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

[Oystein]

You look at the evidence and say chances are Tweeden perceived it the way it happened? Why?

Because the only evidence about how a person perceives something that you will ever get is their own statement about it.

And why am I wrong to look at the evidence and conclude the opposite?

Because no evidence could possibly exist about how a person perceived a situation other than their own reactions and statements. Everything else is conjecture and speculation an pop-psychologizing - i.e. going out on a limb.

Trying to second guess motives there?

No. I did not say motive, I said reasons: "Franken at the time may have, for whatever reasons (probably bad ones) not sensed the inappropriateness". How either of them sensed the inappropriateness was probably more an unconscious than deliberate perception. I don't think Franken went through a mental ethics checklist and weighed the score against any motives. He just felt at the time whatever he did was appropriate. And he was probably wrong (because face it: If one side feels a kiss is inappropriate, then ipso facto it is). Why? Perhaps he just didn't think (bad reason). Perhaps he had internally put Tweeden in the "is ok with touchiness" drawer (bad reason). Perhaps it had previously been his experience that women never complain and thus figured it's alway ok (bad reason). See, no motive required.

And doesn't that bolded part below in your post apply to Tweeden second guessing Franken's motives for the skit and practicing the skit as well?

Yes, I agree.

Have I once said in this thread she had no right to complain? No, I have not.

No, you haven't. And I did not say you ever said such a thing. I perhaps didn't word it clearly enough: I meant to stress the timing of the complaint: that of course she can come out with a complaint at any time, even while some other sexual harrassment case is on national news; this in response to you insinuating that the timing is deliberate and malicious.

No, I'm not demanding anything. I believe she believes that is how the incident went.

Ok, good, thanks for clearing that up, I wasn't sure.

But like any eyewitness anecdote, not everyone is a good observer, especially when emotions are influencing perceptions. I'm saying this is how I see the evidence and the fact that she's obsessed with this single incident from 10 years ago and no one else has come forward, is part of the evidence worth considering.

On one hand: True, perception is a bitch, and I'll add: recollection is a bitch, false memory is a very real thing.
On the other hand: There must have been a reason why that incident got stuck in her head, and I'd argue the null hypothesis is that she had reason, in her frame of references, to consider it inapropriate; which, IMO again, ipso facto makes it inappropriate. Even if she felt that way because she didn't like Franken: That would be a good enough reason not to want to be kissed, or be kissed whichever way he kissed her.

Depends. Without either having a pattern, if that's all we look at, we are back to he said/she said being of equal value.

Yes, and I think that's actually where we are: She said, he said, and no one else has said a thing yet.
But there is that photo: It demonstrates, IMO, that Franken at the time was in a mindset to violate borders of appropriateness with Tweeden. That lends what she said a measure of credibility.

It's possible she hates Franken for the groping joke among other things. Maybe she doesn't hate anyone else like that.

Franken OTOH, has been in a gazillion kissing skits. You would expect he would have tongued someone else in all that time.

Sure, that's all possible.
My hunch is that of a simple case of miscommunication: That Franken misjudged signals. Perhaps he isn't a pervert who is out to stick his tongue into any woman's mouth, I am in fact assuming that he isn't, but that Tweeden, for whatever reason, wasn't "any woman" to him at the moment. I think this has happened to many of us before, that we judged some relationship to be closer, more personal, more intimate than the other person, and awkward situations ensued.

 

[acbytesla]

Frankly, (unintended pun) This Tweeden thing is absurd. Franken was a comic. You would expect comics to step over the line on occasion trying to get a laugh. Tweeden was a fellow comic not an employee dealing with repeated sexual advances from her employer or boss. If Tweeden complained at the time to Franken about it and he continued then I get it. If if stopped then I would say he did what a man should do.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Frankly, (unintended pun) This Tweeden thing is absurd. Franken was a comic. You would expect comics to step over the line on occasion trying to get a laugh. Tweeden was a fellow comic not an employee dealing with repeated sexual advances from her employer or boss. If Tweeden complained at the time to Franken about it and he continued then I get it. If if stopped then I would say he did what a man should do.

What does being a comedian have to do with inserting his tongue into her mouth during a rehearsal?

 

[Oystein]

you posted nothing. everything you have argued is a mix of arrogance and misogyny

You actually posted that that the victim "erred" when she said that scum bag Al Franken did not grope her because you saw the picture... he saw the picture.

He saw the picture folks! She erred, Al Franken erred, I lied

mansplaining folks, back off.

Al Franken erred?!?!?!?!?!? Are you completely off the rails now?!?
Where and when did Franken say he touched here breats? Citation please! Or admit that you string lie after lie after lie only to gain a cheap right to hoot and holler!

And yes, it very much appears as if you and Mrs Tweeden erred, your mocking tone notwithstanding.
You in addition apparently lied when you claimed that she "persisted" in claiming he touched breasts even after having it pointed out that the photo shows him NOT touching her breasts, and that she was asleep at the time and thus cannot have been informed by her own witness perception.

(NOTE: What Franken did posing for the photo, and having the photo taken, and sharing the photo, all was uneqivocally inappropriate, inexcusable, a violation of her dignity. I am not here to excuse it at all. I just have this thing with facts. While it doesn't matter much whether or not he actually groped her breasts - because what he did was bad enough already -, it simply is NOT true that he groped her breasts! Anyone who persists in claiming he did, after having been informed that the claim has no merit and having the evidence layed out, is making stuff up knowingly and consciously. I call such a person a liar!)

 

[Oystein]

The hilarious part about this thread is the the over the top attacks on the woman who had the temerity to attack a Democrat senator come from a person with a pussy hat as her sig.

LOLZ

Huh?

