverDog » Wed Nov 29, 2017 7:53 pm

Aseahawkfan wrote:It's never been ok at work.


Yes, it has never been "OK", but they used to take care of it by sweeping it under the carpet...and if a female reported it, she would get blackballed as no one would want to touch her with a 10 foot pole and she would usually end up quitting. I had a boss that was terminated for sexual harassment that in years prior had been transferred out of a situation where he was known to be "dipping his pen in company ink." Not so anymore. They'll fire you on the spot. And on the flip side, I personally know of several women that slept their way to the top, women that after working an 8 hour shift on the factory floor would go to the ladies room and put on their make-up and perfume for the end of shift meeting we had with our big bosses in an obvious attempt to curry favor with them. So IMO women have been guilty of using sex as a tool to use leverage men with.

Anyhow, it's an interesting discussion. We really need a female perspective. I wish we could entice Sis to join in.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 7232
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby burrrton » Wed Nov 29, 2017 8:08 pm

I had a boss that was terminated for sexual harassment that in years prior had been transferred out of a situation where he was known to be "dipping his pen in company ink."


I had a friend who was fired on the spot when they found out he was having an affair with a coworker. I'm still not even sure what the company violation was (I'm no fan of infidelity, but two consenting adults?).
User avatar
burrrton
Legacy
 
Posts: 2983
Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2013 7:20 am

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby RiverDog » Thu Nov 30, 2017 7:08 am

burrrton wrote:I had a friend who was fired on the spot when they found out he was having an affair with a coworker. I'm still not even sure what the company violation was (I'm no fan of infidelity, but two consenting adults?).


As salaried individuals, we have an unwritten and well understood rule: If you are going to have an affair with a coworker, particularly a subordinate, you had better keep it quiet and not let it affect your job. If even the slightest hint of a conflict of interest arises, you're gone. If you talk to management beforehand, they will try to help, like transfer one of the two to a different department or shift. But management has to keep this unwritten rule tightly framed as a conflict of interest.

It's a sticky situation for management. They cannot act as moral police and prohibit extramarital affairs. Additionally, many, many long term relationships started out as a workplace romance, some starting out as extramarital, and they have to be careful not to violate an individual's rights. They can't tell you not to have a consensual relationship with another adult...although one plant manager I worked for once made a very angry statement in a meeting in which we were debating the subject that "any supervisor that has sex with an hourly employee will be fired", and the meeting was quickly adjourned. Man, if that didn't shake things up!
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 7232
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby Aseahawkfan » Thu Nov 30, 2017 1:50 pm

RiverDog wrote:Yes, it has never been "OK", but they used to take care of it by sweeping it under the carpet...and if a female reported it, she would get blackballed as no one would want to touch her with a 10 foot pole and she would usually end up quitting. I had a boss that was terminated for sexual harassment that in years prior had been transferred out of a situation where he was known to be "dipping his pen in company ink." Not so anymore. They'll fire you on the spot. And on the flip side, I personally know of several women that slept their way to the top, women that after working an 8 hour shift on the factory floor would go to the ladies room and put on their make-up and perfume for the end of shift meeting we had with our big bosses in an obvious attempt to curry favor with them. So IMO women have been guilty of using sex as a tool to use leverage men with.

Anyhow, it's an interesting discussion. We really need a female perspective. I wish we could entice Sis to join in.


I never saw much sexual harassment. I did see gender discrimination a few times where an older male manager did not believe females should be in management positions. He was also a racist. The strange thing was that he was an extremely nice guy even to women and minorities face to face and people in general. When I mean nice, I mean inviting them to his home, taking them out to eat, and generally being a super nice guy. That's why this racism thing can be so strange. In the films, they make racists seem like all around evil people. Yet in real life you can find many racists and sexists that are excellent people in almost every way save for having very wrong beliefs about race and gender. But often those beliefs are coupled with conservative beliefs about helping people in their community and treating women politely and well. That's why I tend to have a different view of racism and sexism, especially when you know it likely derives from socialized beliefs from an older America.

Like you I've seen women that use their attractiveness to their advantage at work. That apparently isn't any kind of crime until the women attracts the attention of a man they don't want to use or don't like the attention from. When guys are giving them gifts, doing their work for them, or generally treating them well, it's all good. The reality is there is no way to perfectly manage or legislate biology and attractive female is always going to attract admirers no matter where they are.
Aseahawkfan
Legacy
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 12:38 am

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby RiverDog » Thu Nov 30, 2017 3:10 pm

Aseahawkfan wrote:I never saw much sexual harassment. I did see gender discrimination a few times where an older male manager did not believe females should be in management positions. He was also a racist. The strange thing was that he was an extremely nice guy even to women and minorities face to face and people in general. When I mean nice, I mean inviting them to his home, taking them out to eat, and generally being a super nice guy. That's why this racism thing can be so strange. In the films, they make racists seem like all around evil people. Yet in real life you can find many racists and sexists that are excellent people in almost every way save for having very wrong beliefs about race and gender. But often those beliefs are coupled with conservative beliefs about helping people in their community and treating women politely and well. That's why I tend to have a different view of racism and sexism, especially when you know it likely derives from socialized beliefs from an older America.

Like you I've seen women that use their attractiveness to their advantage at work. That apparently isn't any kind of crime until the women attracts the attention of a man they don't want to use or don't like the attention from. When guys are giving them gifts, doing their work for them, or generally treating them well, it's all good. The reality is there is no way to perfectly manage or legislate biology and attractive female is always going to attract admirers no matter where they are.


