Senator Al Franken Kissed and Groped Me Without My Consent, And There’s Nothing Funny

[d4m10n]

And different contexts and situations don't make a difference to you?

Of course they do. I assume the public post is virtue signaling and the other is his authentic self.

 

[Oystein]

One of them says sexual assault is a serious problem which needs to be fixed.

The other says it's fun to pretend to sexually assault someone without their consent.

You really don't see the incongruity here?

I'll take this to total silliness: a. murder is a serious problem, b. it's fun to pretend to murder someone without their consent.

Do you see an incongruity there? I actually don't, because to pretend to murder is vastly different from to murder.

To pretend to sexually assault is different from to sexually assault. Can you agree?

 

[BobTheCoward]

Why is this conversation being dominated by the photo rather than the kiss? Abusing a scene partner strikes me as unbelievably more heinous.

 

[angrysoba]

+1.

Depending on how he used the picture, it could be harassment, but judging by just the picture it's not assault.

However, it's pretty stupid for a senator to engage in something like this, and such behaviour should be strongly discouraged.

If he is actually grabbing her breasts, then yes it would be considered sexual assault.

 

[d4m10n]

I'll take this to total silliness: a. murder is a serious problem, b. it's fun to pretend to murder someone without their consent.

Do you see an incongruity there? I actually don't, because to pretend to murder is vastly different from to murder.

To pretend to sexually assault is different from to sexually assault. Can you agree?

To make your murder analogy really on point, the perp would have to be just millimeters away from doing the actual murder, just as Franken was uncomfortably close to actually groping Tweeden. Perhaps dangling a flask of liquid poison—near the tipping point—over a sleeping and agape mouth.

ETA: Even then the analogy fails, since we wouldn't wonder whether he actually did the deed when the camera turned away.

 

[Darat]

Why is this conversation being dominated by the photo rather than the kiss? Abusing a scene partner strikes me as unbelievably more heinous.

According to the account she agreed to him kissing her as a rehearsal for a skit she would perform on stage. It was apparently the manner in which he kissed her that she had objections to. In the rest of the shows she says she (for laughs) turned away when he tried to kiss her to avoid a repeat.

That is of course a "according to her account" so people can take issue with it on those grounds however the picture is objective evidence. (No one has tried to claim it was doctored have they?)

 

[PhantomWolf]

Example: You've been dancing together in a nightclub, you've got very close, smooched a bit, they've had their head on your shoulder, you look at them and in the moment go to kiss the other person.

I really don't think in such circumstances there is any fault by the kisser, if the other person pulls away, gives you a what-the-heck etc. it should be a simply "Sorry, lets carry on dancing". It is not a sexual assault.

Or we could get used to quickly asking, "Mind if I kiss you?"

And, yes it is considered a sexual assault, just as if you went around kissing complete strangers it would be, but it's unlikely that anyone would complain and demand you were charged.

This is definitely a difference between us, I would not say that any kind of sexual assault has occurred and I think re-casting such human behaviour in such terms would be terrible way for society to go.

I think that the issue here is that the lower end of sexual assault such a stolen kiss, a slap on the butt, a groped breast has always been that, but more recently Rape was added to the list of things that is sexual assault, and so now when you say "Sexual Assault" people think "Rape" and so the inclination is to consider what used to be considered sexual assault to no longer be such because it's not rape. It's like, "I didn't sexually assault her because I only pinched her bottom, I didn't rape her!"

I have seen as number of people argue that including the lesser stuff in Sexual Assault devalues rape and the higher end crimes, but I believe it's actually the other way around. By having added Rape into Sexual Assault, what it has done is devalued the lower end to the point that many people don't see them as a crime anymore.

As a sort of general disclaimer. I hate being touched unexpectedly, I hate people putting a hand on my shoulder saying "hello mate", any kind of unexpected touch I find distressing. However all I do in those circumstances I either ignore it or ask them not to do that again. I do not feel as if I would be right to call those unexpected touches assault of any kind, they are part of the usual social human behaviours. Now if someone repeatedly touched me - no matter how slight or innocuous after I've asked them not to then it moves into potential harassment and perhaps even assault.

