Serious PC thread

[Federberg]

Wow! Kevin Spacey found not guilty of all 4 charges in the UK. I assume there's more for him to go thru in the US. But it's not a good sign for MeToo.

 

[tented]

Wow! Kevin Spacey found not guilty of all 4 charges in the UK. I assume there's more for him to go thru in the US. But it's not a good sign for MeToo.

Kevin Spacey cleared of sexually assaulting four men

Some of these sexual assault allegations — especially those based on events from years, if not decades, ago — do seem questionable. “Money, money, and then money” as Spacey put it. Which is NOT to say they’re all lies. I have zero doubts about Harvey Weinstein and others, for example, and can absolutely believe Spacey has done some shady things, yet some of these cases do seem financially motivated.

 

[Federberg]

Kevin Spacey cleared of sexually assaulting four men

Some of these sexual assault allegations — especially those based on events from years, if not decades, ago — do seem questionable. “Money, money, and then money” as Spacey put it. Which is NOT to say they’re all lies. I have zero doubts about Harvey Weinstein and others, for example, and can absolutely believe Spacey has done some shady things, yet some of these cases do seem financially motivated.

there needs to be a balance. Consequences for any allegations that are demonstrably false. It is simply not a good thing that a person can be destroyed now by unsubstantiated rumour.
And this might be controversial... but fuck it... accusers should not be allowed to hide behind anonymity anymore. Victimhood is such powerful currency in this era, I honestly don't see the benefit anymore. Too many people seem to be willing to use it as cover to falsely accuse and destroy others

 

[tented]

there needs to be a balance. Consequences for any allegations that are demonstrably false. It is simply not a good thing that a person can be destroyed now by unsubstantiated rumour.
And this might be controversial... but fuck it... accusers should not be allowed to hide behind anonymity anymore. Victimhood is such powerful currency in this era, I honestly don't see the benefit anymore. Too many people seem to be willing to use it as cover to falsely accuse and destroy others

I agree with all of this — if I came across as implying otherwise, that was my mistake.

 

[Federberg]

I agree with all of this — if I came across as implying otherwise, that was my mistake.

no you didn't imply otherwise in my view.

I was just trying to go a bit further. I felt it needed to be emphasised. The whole world has gone nuts. My stridency was inspired by a friend of mines response to the Spacey news. He opined that there must be some smoke in there somewhere. I found that view infuriating and depressing. Basically once you're tainted with an accusation then what... the stink should follow you for the rest of your life? What's the value in being proven innocent then?

 

[Kieran]

no you didn't imply otherwise in my view.

I was just trying to go a bit further. I felt it needed to be emphasised. The whole world has gone nuts. My stridency was inspired by a friend of mines response to the Spacey news. He opined that there must be some smoke in there somewhere. I found that view infuriating and depressing. Basically once you're tainted with an accusation then what... the stink should follow you for the rest of your life? What's the value in being proven innocent then?

Bob Dylan recently had a woman accuse him of abusing her when she was a child. He tied her up in a room in the Chelsea Hotel and sexually used her for 6 weeks in1965, she said. No corroboration whatsoever. Just an accusation. He was in London at the time, touring and making a film of the tour, then immediately he went to Portugal to get married.

The whole thing was a shakedown. She had dodgy lawyers who dismissed the fact that he wasn’t there as irrelevant: they were going to court. But really? They were hoping he’d pay them off so he could avoid bad publicity. They didn’t know Dylan. He ignored them after he’d made his initial denial and it went before a judge who threw it out.

I think celebrities get so many of these shady attempts to gain coinage, and some of them pay off their accusers. There really needs to be a law where an accuser can be dragged through the courts when it becomes obvious that there’s no substance to their allegations…

 

[Federberg]

Bob Dylan recently had a woman accuse him of abusing her when she was a child. He tied her up in a room in the Chelsea Hotel and sexually used her for 6 weeks in1965, she said. No corroboration whatsoever. Just an accusation. He was in London at the time, touring and making a film of the tour, then immediately he went to Portugal to get married.

The whole thing was a shakedown. She had dodgy lawyers who dismissed the fact that he wasn’t there as irrelevant: they were going to court. But really? They were hoping he’d pay them off so he could avoid bad publicity. They didn’t know Dylan. He ignored them after he’d made his initial denial and it went before a judge who threw it out.

I think celebrities get so many of these shady attempts to gain coinage, and some of them pay off their accusers. There really needs to be a law where an accuser can be dragged through the courts when it becomes obvious that there’s no substance to their allegations…

1000%

 

[Federberg]

Friend of mine who was in a relationship for years, but who's wife divorced him 6 months after he finally married her, sent me this video. Thought he was a just in his anti-feminist feelings, but actually it's an interesting listen...

 

[tented]

Friend of mine who was in a relationship for years, but who's wife divorced him 6 months after he finally married her, sent me this video. Thought he was a just in his anti-feminist feelings, but actually it's an interesting listen...

I don’t think anyone involved in the following incident will read this, but I’m going to be somewhat vague about the details nevertheless:

I have a nephew who went on a date a few years ago, while in college. They got drunk, went back to his dorm room, had sex, then she went back to her dorm room the following morning. She told her roommate what had happened, who took it upon herself to make the determination that her roommate had been raped, then filed reports with campus and local police, who then began the process of investigating him as an accused rapist.

He got lucky: the woman he went on the date with never confirmed her roommate’s interpretation of the events, didn’t press charges herself, and refused to take part in anything which would have made him seem guilty. Yet, the campus and local police went forward with their investigations based on secondhand knowledge of an event which the two participants said didn’t happen. That was the scariest part of the whole thing, IMO.

It took nearly a year to clear him, but the accusations stuck, so he was treated miserably the rest of his time in college. (He refused to transfer to a different university because he knew he was innocent, and didn’t want to start over in another location.)

It still bothers me to think about it, even though this happened years ago, because of the way his name and reputation were so unfairly sullied, even after being cleared of the charges. I don’t think anything ever happened to the roommate who started all of this, either, even though she was proved wrong. Very frustrating.

 

[Kieran]

I don’t think anyone involved in the following incident will read this, but I’m going to be somewhat vague about the details nevertheless:

I have a nephew who went on a date a few years ago, while in college. They got drunk, went back to his dorm room, had sex, then she went back to her dorm room the following morning. She told her roommate what had happened, who took it upon herself to make the determination that her roommate had been raped, then filed reports with campus and local police, who then began the process of investigating him as an accused rapist.

He got lucky: the woman he went on the date with never confirmed her roommate’s interpretation of the events, didn’t press charges herself, and refused to take part in anything which would have made him seem guilty. Yet, the campus and local police went forward with their investigations based on secondhand knowledge of an event which the two participants said didn’t happen. That was the scariest part of the whole thing, IMO.

It took nearly a year to clear him, but the accusations stuck, so he was treated miserably the rest of his time in college. (He refused to transfer to a different university because he knew he was innocent, and didn’t want to start over in another location.)

It still bothers me to think about it, even though this happened years ago, because of the way his name and reputation were so unfairly sullied, even after being cleared of the charges. I don’t think anything ever happened to the roommate who started all of this, either, even though she was proved wrong. Very frustrating.

That’s shocking! The whole lot of it but especially the roommate. Lucky for her they didn’t take joint actions against her. That was purely malicious!

 

[Federberg]

I don’t think anyone involved in the following incident will read this, but I’m going to be somewhat vague about the details nevertheless:

I have a nephew who went on a date a few years ago, while in college. They got drunk, went back to his dorm room, had sex, then she went back to her dorm room the following morning. She told her roommate what had happened, who took it upon herself to make the determination that her roommate had been raped, then filed reports with campus and local police, who then began the process of investigating him as an accused rapist.

He got lucky: the woman he went on the date with never confirmed her roommate’s interpretation of the events, didn’t press charges herself, and refused to take part in anything which would have made him seem guilty. Yet, the campus and local police went forward with their investigations based on secondhand knowledge of an event which the two participants said didn’t happen. That was the scariest part of the whole thing, IMO.

It took nearly a year to clear him, but the accusations stuck, so he was treated miserably the rest of his time in college. (He refused to transfer to a different university because he knew he was innocent, and didn’t want to start over in another location.)

It still bothers me to think about it, even though this happened years ago, because of the way his name and reputation were so unfairly sullied, even after being cleared of the charges. I don’t think anything ever happened to the roommate who started all of this, either, even though she was proved wrong. Very frustrating.

it's utterly terrifying mate. That's not the first time I've heard of something like that.