I know exactly what type of person you are talking about regarding your description of the older male manager. My dad possessed similar characteristics back in the 50's and 60's when I was growing up and before he went through a type of metamorphous similar to what happened to George Wallace. The way I think of it is that they were environmental racists, meaning that they were thrust into an environment and grew up with it, acquiring it at a young age but that because their base was kind hearted, it was easier for them to purge vs. someone that had a genuine built in hate, or a genetic racist, such as the modern day skin heads and neo Nazi's that were not thrust into that kind of lifestyle like men raised in the 30's and 40's were.

Out at work this past summer, I had a newly hired relatively young, very attractive and very friendly (but not flirtatious) female working for me as an operator that was not very skilled but very eager to learn and worked extremely hard. As a rule, if a call went out to a mechanic or electrician to come work on a problem on that line, they might get to it in 15-45 minutes, but when they hear her call, they're Johnny-on-the-spot...or rather than sitting in the shop, they'd come up with some PM work on equipment in the area so they'd already be there when a problem occurred. So between the fact that she's so hard working and things get fixed quicker than they normally would, the place runs great. That's stuff they don't teach you in leadership classes.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 7232
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby idhawkman » Fri Dec 01, 2017 6:05 am

My fear is that there will be a backlash on all of this.

When will we see the first male accuse a female of unwanted advances or flirting and state that it was offensive?

When we hit that stage, then how will the human race survive? If men and women can't approach each other to find out their level of interest in the other how will they ever meet in a potential romantic manner?

There are always extremes and the pendelum always swings to the farthest point which is equally far from center as the opposing side. I don't have one ounce of pity or remorse for men who prey on women but I really don't want to see this swing so far back the other way either.

What is "appropriate" when approaching a woman for a man and approaching a man for a woman?
User avatar
idhawkman
Legacy
 
Posts: 455
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2017 7:00 am

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby Aseahawkfan » Fri Dec 01, 2017 1:53 pm

idhawkman wrote:My fear is that there will be a backlash on all of this.

When will we see the first male accuse a female of unwanted advances or flirting and state that it was offensive?

When we hit that stage, then how will the human race survive? If men and women can't approach each other to find out their level of interest in the other how will they ever meet in a potential romantic manner?

There are always extremes and the pendelum always swings to the farthest point which is equally far from center as the opposing side. I don't have one ounce of pity or remorse for men who prey on women but I really don't want to see this swing so far back the other way either.

What is "appropriate" when approaching a woman for a man and approaching a man for a woman?


I think in the work environment legal liability will create an environment where it isn't allowed either way. It should be this way as far as I"m concerned. As a manager I don't like these types of situations as the involve a lot of problems created out of work that are brought to work. People can go find a mate in plenty of other places other than work. Most of the most serious cases brought to light occurred in the work place where this type of behavior is very inappropriate. If I found out about it, I would have went after these individuals like they were criminals and pushed them out as fast as I could. I would never allow a female employee to be treated in such an awful manner at work.
Aseahawkfan
Legacy
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 12:38 am

Re: Sex assault tsunami

Postby idhawkman » Sat Dec 02, 2017 7:15 am

idhawkman wrote:My fear is that there will be a backlash on all of this.

When will we see the first male accuse a female of unwanted advances or flirting and state that it was offensive?

When we hit that stage, then how will the human race survive? If men and women can't approach each other to find out their level of interest in the other how will they ever meet in a potential romantic manner?

There are always extremes and the pendelum always swings to the farthest point which is equally far from center as the opposing side. I don't have one ounce of pity or remorse for men who prey on women but I really don't want to see this swing so far back the other way either.

What is "appropriate" when approaching a woman for a man and approaching a man for a woman?
Aseahawkfan wrote:
I think in the work environment legal liability will create an environment where it isn't allowed either way. It should be this way as far as I"m concerned. As a manager I don't like these types of situations as the involve a lot of problems created out of work that are brought to work. People can go find a mate in plenty of other places other than work.


I hear ya and agree as a manager these were always very tricky issues and from a corporate standpoint you can't allow it because of the liability involved. That said, we are asking people to go against their more basic animalistic instincts (when you think about it, we are animals, too. Just intelligent animals). The work place is the environment that you get most interaction with the opposite sex (men or women). Some relationships start out as just co-workers who work in close proximity every day. Its plutonic and professional. But then you become friends - still plutonic and professional. This is where it becomes dangerous because friends make the best spouses because once the romance wears off, there has to be other reasons to stick it out through the tough times.

No where else do people interact on such a magnitude of time with the opposite sex. Dating sites, nope. Church functions, nope. Bars or hangouts, nope. All of these settings only provide the facade of the person you are dating. The workplace provides so much time that you see the ups, downs, joys, sadness, likes, dislikes, family, etc of that person you work with. Again, I get it. You can't let it turn to romance for employees in the workplace but it will happen. Its instinct. Managers have to watch for these tell tell signs and separate the employees before it gets to that level if at all possible (small business is harder to do this).

Most of the most serious cases brought to light occurred in the work place where this type of behavior is very inappropriate. If I found out about it, I would have went after these individuals like they were criminals and pushed them out as fast as I could. I would never allow a female employee to be treated in such an awful manner at work.

Agree 100%. Sometimes the involvement is one sided and unwanted and therefore inappropriate. Again, it is basic instinct though and not every employee is as an "intelligent" animal as the next person so it will happen. When it happens you have to make examples out of that employee so that the other borderline intelligent employees will know what's in store for them.

Its a very interesting problem. Totally eliminating the behavior in the workplace is a pipedream, though. My fear is that the only place people will be able to meet is in those temporary short term environments which lead to shorter marriages in most cases and throwing kids in the middle of a mess.
User avatar
idhawkman
Legacy
 
Posts: 455
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2017 7:00 am

Previous

Return to Off Topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests