Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Trump's Early Legacy: Victims of Harassment and Assault coming out

Trump's Early Legacy: Victims of Harassment and Assault coming out (Page 2)
Thread Tools
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Nov 20, 2017, 10:54 PM
 
I’m consistently hearing an argument the Thomas-Hill hearings were the big break point, and people who were young or born afterwards have a very different view on harassment and its acceptability.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 21, 2017, 01:18 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I’m arguing the phenomenon has been on a notably ascendant trajectory. I picked up on it about five years ago.
I don't think so, it is just easier to find “amateur” content and there is more of it. Five years ago, news consumption was very different, it was dominated much more by bigger news outlets and now you in addition have (comparatively) small outfits that span the gamut of the political spectrum, and seem to spend a lot of their time talking about each other. I'm thinking about YouTube shows and podcasts here, funded by ads, Patreon subscriptions and sales of paraphernalia.

Just to name one, you have a whole bunch of carrion eaters picking Anita Sarkeesian videos apart, you have people who make their money “debunking” her and then people who debunk the debunkers. When you ask women outside of our circles who Sarkeesian is, most won't have a clue. She isn't a main stream influencer, but is perceived as such by a small pocket of the internet who label her as an SJW.

This flood of content that is not controlled by big news companies allowed for much more diversity, and I mean that in every sense of the word, politically, culturally and in terms gender and race. News that could have been controlled by the big news corporations now flows freely, and there is no way for, say the Roy Moore's of the world to hide.

Let me give you an example: there were demonstrations of man's right's activists in Toronto at the edge of the main campus, and I noticed them at times when I went out to grab lunch. Literally nobody gave a shit, I have never seen counter protestors, I have not noticed anything controversial, just a few guys holding signs, being courteous by not blocking the foot paths (they are Canadians after all!). When you watch YouTube videos, you get the impression that there was a huge problem at these protests, and while I don't claim the videos you see are fabricated, they certainly show only a very, very selective portion of what happened. These videos are made to produce outrage on both sides (including “anti-SJWs”, or should I say “counter-SJWs” or “SUJWs”?). Unfortunately for the men's rights activists, it associates them with people I would not want to be associated with, including people who are openly racist. Conversely, just by that association, some of these views are overlaid on top men's rights activists, who seemed like regular guys. I didn't talk to them in detail, but some of them seemed to have legitimate grievances (e. g. when it came to custody issues).
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 21, 2017, 12:12 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
No worries!

I’m arguing the phenomenon has been on a notably ascendant trajectory. I picked up on it about five years ago.
I think what you're actually alluding to is social media. That's an astute observation but it doesn't create current circumstances in a vacuum. Which leads me back to the impetus: Trump.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 21, 2017, 12:15 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I’m consistently hearing an argument the Thomas-Hill hearings were the big break point, and people who were young or born afterwards have a very different view on harassment and its acceptability.
The Thomas-Hill hearings were the culmination of what I saw as a push in the 80s to tell women they didn't have to tolerate sexual harassment. Unfortunately between that and Bill Clinton, women's bravery didn't exactly pay off.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Nov 21, 2017, 02:20 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
I think what you're actually alluding to is social media. That's an astute observation but it doesn't create current circumstances in a vacuum. Which leads me back to the impetus: Trump.
Now it’s my turn to be dizzy.

Social media is a tool, not an ideology.

Both SJWs and the Alt-Right made/makes use of it, but what captures them mindshare is people being attracted to the message.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 21, 2017, 02:31 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Now it’s my turn to be dizzy.

Social media is a tool, not an ideology.

Both SJWs and the Alt-Right made/makes use of it, but what captures them mindshare is people being attracted to the message.
The point is the ideology has existed since I can remember. But the tool has created an ability to be heard that hasn't existed previous.
     
Snow-i
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 21, 2017, 04:16 PM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
There's a whole lot of irony in your post. Trying to channel CTP's ghost?
What? Simply disagreeing is now enough for you to paint us all with a broad brush?