I recall a few years back (and I think I've mentioned these stats before) hearing from someone in the field... that women are just as violent in relationships as men, but the narrative is that men are the violent gender. Granted our greater physical strength makes us less likely to be harmed, and more likely to cause harm. But both genders are violent. I will say this though.. I've never raised my hand against a woman (in fact apart from once in a bar in Tokyo, I haven't raised my hand against anyone as an adult), but some of the things that ex-girlfriends have said to me to try to provoke a reaction.... Let's just say that if men said things like that to other men... there would be blood. I say this, to add (what some will say is controversial) that sometimes women say things so evil - to get a reaction - that, if the truth were known perhaps some of the violence that men perpetrate would be excused

It's particularly delicious that we are now getting more and more information about lesbian relationships and the level of violence is amazing. But you wouldn't hear it from the MSM. Sad...

 

[Federberg]

Ok wtf is 2SLGBTQI+?? And where are all these rights that are being attacked??

 

[tented]

Ok wtf is 2SLGBTQI+?? And where are all these rights that are being attacked??

From Wikipedia:

”In Canada especially, the term 2SLGBTQ+ is seen, with the first two characters standing for Two-spirit; the whole term stands for two-spirit, lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer and questioning, and is intended as a term encompassing all sexual- and gender-minorities. For some indigenous people, two-spirit invokes a combination of identities, including sexual, gender, cultural, and spiritual.”

Two spirit —

 

[Kieran]

Ok wtf is 2SLGBTQI+?? And where are all these rights that are being attacked??

Doesn't he look like a comedian trying to keep a straight face when he tells a joke? He’s an evil empty headed POS…

 

[Federberg]

From Wikipedia:

”In Canada especially, the term 2SLGBTQ+ is seen, with the first two characters standing for Two-spirit; the whole term stands for two-spirit, lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer and questioning, and is intended as a term encompassing all sexual- and gender-minorities. For some indigenous people, two-spirit invokes a combination of identities, including sexual, gender, cultural, and spiritual.”

Two spirit —

two spirit... we're officially off the reservation now!

 

[Federberg]

wow...

I'm ashamed of myself. I actually watched that First Take clip at the time. And I bought what they were selling. There's fake news in sports as well Whether it's feminism or racism, listen carefully, don't pre-judge. The woke-istas lie like mofos too...

 

[Federberg]

Not sure I can refute anything he says. Would love to hear the refutation if anyone can find it

 

[Federberg]

my mind is blown. Haven't had a chance today to find out any more about this. I'll investigate when I have time. But thought others would be intrigued. A turning point perhaps?

 

[Federberg]

I think it's worth expanding on a comment @Moxie made on the US Politics Thread, which to me is emblematic of the great socio-political divide...

I would argue that many groups would feel they don't have to be "told" they're oppressed to know it.

I can't tell you how profoundly wrong that type of thinking is. Arbitrary definitions of groups mean nothing in the real world. And human beings are far too diverse of thought, for anyone to believe that they are a monolith, and that individuals within are of one thought or sensibility. However much those who support identity politics would like to think so, those assigned to a group are individuals with individual characters. I shouldn't have to quote MLK's sentence about the 'content of your character', but somewhere along the way, those who would claim to be his spiritual/political descendants have strayed so far away it's like the difference between Abraham Lincoln's GOP and the modern day incarnation.

Consider the following examples...

Peter Thiel

Peter Thiel Shows Us There's a Difference Between Gay Sex and Gay

When you abandon numerous aspects of queer identity, are you still LGBT?

www.advocate.com

Kanye West

I’m Not Black, I’m Kanye

Kanye West wants freedom—white freedom.

www.theatlantic.com

Germaine Greer

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/09612029300200036

What do these 3 very different individuals have in common? They all belong to identity groups, that have tremendously noisy political power - gay, black, feminist. But each strayed from the orthodoxy, and did or said things that were extremely controversial, if not downright disagreeable. And in each case prominent constituents of the groups to which they belong, and please forgive my use of the word 'belong' because I'm not sure that anyone of them would particularly define themselves as part of these groups (perhaps Greer would have at one point). But observationally we can all agree they fit in definitionally into those categories. Group advocates, or self assigned leaders, berate them and even question their right to be considered part of the groups. This is the problem! These identity groups are not monoliths. They are not political entities. But this is the world we live in now.

