i understand and agree that he is unamerican in the sense of the "american ideal" but outside looking in, he is a completely typical product of american culture. he's reality TV, fame for fame's sake, wealthy without working, a hustler, the ideal jerry springer guest, the ideal wrestling guest, the son of racist nepotism, performative altruism (and then defrauds his own charities), he pathologically cannot accept being wrong/defers all fault to anyone else ("whatever, i do what i want"), he's weaponized ignorance, he's "hilariously" rapey, he's illiterate, a proud philistine, he's vapid pageantry, he's a christian who know nothing of religion/spirituality, he's 4chan, he's 8chan, he's tacky style with complete lack of substance, he's the personification of "fake it 'till you make it". these are all lessons i've seen repeated ad nauseam from american TV, films, music, podcasts, youtube stars, etc. to the point where they're past cliché that they're now entrenched americana.

i know that isn't the typical american but that is the most typical american america has sold to itself and the rest of the world.

Already said everything I need to on Rand

Being held accountable for what we do is a good thing, but ignoring degrees and distinctions can turn it bad.

Weinstein out of a position of power, out of a job, and quite possibly into jail: good. Deserved, and sends an important message to those that might want to abuse their power in similar ways in the future. Precedent set -- however things worked before, we won't stand for that shit anymore.

Louis CK out of favor, and on record for doing creepy things which reduces opportunity to continue doing said creepy things. Also removed from positions where he could exert pressure to "consent" to said creepery where consent likely wouldn't be granted if the threat of job repercussions wasn't implied or patently stated. Again, good outcome -- in my opinion including the fact that he likely won't face criminal charges while Weinstein may.


Franken, on the other hand, was held accountable for actions in a way that I found troublesome for two reasons:

1) He was under scrutiny for past actions, yet placed under the judgement of current (bleeding edge current, even) behavioral standards. That is trending towards ex-post-facto law. I can't pass a law in December making it illegal to wear white shirts, then throw you in jail for having worn a white shirt in November before the law was in effect.

It isn't the same thing because sexual harassment has been illegal all along, and because he wasn't really facing legal trouble, just professional / political trouble -- where "ex-post-facto" judgments aren't prohibited. Still, it seems like when standards change we should try to limit judgement under current standards to current behavior. There's a reason why it works that way in law.


2) Furthermore, a lot of the scrutiny Franken was under completely stripped the behavior from context. Context is extremely important. That's why Weinstein "asking" women to "consent" to his rapey behavior wasn't OK, even though asking for consent is sort of the baseline "good"/expected behavior -- they weren't actually completely free to tell him to shove it.

Ignoring the context of Franken's behavior means that it is immaterial that he was working for the USO at the time, where on-stage suggestive stuff and raunchiness was/is pretty much the whole idea. Immaterial that on-stage "groping and kissing" stuff may well have been scripted as such, and basically consented to by the actors -- part of the show.

Combine that with ignoring degrees of offense, and we're listing Franken's name in the same sentence with Louis CK and Harvey Weinstein, which is ridiculous. Franken "had to" be a sacrificial lamb to demonstrate that Democrats are willing to walk the walk as well as talk the talk on this issue -- but did he really?

If more Democrats were willing to "tell it like it is", as I'd argue Maher is doing here, Franken could have said that the photo where he mimed groping a sleeping Karri Turner was a mistake, a joke in poor taste done in the context of an entire tour that seems in poor taste by modern standards, and that could have been the end of it. He could still be in office, and the Democrat party at large would have been better off, as would the net balance in Congress with regards to women's issues.

But nope. Context, distinction, and degrees are all meaningless, so Franken's name is in that same list of dirty sleazeball asshole men, no asterisks or footnotes necessary. I don't think the outcome of that game goes in a favorable direction.

@Payback, @newtboy you're missing the point.

It doesn't matter if rape is worse than groping... we need to start drilling into people that neither is acceptable.

The sentence for these crimes is different and that's correct. (So no, a shoplifter isn't Bernie Madoff)

But as far as I know, none of the accused has been sentenced to anything.

But public shaming as a minimum? I'm fine with that.

And Aziz Ansari doesn't deny what happened, he's just "sorry she feels that way".

"Does this go both ways? If a man has a bad date, or bad sex..."
There's a difference between bad sex and being pressured into sex. Even if it's not rape, it's still not cool.

"I hope that girl you had a bad date with in high school doesn't come back to show you the error of your position by adding your name to the "me too" list, destroying your career, family life, and future with no recourse to prove your innocence...all because she didn't orgasm.....but I do hope you see the error."

If she came back said I was crap in bed, I would probably shrug and say "hey I was a teenage boy, they're all crap at sex". If she said, I pressured her into sex, I would deny it vigorously.

