And therein lies the dilemma. If your intent was just the skit with no ulterior motive, the grope joke seemed like a funny idea at the time, and you weren't aware the women who said his hand was in the wrong place thought that, BUT you respect or want to respect the fact that regardless of Franken's intent, the accusers are voicing their experience, now what do you do?
I agree he should have been more clear that his intent was never to butt grab. He said he didn't remember the skit that way, he should have made it more clear if he did or did not use his tongue.
He really can't win either way.
You dislike Franken, or his politics or both. I like him and respect that he has been an active advocate for women's rights for decades.
I actually like Al Franken. I was a fan of his comedy, especially the SNL days, even if I didn't agree with all his political positions. Please don't poison the well by suggesting that I can only see bad things because I hate the dude.
From my POV there is nothing in the four complaints that amounts to anything which can't be explained by different perceptions about what occurred.
You can say that about any sexually-related allegation. "I remember it differently," is literally the mantra of a guy who knows he did something but thinks he did it with at least implied consent.
He didn't answer the door in his birthday suit, he didn't actually grope Tweeden, her grope jokes on stage were worse than his photo joke, he didn't corner Tweeden in the hall and kiss her, and the claimed hands on butts during photo ops hardly seems like sexual acts. Franken certainly didn't say he shouldn't have squeezed.
So the first time I meet you, you wouldn't have a problem with my hand on your butt? I seriously doubt that's true because it is an inherently intimate/sexual act. No, it isn't on the level of masturbating in front of women or coercing them into sex but it is still an inappropriate act.
I don't see anything sinister. You can't see anything but sinister and I don't see the evidence you think backs that assessment up.
All I see is a dude who has not denied anything and instead offered up some pretty weak apologies. I think he, having been a male in the entertainment business in the 70's, has a different idea of what's appropriate and inappropriate. His, "I have a different recollection," is an exact echo of Weinstein's statement. So, if we are going to accept that Weinstein is probably a sexual predator, I think we have to also accept, given the multiple stories that have come forward, Al Franken is probably a guy who likes to cop a feel when he thinks he can get away with it.
Without more evidence I don't think Franken's apologies are admissions of sexual harassment. Seems like to a right winger if you don't deny everything and attack the accusers you must surely be guilty.
I doubt many on the right and unfortunately plenty of people on the left don't get it that Franken's apologies are based on respecting the women's experiences, not based on apologizing for sexually harassing women.
I get it, I just think it's completely the wrong approach. If a woman accused me of getting inappropriately handsy and I know I wasn't, I will absolutely deny it. If I know I didn't do anything, her experience is irrelevant; she is just plain wrong. I wouldn't go the route of attacking her but I would vehemently deny.
In Franken's case, I truly believe we have a basically good guy who is a sincere politician and doesn't want to lose his Senate position. I think he knows it's at least possible that he did something like this so he can't issue a flat denial. All he can do is downplay it, issue the standard "different recollection" non-denial and hope it blows over and that no one else comes forward to force his hand.