Who the hell died and gave The Advocate the authority to say Peter Thiel is not gay because of his political beliefs?

Who said Nahisi-Coates has the right to define blackness?

What are we doing here? Am I the only one who sees how absurd this all is? I hope not...

And so... NO! groups are not monoliths. They can't be told anything. One individual might feel oppressed, but the other might not. And just because there are some loud mouthed progressives who think they can speak on behalf of 'black people' or 'gay men' or feminists. It means NOTHING! Get back to me when there's been a vote within those groups. Then I might take it seriously...

 

[Kieran]

I think it's worth expanding on a comment @Moxie made on the US Politics Thread, which to me is emblematic of the great socio-political divide...

I would argue that many groups would feel they don't have to be "told" they're oppressed to know it.

I can't tell you how profoundly wrong that type of thinking is. Arbitrary definitions of groups mean nothing in the real world. And human beings are far too diverse of thought, for anyone to believe that they are a monolith, and that individuals within are of one thought or sensibility. However much those who support identity politics would like to think so, those assigned to a group are individuals with individual characters. I shouldn't have to quote MLK's sentence about the 'content of your character', but somewhere along the way, those who would claim to be his spiritual/political descendants have strayed so far away it's like the difference between Abraham Lincoln's GOP and the modern day incarnation.

Consider the following examples...

Peter Thiel

Peter Thiel Shows Us There's a Difference Between Gay Sex and Gay

When you abandon numerous aspects of queer identity, are you still LGBT?

www.advocate.com

Kanye West

I’m Not Black, I’m Kanye

Kanye West wants freedom—white freedom.

www.theatlantic.com

Germaine Greer

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/09612029300200036

What do these 3 very different individuals have in common? They all belong to identity groups, that have tremendously noisy political power - gay, black, feminist. But each strayed from the orthodoxy, and did or said things that were extremely controversial, if not downright disagreeable. And in each case prominent constituents of the groups to which they belong, and please forgive my use of the word 'belong' because I'm not sure that anyone of them would particularly define themselves as part of these groups (perhaps Greer would have at one point). But observationally we can all agree they fit in definitionally into those categories. Group advocates, or self assigned leaders, berate them and even question their right to be considered part of the groups. This is the problem! These identity groups are not monoliths. They are not political entities. But this is the world we live in now.

Who the hell died and gave The Advocate the authority to say Peter Thiel is not gay because of his political beliefs?

Who said Nahisi-Coates has the right to define blackness?

What are we doing here? Am I the only one who sees how absurd this all is? I hope not...

And so... NO! groups are not monoliths. They can't be told anything. One individual might feel oppressed, but the other might not. And just because there are some loud mouthed progressives who think they can speak on behalf of 'black people' or 'gay men' or feminists. It means NOTHING! Get back to me when there's been a vote within those groups. Then I might take it seriously...

You’ve touched on the predicament there for people who think in group identities. Firstly, they’ll dismiss any critique of this as a conspiracy theory, because they won’t like this mess to be critiqued. But from within the identitarian cults there will be a mass posture of denial when it comes to renegades. What to do with them? Disagree and move on? Ostracise them? Or deny them the right to think differently?

Or do you deny their very existence as a member of a group by denying their gayness, their blackness, their views as a woman?

Joe Biden made a meme out of this when he told black voters that if they don’t vote for him, “You ain’t black.” Now how is the American president allowed to be a declared racist and still be considered to be good? Because white liberals don’t criticise their own bad eggs. You can be homophobic once you’ve established your bona fides with the LGBTQFUCKUWTF+=- community. Meaning that if you accept the false religions of intersectionality, patriarchy, whiteness, BLM, Stonewall, gender studies and so on - if you preach in favour of these - you can be homophobic against actual gay people who don’t.

You can be racist against blacks who don’t vote Joe. And Joe has shown you why.

Groups are told they’re victims. Black people are like cuddly pet poodles to American liberals. They pat them on the head and throw them a bone. They like to keep them needing that bone. Confused kids are a cause worth killing for, to smug coastal enclaves. What matters in these things isn’t your sexuality, your identity or your colour - it’s your usefulness that matters…