"Being weird is the same as being a rapist?!? Jesus fucking Christ, I always thought you were rational. "
Come on, newt, you know that's not what I said. I said "stop being weird, gropey or rapey". If I said "stop eating bacon, doughnuts or sugar", would you think I meant that bacon, doughnuts and sugar are the same?

First, I like weird people on a day to day basis. Second, there's nothing wrong with consensual weirdness.

But in context, it's pretty clear what I was talking about. But if you must have it spelt out, don't
- force people to watch you masturbate
- meet people (especially younger members of the opposite sex that work for you) in a dressing gown in your hotel room
- make sexually explicit remarks to strangers

But to reiterate, yes, there are degrees of violation. Rape is worse than groping and groping is worse than exposure. There, happy now?

Now that we're all agreed on that, can we focus on stopping the problem instead of this pointless grading of offences?

This really isn't difficult. If you can't tell whether another person is enthusiastic about sexual activity with you... maybe relationships aren't for you.

Good points Bill.

Next time I'm breaking some dudes leg with a baseball bat, I'll be sure to remind him that he's not being murdered.

But hey, congrats on one thing. I was kinda unsure about Sam Bee's video until I saw this... now I'm 100% behind her.

So let me mansplain the fuck outta this.
Yes, rape is worse than groping.
No, no one gives a fuck about your opinion.
Yes, some drugs fuck you up more than others.
No, that analogy doesn't fucking apply here.

Honestly, the more I watch Maher, the more I'm convinced he's actually a fucking moron who, by sheer coincidence, happens to agree with some smart people on some things, but when left to his own devices, hasn't a fucking clue.

The senator is EXACTLY right. Right now, we don't need to have a conversation about the varying levels of how fucked up groping or harassment or rape is. If and when people are being sentenced to death and/or extreme prison terms, yeah, let's talk about proportionate response. Right now, let's just keep telling dudes (and be honest, it's mostly dudes) STOP BEING WEIRD, GROPEY OR RAPEY. It's just not fucking cool.

And if it takes "ruining someone's career" to do that... well, boo fucking hoo.

And as for the people claiming trial by media, I agree, that's fucked up. And when one of the accused people actually denies what they've done... I'll happily give them the benefit of the doubt.

I think her point is that not only is it ok for women to speak about rape and assault, but also about other elements of sexual relationships that are both non-criminal and crucial. I don't know about you, but I've (1) never been rapey or weird; (2) had lots of great sex with lots of great people; and (3) more often than not navigated sexual behavior through non-verbal cues. In fact, many of the best sexual encounters I've had progressed solely upon non-verbal cues. So if for nothing more than the magic of sex (and if course there is more), I support women discussing men who can't read a vibe. BUT forchristsakejustdontputhisdickinyourmouththen.

the boys are a lot less rapey / sexual assualty in their banter as well

Well he does say he has no 'smoking gun'.

The thing is, nothing he said is proof, but everything he said follows logical steps and a chain of verifiable evidence to a conclusion, which cannot be said of the 1001 supposedly 'disqualifying' offenses the GOP claims Clinton's been party to. Olberman's story is exactly what investigative reporters are supposed to do and exactly what they've been failing to do in the US for decades now.

How come we're just finding out about Trump's past rapey comments now? Why wasn't the media asking those Miss Teen USA contestants about their experiences until this week? The media has fallen flat and Olberman is one of the few trying to prop it up again. Hell, he's not even a real journalist, he's a sports reporter. Maybe that's why he missed the part in Journalism school about rolling over for big money and special interests like a lap dog.

His conclusions may be questioned, but he is clear from the report they are HIS conclusions, not verifiable facts. I see nothing wrong with that.

And that's exactly what it's about.
I don't care about infedelity. Fuck as many Bimbos as you like, I'm not your wife. But sexual harassment? Sexual assault?
No, man. No fucking way. I'm a pig, okay? I love sluts and I don't mind the filthiest sex work in the world but if you think I'm ok with taking consent out of the interaction between men and women, you got the wrong guy.
You do not grab women 'by the pussy' unless they ask you to.
You're entitled to nothing. No matter who you are, no matter if anybody objects, no matter wether you're famous or not.
The Donald doesn't understand this. That's why he's a horrible, rapey person.

This would make literally every woman in Ireland over the age of 50 a rapist.

Seriously, they will force you to drink tea, often using quite rapey language:
"you'll enjoy it when you're having it"
"you haven't had any tea today"
"just the one"

This video has been declared a duplicate by the original submitter; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof declared by mintbbb.

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/ayn-rand-and-her-stories-of-rapey-heroes

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by ChaosEngine. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/ayn-rand-and-her-stories-of-rapey-heroes

Your video, ayn rand and her stories of rapey heroes, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.