Which pretty much follows the law, unless they were touching you in places that they really shouldn't be

Of course, but even that isn't foolproof and people will still mistake what each other is saying.

Possibly, but just because something might not be 100% effective due to idiots, doesn't mean that we shouldn't even bother trying to achieve it.

But I think it is all part and parcel of the general discussion, how we communicate to one another is all part and parcel of deciding where we draw lines and create boundaries. I am just cautious about the "sex" aspect that tends to dominate these discussions and we end up escalating the matter by thinking just because there is a sexual element in a human interaction it is always bad without a formal, notarized agreement between two people (yeah I am being silly with the last bit but I hope you get what I mean).

True, and I can see that, I'm just not wanting to help derail the discussion and end up getting told off.

 

[Oystein]

...
As I noted at the time it was mentioned, since it's not demeaning sexually, I'd have less of an issue with it. Drawing a mustache on her is not devaluing her to being a body part to be used for men's entertainment. I do think that we have to be careful with it comes to touching other people without permission, especially strangers, but of it was a prank between friends then I'd be a lot more okay with it. Drawing a penis though I'd object too as again it's sexualising the person.
....

I think it is useful to remember that many sex crimes (particularly rape, but assault and harrassment, too) are committed less out of a desire for sex but a desire for power and domination. In that light, the sexual content is less significant than the abuse of a vulnerability on the victim's side - such as the fact that they are asleep or drugged or dependent or have a weak personality.

To draw a moustache on a powerless, insecure man is, in my opinion, worse than pretending to grope a powerful, strong woman. (I don't know whether Tweeden is, as a matter of personality, a strong woman and thus don't claim this applies in her case).

 

[BobTheCoward]

According to the account she agreed to him kissing her as a rehearsal for a skit she would perform on stage. It was apparently the manner in which he kissed her that she had objections to.

It was apparently in the manner of sexual assault.

 

[PhantomWolf]

I'll take this to total silliness: a. murder is a serious problem, b. it's fun to pretend to murder someone without their consent.

Do you see an incongruity there? I actually don't, because to pretend to murder is vastly different from to murder.

To pretend to sexually assault is different from to sexually assault. Can you agree?

Do you think that placing a knife almost against the throat of a sleeping person like you're about to slash it is acceptable behaviour?

 

[Oystein]

To make your murder analogy really on point, the perp would have to be just millimeters away from doing the actual murder, just as Franken was uncomfortably close to actually groping Tweeden. Perhaps dangling a flask of liquid poison—near the tipping point—over a sleeping and agape mouth.

ETA: Even then the analogy fails, since we wouldn't wonder whether he actually did the deed when the camera turned away.

Your ETA argues from imagination. I am not going to speculate here. There is evidence of pretended assault, but no evidence, and no allegation of assault. So I think my question is perfectly valid still, and you avoided answering it:

Can you agree that pretended assault is not as bad as assault?

 

[Darat]

It was apparently in the manner of sexual assault.

No it wasn't - she agreed to the kiss - from her account "...I said ‘OK’ so he would stop badgering me. We did the line leading up to the kiss and then he came at me, put his hand on the back of my head, mashed his lips against mine and aggressively stuck his tongue in my mouth...."

Did he apply pressure to get a kiss? Yes but not pressure that would I say constituted a crime being committed.

 

[Darat]

Do you think that placing a knife almost against the throat of a sleeping person like you're about to slash it is acceptable behaviour?

Oystein hasn't said the action in the photo was "acceptable behaviour".

 

[Distracted1]

Do you think that placing a knife almost against the throat of a sleeping person like you're about to slash it is acceptable behaviour?

Given certain contexts, I find it acceptable.

 

[Oystein]

Do you think that placing a knife almost against the throat of a sleeping person like you're about to slash it is acceptable behaviour?

