CriedWhenBrucieLeft
Meme Only Account
Is that a question or statement?
USA Politics
- Thread starter Genghis Khan
- Start date
RTC
Libera et impera!
People express themselves in different ways. People also are more willing to be honest about certain things. We've all had fleeting thoughts about doing these sorts of things, but so long as threats aren't made, or there are no attempts to act upon them, I think it's harmless. Trump toed the line, but I wouldn't say he crossed it in this instance, seeing as it was a private chat and not a political matter.
Here's an example of this kind of thing actually being much more controversial, despite seeming much less offensive:
No it's not. It might be an alien construct to you, but to call it wrong seems pretty elitist.
It tells you a lot about his character if he openly says things like that to other people, whether in private or not. It tells you especially much about his character if you consider that he wasn't 20, but 60 when he made those comments. That's no longer an age when "lad banter" is all that innocent anymore. And assessing his character is important, because he wants to be made president of the US.
RTC
Libera et impera!
Banter, by its very definition, is innocent. There is no certain age where you draw the line and say "Oh, he's not just showing off and behaving like a jock, he actually wants to grope women". You are holding someone to these standards in a private conversation with cohorts. It's a stupid thing to say, but the character assassination that has occurred over this is so ridiculously over-the-top that it makes me wonder how entertaining our world would be if everyone was held to such high standards. At the end of the day, both Trump and Hillary are human, and a defining characteristic of humanity is human error, which we all suffer from. I understand Trump is in the running for being the most powerful man in the world, and thus, should be held to a higher standard, but private conversations with cohorts from 10 years ago should be irrelevant for our judgement of him, as people are much different depending on their environment and situation.
There are much better reasons to attack Trump than this.
Not denying it won't hurt Trump, I just think it's been blown out of proportion.
And I would never vote Trump. I'd probably begrudgingly vote Hillary, despite her being a terrible Democrat candidate.
Dr. Eddies Wingman
Brighter than thousand_suns
Also when they only serve to confirm the image many people have of him, based on much more recent behaviour?
The thing is, this video doesn't really reveal anything new about Trump's way of being - except for the fact that this happened the same year he married his current wife, and he was hitting on a woman who was also married.
In France he'd probably get away with that. In the USA, and running as the Republican candidate at a time where the Christian conservatives have more influence than they've had for quite some time?
RTC
Libera et impera!
I don't know where you're getting the Christian conservatives having more of a influence thing from here. If it's a comment on the alt-right, the internet portion of 4 and 8chan tend to be atheist/agnostic. None of them are die-hard bible worshippers or fundamentalists anyhow, primarily because they realise how ridiculous religious fundamentalism is from their critiques of Islam, even if is a hatred that goes too far and extends to Muslims as people.
Seems an incredibly weak straw broke the back then, considering there are much better things to attack him for.
Dr. Eddies Wingman
Brighter than thousand_suns
No, I'm saying that it seems like any Republican candidate is more dependent on support from the Christian conservatives than before. The last few campaigns seem to indicate it (but I am not that old, I don't know how it was when Reagan or Bush Sr. were elected).
I didn't mean to refer to the alt-right at all.
I didn't mean to refer to the alt-right at all.
That's what the idiom "straw that broke the camel's back" means. A small, by comparison insignificant thing that however comes after heaps and heaps of in your words better things that have a cumulative effect. A camel's back isn't broken by a single straw, but by a large mass that accumulates to a weight the camel can no longer bear. The image describes a single straw that adds just a tiny little bit of weight to what is already burdening the camel, and that is then just the tiny little amount more than a camel can carry, and therefore it breaks down.
Given that old-style 'family values' and morals are often valued by Republican supporters, Trump has shat all over what he's supposed to be representing.
"Lad banter" is not an alien construct to me. Believe it or not, I am or have been at one point in the past, a lad. I have said many things about women that are meant to bullshit and that are meant to strut masculinity.
What I am saying is that this sort of hypermasculine nonsense is poisonous and telling about someone's attitudes towards women. Not that it is illegal. There's a huge difference between someone commenting that person X is attractive, or even saying, "Man, she's fuckin' hot," and indicating that their consent is irrelevant. What Trump said is that he just kisses a woman if he wants her. And it's OK because he's famous. It's so disgusting it makes my skin crawl.
If we had audio of any other man saying the same things, it would be just as unacceptable. It would be unacceptable from a football player, or from a hockey player. It would be unacceptable from a preacher, or from a soldier, or from a race car driver. And if someone said that to me, I'd definitely tell them they're fucking insane.
But. Maybe we should ask some of the women here what they think about Trump's comment and that style of "lad banter", and see how it makes them feel.
Albie
Keeping an open eye on the Weeping Angels.
This whole Trump thing is one of the many reasons why I believe that everyone should be allowed to speak as freely as they want. Once you start imposing restrictions on speech, people start to self-censor leading to everyone else not really knowing what that person is really like. We have found from this that we can deduce once again that Trump is a prat.
This is pretty much the short of it. "lad banter" arguments aside, it's fair for these things to be taken into consideration when this guy has a chance at being the leader of one of the most powerful nations in the world.
If you were applying for a job and they came across a similar video for you during the background check, would they be right not to hire you? It's the same thing here.
RTC
Libera et impera!
I think those people are starting to disappear gradually. There are still sects of them, but they are much less prominent than they were in the days of Reagan and Bush Sr. The older generations are dying out, and people are becoming more progressive.
I understand what the idiom means, but I don't think this is necessarily one where the past straws really factor into it. If Trump said it without a previous track record of being outspoken, there would be a lot more shock and awe than there is now still. As it stands, it's really just another Trump moment.
Oh, I'm not going to deny it cuts both ways, Benghazi in particular is pathetic by the Republicans. But I'm saying we shouldn't stoop to those lows.
Donald Trump's situation is a lot different from you and I. Due to his fame and fortune, he consistently gets a lot of women making moves on him and actually consenting to the kind of things he's talking about. It's a disconnect from what you and I are used to, but it happens a lot more to Trump because of his environment, and so, he's not as used to women saying no. That doesn't mean that Trump wouldn't understand the meaning of no, just that it would be unusual to him. It's naive and stupid, but not indicative of someone's capability to run a country.
I wouldn't say it would be unacceptable. I'd find it shallow and pretty degrading, but not unacceptable to the point of pure uproar. If you've seen Bojack Horseman, one of the things the protagonist has to go through is the impossibly high standards of being a celebrity. It's even worse when you're running for presidency. Yes, presidency requires a lot more responsibility than average, but let's not over-react to this. My point is, we all do stupid shit, but it flies under the radar because it's private, and we're not under constant scrutiny.
RTC
Libera et impera!
1: We've established this was not a malicious pre-meditation of sexual assault.
2: I think we agree it's a low, but I don't think it's a low in the political sense. This isn't within the spirit of politics. It's the same populist rhetoric Trump uses against others being used against him. Smart by the Democrats to use it to their advantage though.
The Flash
Dennis Wilcock did 9/11
I think Trump deserves the criticism for being a scumbag, but not the ones that accuse him of trying to condone sexual assault.
The way I view the tape is him being overconfident and bragadocious, which is not inconsistent with his personality. He thinks women just want him naturally, no matter what he does. He most likely is also making things up in the heat of the moment, which also isn't inconsistent with his personality.
The way I view the tape is him being overconfident and bragadocious, which is not inconsistent with his personality. He thinks women just want him naturally, no matter what he does. He most likely is also making things up in the heat of the moment, which also isn't inconsistent with his personality.