Can you please name posters who do "over the top attacks" on Tweeden in this thread?

 

[Oystein]

...
Yet, she persisted.

Repeating that lie (I call it a lie because you presented non-evidence for the claim as evidence - a particularly mischievous case of deceipt) doesn't improve your position.

 

[The Big Dog]

Huh, the misogyny was being laid on with a trowel last night.

 

[Oystein]

Her perception might not be “reliable.”
...

This, incidentally, is a perfectly true statement, and almost trivially so.

Just as "Oystein's perception might not be “reliable.”" is a trivially true statement. Substitute any person's name that's alive today, has been alive in the past or will be alive in the future, and you will get billions of perfectly true statements.

Apparently, The Big Dog has a problem with perfectly true statements.

 

[The Big Dog]

Repeating that lie (I call it a lie because you presented non-evidence for the claim as evidence - a particularly mischievous case of deceipt) doesn't improve your position.

It has been explained to your repeatedly that just because someone disagrees with you, or in this case, demonstrates that you are wrong, does not mean that they are lying. Indeed the fact that you keep raising such frivolous arguments shows that you have no worthy arguments at all.

Despite the fact that you have declared that she "erred" nevertheless she persisted.

By the way, you might want to look up the phrase "she persisted," before you accuse me of lying, again.

 

[NoahFence]

This, incidentally, is a perfectly true statement, and almost trivially so.

Just as "Oystein's perception might not be “reliable.”" is a trivially true statement. Substitute any person's name that's alive today, has been alive in the past or will be alive in the future, and you will get billions of perfectly true statements.

Apparently, The Big Dog has a problem with perfectly true statements.

You're not just noticing that now, are you?

 

[Oystein]

http://verifiedpolitics.com/newly-r...ust-cast-doubt-claims-al-frankens-accusers-2/

It appears Tweeden was not too offended until lately.

Ahem.
What happens on stage for the benefit of entertainment should not be confused with what happens off stage during rehearsals or while travelling for the benefit of only the active person.
I see none of the three incidents depicted in that article as abusive, not even as unexpected. The guitar player is playing along, Robby Williams is playing along, and that wide-eyed soldier has his hand comfortably on the small of Tweeden's back, which should not be the case if he objected to tender intimacy.

On the other hand, the fake-groping photo and the rehearsed tongue kiss, if factual, are clearly out of bounds.

And a gentleman ought to be able to grasp such distinctions. Context matters! A woman (nor a man) does not give permission to be kissed and groped by anybody at any time just because it is part of on-stage kits!

 

[uke2se]

Since this thread has devolved into the Big Dog and friends being sarcastic about sexual abuse, why don't the rest of us leave them to it? There is plenty of sexual abuse to go around in the Roy Moore thread.

 

[Oystein]

Apparently, joking about sex was a major theme of the USO shows.

Plenty of really funny jokes have themes of adultery, death or other crass, usually inacceptable behaviour. In fact, play on taboos is a major reason why such jokes are fun. Doesn't mean that people participating in such joke thereby agree to be made subjects of practical jokes.

 

[LTC8K6]

http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/20/politics/al-franken-inappropriate-touch-2010/index.html

Woman says Franken inappropriately touched her in 2010

 

[acbytesla]

What does being a comedian have to do with inserting his tongue into her mouth during a rehearsal?

What part of 'acting don't you understand? Also, men sometimes misinterpret signals and sometimes they make make advances on women and cross the line. If Tweeden objects and Franken continues then yes, there is a problem. If he modifies his behavior then he did what he was supposed to have done.

I took drama and acted in plays in high school, college and some community theater. I have had actresses do that to me. I didnt have a hissy fit.

 

[Oystein]

Huh, the misogyny was being laid on with a trowel last night.

I count zero names and zero citations.

Looks like there is nothing, zero them to your blabbering

 

[LTC8K6]

The photo does not show him touching even her kevlar armour.

Doesn't matter.

It's a 55 year old man pretending to grope the boobs of a sleeping woman to humiliate her via a photograph of the act.

It is sexual harassment of the high school variety.

 

[LTC8K6]

What part of 'acting don't you understand? Also, men sometimes misinterpret signals and sometimes they make make advances on women and cross the line. If Tweeden objects and Franken continues then yes, there is a problem. If he modifies his behavior then he did what he was supposed to have done.

I took drama and acted in plays in high school, college and some community theater. I have had actresses do that to me. I didnt have a hissy fit.

We all know the rule about offending people.

If they were offended, then you were offensive.

 

[Oystein]

It has been explained to your repeatedly that just because someone disagrees with you, or in this case, demonstrates that you are wrong, does not mean that they are lying. Indeed the fact that you keep raising such frivolous arguments shows that you have no worthy arguments at all.

Despite the fact that you have declared that she "erred" nevertheless she persisted.

By the way, you might want to look up the phrase "she persisted," before you accuse me of lying, again.

I had asked you to provide a citation for the claim that she "persisted" in saying that Franken groped her (as opposed to merely pretending to grope).

You presented me with her original statement.
Yes, in her original statement she said he groped her.
That's not persisting.

It would be persisting if she said it again after it has been pointed out to her that
a) The photo does not in fact show him groping her, only pretending to
b) She was asleep at the time (and in fact she says the same: that she was asleep at the time) and thus cannot know of her own perception whether or not Franken groped her

So, it is established as fact that you did not provide evidence of her "persisting".

Then you claimed that you DID provide evidence of her persisting.

That was a lie, because I had explained to you in detail why that claim is wrong, and I consider you too intelligent not to understand it.

 

[Oystein]

You're not just noticing that now, are you?

Uhm no, I have been calling out TBD's repeated lies for several days and many pages now.