As matter of fact: yes! Depending on context, of course, the most important element thereof would be the nature of the relationship between prankster and prankstee (can I claim royalties for that coinage? ).

I will try to remember to look for a couple of photographs of friends taken a couple of years back, where one is pretending to murder another. IIRC, the first shows the "victim" unsuspecting, or at the moment where he reacts with real shock to the big knife wielded behind him; the second is a reenactment, because everybody had so much fun, including the victim. He figured he could and should look even more frightened.

 

[Belz...]

If he is actually grabbing her breasts, then yes it would be considered sexual assault.

That's what I meant: he doesn't appear to be doing so from the picture; if he did, it probably would be assault (depending on context).

 

[BobTheCoward]

No it wasn't - she agreed to the kiss - from her account "...I said ‘OK’ so he would stop badgering me. We did the line leading up to the kiss and then he came at me, put his hand on the back of my head, mashed his lips against mine and aggressively stuck his tongue in my mouth...."

Did he apply pressure to get a kiss? Yes but not pressure that would I say constituted a crime being committed.

Not all sexual assault is a crime.

It isn't the pressure that is the issue. It is the forcing the tongue into her mouth that is the problem. If that happened to my kid in a drama class or a coworker in a winter party play rehearsal, I would be livid.

 

[PhantomWolf]

I think it is useful to remember that many sex crimes (particularly rape, but assault and harrassment, too) are committed less out of a desire for sex but a desire for power and domination. In that light, the sexual content is less significant than the abuse of a vulnerability on the victim's side - such as the fact that they are asleep or drugged or dependent or have a weak personality.

It's about control, but also objectification. Groping a woman is less about having power over her and more about treating her like an object to be used. Rape is very much about power and control, as is hassarasement.

To draw a moustache on a powerless, insecure man is, in my opinion, worse than pretending to grope a powerful, strong woman. (I don't know whether Tweeden is, as a matter of personality, a strong woman and thus don't claim this applies in her case).

The thing is that the drawing of a mustache isn't an attempt to exert power over them, nor to control them, they aren't really being forced to do something they don't want to. Nor are they being objectified or deemed. You're not declaring that they are just a moustache and a plaything. However, when you pretend to grope a woman's breasts (or a man's groin) you are objectifying the, you are reducing them to the pair of breasts or their dangly bits and treating them as an object for your entertainment. You are exerting power over them because you are saying they are just a sexual organ for your enjoyment.

 

[angrysoba]

Sexual assault is a terrible thing, that picture even in the worse light cannot be considered sexual assault. It is wrong to equate the two and I think doing so makes it much harder to deal with the actual issue of sexual assault.

+1.

Depending on how he used the picture, it could be harassment, but judging by just the picture it's not assault.

However, it's pretty stupid for a senator to engage in something like this, and such behaviour should be strongly discouraged.

If he is actually grabbing her breasts, then yes it would be considered sexual assault.

That's what I meant: he doesn't appear to be doing so from the picture; if he did, it probably would be assault (depending on context).

What? Given that in the worst light, he may very well be touching her breasts in that picture, then yes it could be sexual assault. I don't see a likely context in which it wouldn't be.

 

[Oystein]

...

The thing is that the drawing of a mustache isn't an attempt to exert power over them, nor to control them, they aren't really being forced to do something they don't want to. Nor are they being objectified or deemed. You're not declaring that they are just a moustache and a plaything.

What??
I completely disagree with all of this! That man is treated as a doll or a canvas and made to sport a painted moustache against his will, as the prankster abused a temporary, possibly permanent, power differential with a view to embarrassing the victim. Prankster invaded private space in the process.

However, when you pretend to grope a woman's breasts (or a man's groin) you are objectifying the, you are reducing them to the pair of breasts or their dangly bits and treating them as an object for your entertainment. You are exerting power over them because you are saying they are just a sexual organ for your enjoyment.

You place entirely too little weight on the non-sexual parts of ones privacy and dignity.