Tidal wave of sexual assault-misconduct allegations list

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Once again we see Chap's inability to stick to the discussion at hand, and completely goes off the rails with his mental illness -> a.k.a., social Marxism.

He keeps lighting brush fires because he's so mired in ideology that words have no meaning, there's nothing of value except socialism, and anything that might resist being used to implement his economic slavery is to be assumed an enemy.

If Chap is an example of the lawless, value-less, ambiguous state of social Marxism then I urge people to reassess their political views.

- Doc

[_Chap]

Once again we see Chap's inability to stick to the discussion at hand, and completely goes off the rails with his mental illness -> a.k.a., social Marxism.

He keeps lighting brush fires because he's so mired in ideology that words have no meaning, there's nothing of value except socialism, and anything that might resist being used to implement his economic slavery is to be assumed an enemy.

If Chap is an example of the lawless, value-less, ambiguous state of social Marxism then I urge people to reassess their political views.

- Doc

At this stage, I am hoping quite fervently that DrC is a troll, looking for a way to wind us all up.

Otherwise I can make no sense out of his continual assertions that I am advocating Marxism, socialism, economic slavery, and so on and so forth.

Earlier in this thread I summed up my position as follows:

viewtopic.php?p=1100504#p1100504

Can anyone see where I am advocating "Marxism, socialism, [and] economic slavery" here?

Here's my position:

It seems clear to me that the amount of unreported, unpunished, and relatively serious sexual molestation of woman by men has historically been rather large. Changing this very unjust situation will have costs for men as a gender: mainly, I think, through guilty men getting called out on their behaviour, and other men modifying their behaviour, but also, sadly, through a small number of innocent men getting unjustly accused.

The idea that we have to leave things as they were until we can think of a way of redressing the huge injustice done to women without risk of any deleterious consequences to men is not acceptable. It's time to change, and it's been time to change for a long long time already, without anything much being done about it.

And

Were we were (and stayed for centuries) was very dangerous indeed for women. Men could be as irresponsible as they liked, and there was little risk of a penalty, especially if they chose their victims with a little care.

The present situation is more dangerous than it used to be for men.

I agree that society must do what it can to reduce the risk to the innocent - but in ways that do not amount, in effect, to saying 'Let's just go back to the way things were.'

[_Lemmie]

Example: The bank worker who ejaculated into a co-workers drink bottle without her knowing, twice, and she drank it. After the second time, she assumed her water tasted strange for one reason, and had her boyfriend ejaculate into a water bottle to see if her suspicion was right.

The banker "admitted in a taped interview that he ejaculated into an 'attractive' co-worker’s water bottle because 'her lips had touched it.'"

I find it disturbing that DT is asking for a hard legally defined rule describing sexual harassment so he can figure out where the line is at work, and he's being virtually excoriated by people who can't be bothered to offer one, but instead provide examples of a man ejaculating into sippy cups as the 'standard' of behavior....

- Doc

This is getting ridiculous, Doc. You know full well that what you quote as "example" above is actually from Doubting Thomas' source, and that Chap referred to it this way:

The example of sexual harassment given by the source you [doubting Thomas] quote was:

Please, I know the opinions are going strong, but when you resort to mentalgymnast tactics by mis-quoting an excerpt like the above, and then excoriating the poster based on YOUR incorrect use of the excerpt, you lose a lot of credibility.

[Guest]

Lemmie,

Isn't DT just asking for a hard and fast rule on sexual harassment? That's how I take what he's getting at.

Look. I'm all for a professional working environment. I've stated it on multiple occasions. However, this mob mentality and extrajudicial punishment as a result of the #metoo campaign is a very, very slippery slope. I'm uncomfortable with people having real-world results based off allegations. Hence, the reason why I've suggested, on multiple occasions, that the accusers use the legal system as a means to achieve justice.

- Doc

[_Lemmie]

Lemmie,

Isn't DT just asking for a hard and fast rule on sexual harassment? That's how I take what he's getting at.

Look. I'm all for a professional working environment. I've stated it on multiple occasions. However, this mob mentality and extrajudicial punishment as a result of the #metoo campaign in a very, very slippery slope. I'm uncomfortable with people having real-world results based off allegations. Hence, the reason why I've suggested, on multiple occasions, that the accusers use the legal system as a means to achieve justice.

- Doc

I assume you are responding to my last post. What does any of the above have to do with your misquote of Chap?

If you meant it to be, then no, I don't see how misquoting Chap addresses DT's question. Both EA and Chap gave DT substantive answers.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Chap literally used that example as an example to further along his point that if I don't agree with his support of extrajudicial punishment based off alegations alone that somehow I'm ok with men jacking off into sippy cups.

We all extrapolate intent from what's posted, Lemmie. That said, I'll be more mindful of the quotation feature because being lumped in with MG is as distasteful as drinking from an ejaculate-filled sippy cup.

- Doc

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Also, at any point anyone is free to ask me pointed questions that I'm more than happy to answer rather than inferring something or placing a narrative on my POV that most likely isn't the case.

- Doc

[_Lemmie]

Chap literally used that example as an example to further along his point that if I don't agree with his support of extrajudicial punishment based off alegations alone that somehow I'm ok with men jacking off into sippy cups.

We all extrapolate intent from what's posted, Lemmie. That said, I'll be more mindful of the quotation feature because being lumped in with MG is as distasteful as drinking from an ejaculate-filled sippy cup.


- Doc

lol. He literally did not.

Also, at any point anyone is free to ask me pointed questions that I'm more than happy to answer rather than inferring something or placing a narrative on my POV that most likely isn't the case.

- Doc

lol again. You just finished saying we all extrapolate intent. No one should try that on you, though?

Peace, Doc. I'm not trying to start anything.

I'll be more mindful of the quotation feature because being lumped in with MG is as distasteful as drinking from an ejaculate-filled sippy cup.

Now THAT'S a New Year's Resolution!!!!!

Merry Christmas!

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

You're my fav, Lemmie. You can bring the heat anytime. I'm cool with it. Merry xmas to you, too.

- Doc

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Anyway. Getting back on topic after Chap's endless trolling and derails...

Accused - Vice Media Execituves, fostering hostile working environment

Accusers - more than TWO DOZEN women, current and former employees

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/23/busi ... sment.html

Vice is a very Liberal nu media organization. Once again we see supposed Progressive Liberal males objectifying women, according to the accusers.

Sick. Yuck. Nauseating?

I'm starting to think you can't believe anything a 'progressive' male says on gender equality and gender respect. Most of them seem to be perverted degenerates.

- Doc