What I'm channeling here is contempt for hypocritical & holier than thou attitudes. This is the PWL, still, right? Or is it now just another left wing echo chamber?

Trump being a self-proclaimed misogynist, creep, and sexual harasser isn't a partisan view, it's literally the words and stories Trump himself has said and shared.
Which makes sense in the context of all the powerful and bipartisan folks in politics, film, etc are going down for decades of disgusting behavior, that we frame the conversation in the context of Trump.

The assertion was that these literal facts fostered an environment where victims felt compelled to shine some light on their abusers.
So, progress?

Your post, on the other hand, tries to play several purely partisan cards:
This ought to be good.

1. "Both sides are the same." Nowhere in the OP did it claim that the abusers were on one side or the other,
Did you read the Title? The OP is literally titles "Trump's legacy" and the OP is written in the context of Trump's behavior.

I mean, why?

only considered the impact Trump had on the current environment. Also consider the implications of the fact that your best possible response to, "You're a bad person" isn't "No, I'm not," but instead, "Well you're just as bad!"
So what you're telling me is that if Hillary won, these assholes would still be out there in powerful positions and women would still be too scared to come forward?

Really? Else, what does Trump have to do with it?

2. "Hillary is friends with the liberal Hollywood movie stars." Trump was literally in movies, professional wresting, porn, and on TV. You and Chnogo should hang out; you can unironically obsess over the awful sexual abuse scandals in Liberal Hollywood.
Or, more rationally, you could frame the issue objectively without bringing partisan politics into it. That's not this thread, however.

3. "You're being partisan!" Accuse the other side first, get them on the defensive, deflect from the actual conversation. Classic CTP move.
Ah yes, anyone who disagrees must be the enemy. And you wonder why this place has absolutely 0 right wing posters any more? Ya'll are not capable of perspectives that don't jive with yours. That's cool and all because it's a hard thing to do, but you saying "You're CTP!" twice in this post is proving your point in a way I don't think you intend it to.
     
Snow-i
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 21, 2017, 04:23 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Was the OP that hard to parse?
It was perfectly clear.




How am I making it a partisan issue?
By referring to this as "trump's legacy" and framing the conversation in the context of Trump, as if he is some kind of demi god on the issue.

It's been a societal issue for a long ass time and it, quite frankly, has 0 to do with Trump (or at least as much as any man in any position of power). It's like he's your baseline by which everything must be evaluated.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 21, 2017, 08:09 PM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
By referring to this as "trump's legacy" and framing the conversation in the context of Trump, as if he is some kind of demi god on the issue.
He's the President. It's the closest to a demi-god the US has.

Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
It's been a societal issue for a long ass time and it, quite frankly, has 0 to do with Trump (or at least as much as any man in any position of power). It's like he's your baseline by which everything must be evaluated.
It has zero to do with Trump... even though when a lot of women look at Trump they see a 10+ woman accused harasser that was elected to Presidency?

But please, then engage with us productively. What do you think has triggered the sudden reversal in fortunes for powerful harassers?
     
Waragainstsleep
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 21, 2017, 10:02 PM
 
Chelsea Handler said on Real Time the other night she thought this sexual harassment backlash was all about Trump. I'm still not convinced and its not because I don't want to give him credit. If you can call it credit.

I think if it was about Trump it would have started immediately after the election. He won despite the "pussy grabbing" tape and the pageant allegations among others. Maybe women were so certain that would be his downfall they didn't start speaking out during the election campaign, I could see that as an argument but I think they would have started speaking up right away afterwards if that was really their catalyst. Weinstein is the first domino for me. Trump may have greased a few wheels when it came to gaining some momentum, but I think its purely down to the first few accusers of Weinstein who for whatever reason decided enough was enough. Who was first was it Rose McGowan?
Maybe someone should ask her if it was about Trump or not.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:41 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,