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

Skeptic Ginger said:
Staw man much? :rolleyes:

Appeal to authority

I made no such unsupported claim. I explained what evidence I was basing my conclusion on.

You all don't have to take my word for it. I don't care. But don't tell me I'm pulling the conclusion out of thin air because I described what I know about Franken and it's quite extensive.

Now whether you have extensive knowledge about Franken or not is your business. I have not seen anything presented except the most superficial reading of the news events.

As for my knowledge of sexual harassment and abuse, I'm pretty sure I do have more extensive knowledge of the subject than you if your posts are any representation of your knowledge. Again, I have not seen anything presented except the most superficial reading of the news events.

Nurses and family practitioners often have extensive knowledge of sexual harassment and abuse. And as an occupational health provider I have some professional knowledge of harassment in the workplace. Then there is the fact I've been around the block and have some first hand experience.


Now, again, I don't care or expect you to take my word for it. But I described the evidence I was basing my conclusion on. That is not an appeal to authority, not special pleading and not a description of "special knowledge", just regular ol' read-extensively-and-have-had-some-experience knowledge.
Click to expand...

To be an acknowledged authority, it cannot simply be something you claim for yourself. But I would go further and say that even legitimate authorities can be wrong. A lung specialist once told me I had lung cancer. It turned out to be sarcoidosis. The premises that he was a specialist and I had symptoms were correct, but the conclusion was false. This can happen.

This is why we are trying to work out under what circumstances you would accept that your view of Franken turns out to be wrong and that he actually has groped women?

You cannot just a priori rule out accusations as you seem to do with suggestions that they may be Russian trolls or politically motivated or misremembering. The weight of evidence (four accusers of various political persuasions) is mounting against Franken, and he still hasn't offered the kinds of denials that you have.
 
Consider the Franken admission from a different POV. You are a decent guy, you care that women think you encroached on their space. You didn't have a sexual intent, you weren't groping, but a couple women believed your hand was in a place they did not appreciate.

Franken's apology is consistent with that scenario.

He didn't say, "I'm ashamed, I whipped my dong out, I thought they wanted it." He didn't say, "I squeezed their butt cheeks and I'm sorry I did it." He didn't say, "They're full of it, they jumped to a false conclusion."

No, he didn't say any of that. He said, "I respect they thought my hand was in the wrong place, I'm sorry, I'll try to do better."
 
Last edited:
The Big Dog said:
Al Franken still hasn’t denied grabbing women:
Click to expand...

Would it be better if he had denied it?

I actually think it's a good thing he did not deny.
Bill Clinton denied
RoyMoore denied
Both are even worse scumbags for their denials - adding insult to the injury.
 
NoahFence said:
What's the issue? You people already established that this type of behavior is consistent with your values. So I don't get why there's an issue with Franken.
Click to expand...

It's not about the behavior, it's about whether "our side" or "their side" did it. It's tribalism. An atrocity committed by one's own tribe is a smart move, a misdemeanor committed by the other tribe is a war crime.

The "culture war" going on isn't two sides fighting for opposite values, it's two sides fighting entirely different wars.
 
TragicMonkey said:
It's not about the behavior, it's about whether "our side" or "their side" did it. It's tribalism. An atrocity committed by one's own tribe is a smart move, a misdemeanor committed by the other tribe is a war crime.

The "culture war" going on isn't two sides fighting for opposite values, it's two sides fighting entirely different wars.
Click to expand...

Oh, I know that. I'm just trying to get one of them to freely admit it for once instead of tap dancing around the truth.
 
Oystein said:
Would it be better if he had denied it?

I actually think it's a good thing he did not deny.
Bill Clinton denied
RoyMoore denied
Both are even worse scumbags for their denials - adding insult to the injury.
Click to expand...
Denials usually draw the charge of invalidating or smearing the victim.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

This is where the tapatalk signature that annoys people used to be
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Consider the Franken admission from a different POV. You are a decent guy, you care that women think you encroached on their space. You didn't have a sexual intent, you weren't groping, but a couple women believed your hand was in a place they did not appreciate.

Franken's apology is consistent with that scenario.

He didn't say, "I'm ashamed, I whipped my dong out, I thought they wanted it." He didn't say, "I squeezed their butt cheeks and I'm sorry I did it." He didn't say, "They're full of it, they jumped to a false conclusion."

No, he didn't say any of that. He said, "I respect they thought my hand was in the wrong place, I'm sorry, I'll try to do better."
Click to expand...

Come on now, his apology was more like, "I don't remember doing that but if they thought I did, then we have to listen to women." Pretty damn weak. Part of a sincere apology is taking responsibility. It does not involve blaming the victim for thinking what he was doing was wrong and playing on the public's perception of him as a champion of women's rights as a kind of mitigating factor.

It really isn't hard NOT to put your hand on a woman's butt when you are posing for a picture with her. That's not where your hand naturally goes when posing with strangers. I think you have to WANT to put your hand on their butt and have no self-control to stop yourself from actually doing it. So Franken's apology should be more like, "My hand was in the wrong place and I need to be more mindful of people's boundaries and exercise more self-control..."

Franken obviously has a problem controlling himself. Four women have now accused him of groping/harassment.
According to the Washington post, he can't even say whether or not more allegations will come out. As much as you might admire him politically, don't you think it's time to start taking the allegations seriously instead of pointing out what a great apology he gave?
 
Hey, I've been gone for a bit and likely won't catch up completely on this thread.

Have we ever figured out an easy way to tell if someone is just a concerned citizen who wants to let others know what is going on or if they are thirsty?

I was unsure so I refrained from calling anyone thirsty over the holidays just because it seemed ambiguous.
 
Dr. Keith said:
Hey, I've been gone for a bit and likely won't catch up completely on this thread.

Have we ever figured out an easy way to tell if someone is just a concerned citizen who wants to let others know what is going on or if they are thirsty?

I was unsure so I refrained from calling anyone thirsty over the holidays just because it seemed ambiguous.
Click to expand...


I feel confident that many people found themselves to be thirsty over the holidays.
 
Dr. Keith said:
Hey, I've been gone for a bit and likely won't catch up completely on this thread.

Have we ever figured out an easy way to tell if someone is just a concerned citizen who wants to let others know what is going on or if they are thirsty?

I was unsure so I refrained from calling anyone thirsty over the holidays just because it seemed ambiguous.
Click to expand...

One that might be posting in a thread while bragging about not reading it may indeed be thirsty.

On topic, two of the women have decided to remain anonymous, no doubt due to the abuse to which the other women were exposed.

As such, I think we can safely put all four women victims in the concerned citizen category.
 
The Big Dog said:
One that might be posting in a thread while bragging about not reading it may indeed be thirsty.

On topic, two of the women have decided to remain anonymous, no doubt due to the abuse to which the other women were exposed.

As such, I think we can safely put all four women victims in the concerned citizen category.
Click to expand...

No disagreement. Just wondering: What is the criteria you use for this?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom