CDZ Are we seeing the nascence of the Women's Movement 2.0?

[PoliticalChic]

Leave it to some RWNJ to make an issue out of some fool claiming to have a right by virtue of celebrity status to commit sexual assault on women. It really is not that complicated. It is not OK or acceptable to fondle or kiss a woman without her permission and not OK to grab her pussy or any other part of her body if you are not invited to do so. It ain't that complicated.

Clinton Misogyny - Sex
Juanita Broaddrick (AR)- rape
Eileen Wellstone (Oxford) - rape
Elizabeth Ward Gracen - rape - quid pro quo, post incident intimidation
Regina Hopper Blakely - "forced himself on her, biting, bruising her"
Kathleen Willey (WH) - sexual assault, intimidations, threats
Sandra Allen James (DC) - sexual assault
22 Year Old 1972 (Yale) - sexual assault
Kathy Bradshaw (AK) - sexual assault
Cristy Zercher - unwelcomed sexual advance, intimidations
Paula Jones (AR) - unwelcomed sexual advance, exposure, bordering on sexual assault
Carolyn Moffet -unwelcomed sexual advance, exposure, bordering on sexual assault
1974 student at University of Arkansas - unwelcomed physical contact
1978-1980 - seven complaints per Arkansas state troopers
Monica Lewinsky - quid pro quo, post incident character assault
Gennifer Flowers - quid pro quo, post incident character assault
Dolly Kyle Browning - post incident character assault
Sally Perdue - post incident threats
Betty Dalton - rebuffed his advances, married to one of his supporters
Denise Reeder - apologetic note scanned
CLINTON'S ROGUES GALLERY:


And...just recently: "Leslie Millwee says that on two of the alleged occasions, Clinton groped her while he rubbed himself against her and reached climax." EXCLUSIVE VIDEO INTERVIEW: New Bill Clinton Sexual Assault Accuser Goes Public for the First Time - Breitbart



Educate yourself.

Apparently there is another American woman who clinton sexually assaulted when he was in Britain...she was over there on a trip given to her by her parents when she met clinton.......she has refused to come forward because of the hilary clinton's plumbers....

Seems the 'private eye' that Hillary hired to intimidate some, Jack Palladino, may have admitted it...
"PI 'admits' Hillary paid him to harass Willey
Morgan was referring to one of many threatening incidents Willey says culminated just two days before her testimony in the Paula Jones sexual harassment case in an encounter with a “mysterious jogger.” The man, according to Willey, threatened her and her children, by name, and referred to her damaged car and missing 13-year-old cat. The message, she said, was clear..."
Read more at PI ‘admits’ Hillary paid him to harass Willey


Would the Clinton Crime Cartel do something like that?

You betcha'!!

 

[PoliticalChic]

Trump is a misogynist oaf. Hillary wants to open up the doors to this country for hundreds of thousands of them.

A pox on them both.

Pox aside....
In your post....two charges.
Assuming, arguendo, both to be true.....which is more of a danger to the nation?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

[

Pox aside....
In your post....two charges.
Assuming, arguendo, both to be true.....which is more of a danger to the nation?

Hillary, and the hypocritical left in general. Any sane person should be able to see what has happened in Europe due to the same policies.

 

[OldLady]

Leave it to some RWNJ to make an issue out of some fool claiming to have a right by virtue of celebrity status to commit sexual assault on women. It really is not that complicated. It is not OK or acceptable to fondle or kiss a woman without her permission and not OK to grab her pussy or any other part of her body if you are not invited to do so. It ain't that complicated.

Apparently, as long as a Democrat has engaged in sexual acts outside of marriage, it is fine.

 

[OldLady]

I have never heard the women's movement shot down for purely political reasons before, so that's an interesting perspective, I guess.
Women are born into every class, and being seen as inferiors to men or as creatures whose personal boundaries don't count is a problem in every neighborhood.

I've never felt inferior to anyone....how about you?

I've certainly had plenty of men try

 

[Camp]

Leave it to some RWNJ to make an issue out of some fool claiming to have a right by virtue of celebrity status to commit sexual assault on women. It really is not that complicated. It is not OK or acceptable to fondle or kiss a woman without her permission and not OK to grab her pussy or any other part of her body if you are not invited to do so. It ain't that complicated.

Apparently, as long as a Democrat has engaged in sexual acts outside of marriage, it is fine.

There is far more depth to the issue rising out of Trump's sexual assault rant. It is actually moving beyond Trump. The right views it as a temporary political issue and do not recognize it for its depth and roots that will make it a major issue in the coming years. They right it off as a liberal or progressive issue and fail to realize it is about the roots of discrimination and degrading of women. The following video is the opening salvo for the issue that will take hold aimed at educating and motivating women. While it is anti-Trump, Trump is just the catalyst being used for the larger issue.

youtube.com/watch?v=1ncxd0kC130

 

[OldLady]

Leave it to some RWNJ to make an issue out of some fool claiming to have a right by virtue of celebrity status to commit sexual assault on women. It really is not that complicated. It is not OK or acceptable to fondle or kiss a woman without her permission and not OK to grab her pussy or any other part of her body if you are not invited to do so. It ain't that complicated.

Apparently, as long as a Democrat has engaged in sexual acts outside of marriage, it is fine.

There is far more depth to the issue rising out of Trump's sexual assault rant. It is actually moving beyond Trump. The right views it as a temporary political issue and do not recognize it for its depth and roots that will make it a major issue in the coming years. They right it off as a liberal or progressive issue and fail to realize it is about the roots of discrimination and degrading of women. The following video is the opening salvo for the issue that will take hold aimed at educating and motivating women. While it is anti-Trump, Trump is just the catalyst being used for the larger issue.

youtube.com/watch?v=1ncxd0kC130

Thank you so much, even if that, too, had an election slant. I hope you're right that discussion will continue on this topic after the election.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Trump is emblematic of the whole fake rape movement. The claims against Trump are so outlandishly fake that the public is dared to believe them. The accusers expect to just fade away like Cain and Schwarzenegger's accusers did. They should be sued. The whole fake rape voice needs to be silenced. Duke LA Crosse, Rolling Stone, Lena Dunham, the idiot mattress girl all need to be silenced in a manner that so humiliates them the no one would dare another fake rape story.

 

[OldLady]

Trump is emblematic of the whole fake rape movement. The claims against Trump are so outlandishly fake that the public is dared to believe them. The accusers expect to just fade away like Cain and Schwarzenegger's accusers did. They should be sued. The whole fake rape voice needs to be silenced. Duke LA Crosse, Rolling Stone, Lena Dunham, the idiot mattress girl all need to be silenced in a manner that so humiliates them the no one would dare another fake rape story.

I don't advocate lying, but I'm not really thinking so much of Trump as the problem generally, which is widespread and common and doesn't include just rape. It's just an attitude that makes rape more prevalent.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Trump is emblematic of the whole fake rape movement. The claims against Trump are so outlandishly fake that the public is dared to believe them. The accusers expect to just fade away like Cain and Schwarzenegger's accusers did. They should be sued. The whole fake rape voice needs to be silenced. Duke LA Crosse, Rolling Stone, Lena Dunham, the idiot mattress girl all need to be silenced in a manner that so humiliates them the no one would dare another fake rape story.

I don't advocate lying, but I'm not really thinking so much of Trump as the problem generally, which is widespread and common and doesn't include just rape. It's just an attitude that makes rape more prevalent.

Yes, it is a problem, and exists in every portion of society. The old boy network is not just limited to the right, either.

In a local case from Portland, recently, a hip musician admitted to rape on facebook. People who knew him had been trying to warn others about his behavior for years, only to find themselves ostracized for it by all the leftist hipsters who then turned around and tried to claim THEY were the actual victims of bullying when his behavior was finally revealed. Too much!

There is an enormous portion of the left that gives lip service to a principle whenever asked, but refuse to put their money where their mouth is when dealing with real events instead of abstractions.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Okay. That's enough. When you have nothing to add but insults toward other posters, you should be going to the FZ and taking a good dump. It'll do you good.

I don't play your game of rightwingers being devils and leftwingers angels (or the other way around) and so I point out attitudes inimical to a principle no matter their source. When I did so , you accused me of "finger pointing" and made a great, sweeping gesture about leaving the board in order to avoid opinions that did not align with your word view. You didn't WANT to hear about anything that provided any cognitive dissonance created when your preconceptions were threatened. You are now saying I have insulted you merely for indicating that extreme partisanship does not address the actual issue of women's rights.

In another clean debate thread, you had no problem whatsoever with unlimited ACTUAL insults, provided it was an authoritarian leftist indulging in them, so I can only assume here that it is really more a case of who gets to take a dump and who doesn't than any real commitment to clean debate.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

I don't play your game of rightwingers being devils and leftwingers angels (or the other way around) and so I point out attitudes inimical to a principle no matter their source. When I did so , you accused me of "finger pointing" and made a great, sweeping gesture about leaving the board in order to avoid opinions that did not align with your word view. You didn't WANT to hear about anything that provided any cognitive dissonance created when your preconceptions were threatened. You are now saying I have insulted you merely for indicating that extreme partisanship does not address the actual issue of women's rights.

In another clean debate thread, you had no problem whatsoever with unlimited ACTUAL insults, provided it was an authoritarian leftist indulging in them, so I can only assume here that it is really more a case of who gets to take a dump and who doesn't than any real commitment to clean debate.

She won't reply to the questions I asked in post #27 either.

All she's worried about is demonizing men in general.

The relationships between men and women is a two way street and each side needs to be held accountable for their actions.

*****SMILE*****

 

[OldLady]

Okay. That's enough. When you have nothing to add but insults toward other posters, you should be going to the FZ and taking a good dump. It'll do you good.

I don't play your game of rightwingers being devils and leftwingers angels (or the other way around) and so I point out attitudes inimical to a principle no matter their source. When I did so , you accused me of "finger pointing" and made a great, sweeping gesture about leaving the board in order to avoid opinions that did not align with your word view. You didn't WANT to hear about anything that provided any cognitive dissonance created when your preconceptions were threatened. You are now saying I have insulted you merely for indicating that extreme partisanship does not address the actual issue of women's rights.

In another clean debate thread, you had no problem whatsoever with unlimited ACTUAL insults, provided it was an authoritarian leftist indulging in them, so I can only assume here that it is really more a case of who gets to take a dump and who doesn't than any real commitment to clean debate.

It's a new day and I hope it finds you in a better mood.
Just to be clear, what I was trying to say (not very well apparently) is that I don't view Trump's lingering attitude as a Republican or Democratic issue. That is why I said it might require going to a different board to discuss this issue without making it a partisan issue. Not that I was going to trounce off the board in a huff. USMB is, after all, a political board.

This thread is supposed to be about whether the Trump kerfluffle will reopen the door for further discussion about the apparently wide spread attitude that women are still "open season" and it's okay, it's just boy stuff, locker room talk, etc.

You say respect is a two way street. I agree. When two strangers meet, however, and one is male and one is female, they should be starting from a level playing field and they can earn or lose respect from there. Fair?

 

[Damaged Eagle]

It's a new day and I hope it finds you in a better mood.
Just to be clear, what I was trying to say (not very well apparently) is that I don't view Trump's lingering attitude as a Republican or Democratic issue. That is why I said it might require going to a different board to discuss this issue without making it a partisan issue. Not that I was going to trounce off the board in a huff. USMB is, after all, a political board.

This thread is supposed to be about whether the Trump kerfluffle will reopen the door for further discussion about the apparently wide spread attitude that women are still "open season" and it's okay, it's just boy stuff, locker room talk, etc.

You say respect is a two way street. I agree. When two strangers meet, however, and one is male and one is female, they should be starting from a level playing field and they can earn or lose respect from there. Fair?

Good luck with that. Might I suggest that you start your crusade out with high school and college sports teams? A permanent ban from ever playing sports and rehabilitation therapy if any team member is caught groping in your crusade to change things. I'm sure you'll receive resounding support in your endeavor. I'm also sure no parents would ever demand that a top player remain on the team and attempt to demonize the person who was groped.

*****SMILE*****

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Okay. That's enough. When you have nothing to add but insults toward other posters, you should be going to the FZ and taking a good dump. It'll do you good.

I don't play your game of rightwingers being devils and leftwingers angels (or the other way around) and so I point out attitudes inimical to a principle no matter their source. When I did so , you accused me of "finger pointing" and made a great, sweeping gesture about leaving the board in order to avoid opinions that did not align with your word view. You didn't WANT to hear about anything that provided any cognitive dissonance created when your preconceptions were threatened. You are now saying I have insulted you merely for indicating that extreme partisanship does not address the actual issue of women's rights.

In another clean debate thread, you had no problem whatsoever with unlimited ACTUAL insults, provided it was an authoritarian leftist indulging in them, so I can only assume here that it is really more a case of who gets to take a dump and who doesn't than any real commitment to clean debate.

It's a new day and I hope it finds you in a better mood.
Just to be clear, what I was trying to say (not very well apparently) is that I don't view Trump's lingering attitude as a Republican or Democratic issue. That is why I said it might require going to a different board to discuss this issue without making it a partisan issue. Not that I was going to trounce off the board in a huff. USMB is, after all, a political board.

This thread is supposed to be about whether the Trump kerfluffle will reopen the door for further discussion about the apparently wide spread attitude that women are still "open season" and it's okay, it's just boy stuff, locker room talk, etc.

You say respect is a two way street. I agree. When two strangers meet, however, and one is male and one is female, they should be starting from a level playing field and they can earn or lose respect from there. Fair?

I see you have removed your earlier posts so people may have a difficult time following this, but I might point out that I am just about the only person in this thread who HASN'T turned it into a partisan game of gotcha. I deplore Trump as the representation of the old boy network just as much as I do Hillary for the institutionalized hypocrisy born of identity politics.

Yes, this will lead to a discussion of misogyny, but it will not be an honest one as long as people insist on framing it according to identity. Good grief, Hillary has been pandering like mad to the Thug lives matter movement as well as Islam, both of which expressing levels of misogyny that make Trump look like Betty Friedan in comparison, and until people desist with the double standards, they won't get to the heart of the matter.

Getting one's panties in a knot over Trump while simultaneously advocating for Islam is like cursing the tom cat that just peed in your petunias while ignoring the saber-toothed tiger with a toddler's head in its jaws.

 

[OldLady]

Okay. That's enough. When you have nothing to add but insults toward other posters, you should be going to the FZ and taking a good dump. It'll do you good.

I don't play your game of rightwingers being devils and leftwingers angels (or the other way around) and so I point out attitudes inimical to a principle no matter their source. When I did so , you accused me of "finger pointing" and made a great, sweeping gesture about leaving the board in order to avoid opinions that did not align with your word view. You didn't WANT to hear about anything that provided any cognitive dissonance created when your preconceptions were threatened. You are now saying I have insulted you merely for indicating that extreme partisanship does not address the actual issue of women's rights.

In another clean debate thread, you had no problem whatsoever with unlimited ACTUAL insults, provided it was an authoritarian leftist indulging in them, so I can only assume here that it is really more a case of who gets to take a dump and who doesn't than any real commitment to clean debate.

It's a new day and I hope it finds you in a better mood.
Just to be clear, what I was trying to say (not very well apparently) is that I don't view Trump's lingering attitude as a Republican or Democratic issue. That is why I said it might require going to a different board to discuss this issue without making it a partisan issue. Not that I was going to trounce off the board in a huff. USMB is, after all, a political board.

This thread is supposed to be about whether the Trump kerfluffle will reopen the door for further discussion about the apparently wide spread attitude that women are still "open season" and it's okay, it's just boy stuff, locker room talk, etc.

You say respect is a two way street. I agree. When two strangers meet, however, and one is male and one is female, they should be starting from a level playing field and they can earn or lose respect from there. Fair?

I see you have removed your earlier posts so people may have a difficult time following this, but I might point out that I am just about the only person in this thread who HASN'T turned it into a partisan game of gotcha. I deplore Trump as the representation of the old boy network just as much as I do Hillary for the institutionalized hypocrisy born of identity politics.

Yes, this will lead to a discussion of misogyny, but it will not be an honest one as long as people insist on framing it according to identity. Good grief, Hillary has been pandering like mad to the Thug lives matter movement as well as Islam, both of which expressing levels of misogyny that make Trump look like Betty Friedan in comparison, and until people desist with the double standards, they won't get to the heart of the matter.

Getting one's panties in a knot over Trump while simultaneously advocating for Islam is like cursing the tom cat that just peed in your petunias while ignoring the saber-toothed tiger with a toddler's head in its jaws.

I didn't remove any posts and I didn't get any alerts from the mods saying they had taken any down. Don't know what you think is missing, but it doesn't appear to be so.

Identity politics is your justification for calling any discussion of misogyny hypocritical? It is completely untrue that people who support BLM or Muslim Americans can't take part in a discussion of how women in America are viewed. The more the merrier.

 

[320 Years of History]

In a local case from Portland, recently, a hip musician admitted to rape on facebook. People who knew him had been trying to warn others about his behavior for years, only to find themselves ostracized for it by all the leftist hipsters who then turned around and tried to claim THEY were the actual victims of bullying when his behavior was finally revealed. Too much!

Say what?

• Can you provide a bit of detail and documentation, please?
  • Something that identifies the case, such as the name of the musician...seeing as it was a case and he admitted to rape that must be public knowledge.
  • Where are these claims whereby the folks who'd been warning others later found themselves ostracized for having done so?

Trump is emblematic of the whole fake rape movement. The claims against Trump are so outlandishly fake that the public is dared to believe them. The accusers expect to just fade away like Cain and Schwarzenegger's accusers did. They should be sued. The whole fake rape voice needs to be silenced. Duke LA Crosse, Rolling Stone, Lena Dunham, the idiot mattress girl all need to be silenced in a manner that so humiliates them the no one would dare another fake rape story.

Blue:
What the hell is the "fake rape movement?" Where is it's webpage? Who is its current leader?

Red:
What demonstrates that they are fake at all, never mind whether they be "outlandishly" so?

 

[320 Years of History]

If Trump weren't running for President I would have viewed the tape as nothing more than the attitude of one old dinosaur who will hopefully lose some of that sexual energy in the next decade or so. What is disturbing and pulls the curtain back on this issue is that millions of Trump's supporters are saying it doesn't matter, it's okay to elect a President with that kind of attitude. We'll just laugh it off and pretend that all the women coming forward to back up his own bragging words are lying.

That's what's disturbing. Are you sure your kids know better than to think it is open season on women? If so, fine. Some parents have some work to do.

Red:
But he is, and that's what makes this a far bigger issue than it has previously been. It's an issue that should long ago have been resolved, yet like other "isms," it lingers well past its welcome.

Blue:
Yep, that's the other side of the problem. One has to wonder whether they make light of his behavior because they hope to be be able to do the same if they are male, or whether they have a fetish of some sort if they are female.

Pink:
It makes no sense to me why folks will believe Cosby's and Clinton's accusers and not Trump's.

Green:
That folks don't see this as a problem and they thus teach their children as much is why mistreatment and malignant attitudes have persisted as they have.

There is an enormous portion of the left that gives lip service to a principle whenever asked, but refuse to put their money where their mouth is when dealing with real events instead of abstractions.

??? What?

This thread is supposed to be about whether the Trump kerfluffle will reopen the door for further discussion about the apparently wide spread attitude that women are still "open season" and it's okay, it's just boy stuff, locker room talk, etc.

That is what it's intended to be about.

Yes, this will lead to a discussion of misogyny, but it will not be an honest one as long as people insist on framing it according to identity.

To have this discussion honestly, there are a number of cultural elements that one must recognize as real and that one must accept as disrespectful to women.

Presidents as Role Models:
Like it or not, the President sets the tone that defines the character of the nation. Truly all leaders and would-be leaders do, but in the U.S. there is no more senior leader than the President. The President is a role model; therefore whatever the President does becomes a tacit signal of approbation that signals to the rest of the nation that it's okay for us to do it too. Of all the ways in which that manifests itself is in the ways we interact with one another.

A Kiss is all it Takes, but a Good Spanking Doesn't Hurt Either:
That Trump has been documented as having the attitudes that are expressed by using the words he did in that Access Hollywood tape and he is running for President and his supporters are yet willing to discount the impact of what surely seems** literally sexual assault is the problem. That diminishing of the events and attitude is tantamount not only to condoning -- by acquiescence if even not by affirmation -- sexual assault, but also to declaring that women are objects just as they were in what Trump would surely call the "days when America was great." To this day that notion remains firmly -- as evidenced by Trump's bragged-about behavior and his supporters' insouciance toward it -- in the American psyche. We all know image, and the clip below illustrates the attitude.

​

Who has not seen any of a hundred or more "classic" movie scenes where the beautiful woman is distraught, fuming and struggling to get away from a man who then grabs her, plants a kiss on her lips and suddenly she's swooning and submitting. That mentality -- the idea that any man's kiss is all it takes to subdue, becalm and satisfy any woman -- is exactly what's expressed in Trump's remark about not even waiting to kiss beautiful women. (Hopefully you can think of a specific movie or scene; my mind's drawing a blank yet I know I've seen a ton of them. Sorry.)

**Note:
I write "seems" only because we weren't there when the events occurred. The fact of human sexual interactions, however, is that generally kissing on the lips by newly acquainted individuals (not one's significant other or close friend(s) who may get a "lip peck" as a greeting), and certainly kissing "with tongue," is a form of foreplay, and the point of foreplay is that it is a precursor to sexual interaction/satisfaction.​

For the U.S. to elect a President who espouses the notion that women have so little control of their own emotions and physical desires that kissing them is all it takes for them to submit to the will of a man is preposterous on its own. That we might have a President whom we can see/hear clearly that thinks that way bodes horribly for American women and girls for it gives every testosterone addled boy, teen and man the tacit go ahead to have his way with women regardless of the woman's efforts to rebuff them. Those are the things one must admit to have an honest discussion on this topic.

​

Getting one's panties in a knot over Trump while simultaneously advocating for Islam is like cursing the tom cat that just peed in your petunias while ignoring the saber-toothed tiger with a toddler's head in its jaws.

What is it with folks on this forum? What has one's view about Islam to do with how American women are seen and treated? Why does the treatment and cultural mores pertaining to how males and females are expected to interact have to be connected to Islam? Are not the same standards applicable to American Muslim women?

I'm amazed you had the nerve to write about having an honest discussion yet you also trivialized the appropriateness of our outrage over the mistreatment of women with your "bigger fish to fry" analogy. Women comprise some 50%+ of the U.S. population, and that makes them every bit a "big fish."

Though I neither support nor oppose Islam, from my read of the Quran, it seems to me that how Islam is portrayed re: women and their roles strikes me as a more a matter of how provincial Islamic radicals behave more so than what The Prophet taught. Christianity has more than it's own share of passages that promote violence toward women. That we don't much talk about those verses doesn't make them not be there and very much part of Christianity, yet we focus on such verses when we assail Islam and we ignore them in the Christian tradition. But neither Islam nor Christianity is the point. The point is that it'd be far more honest to simply address what is and is not acceptable about how we in the U.S., in our laws and secular practices, treat and view women.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

No partisanship here...

Isn't puritanism fun!

I'm looking forward to all those jocks being ostracized from the team for groping and rape since we're now going to hold everyone accountable.

While we're at it 'get thee to a convent woman' if you have a child out of wedlock.

Next we can reestablish the 18th Amendment...

*****CHUCKLE*****

 

[OldLady]

If Trump weren't running for President I would have viewed the tape as nothing more than the attitude of one old dinosaur who will hopefully lose some of that sexual energy in the next decade or so. What is disturbing and pulls the curtain back on this issue is that millions of Trump's supporters are saying it doesn't matter, it's okay to elect a President with that kind of attitude. We'll just laugh it off and pretend that all the women coming forward to back up his own bragging words are lying.

That's what's disturbing. Are you sure your kids know better than to think it is open season on women? If so, fine. Some parents have some work to do.

Red:
But he is, and that's what makes this a far bigger issue than it has previously been. It's an issue that should long ago have been resolved, yet like other "isms," it lingers well past its welcome.

Blue:
Yep, that's the other side of the problem. One has to wonder whether they make light of his behavior because they hope to be be able to do the same if they are male, or whether they have a fetish of some sort if they are female.

Pink:
It makes no sense to me why folks will believe Cosby's and Clinton's accusers and not Trump's.

Green:
That folks don't see this as a problem and they thus teach their children as much is why mistreatment and malignant attitudes have persisted as they have.

There is an enormous portion of the left that gives lip service to a principle whenever asked, but refuse to put their money where their mouth is when dealing with real events instead of abstractions.

??? What?

This thread is supposed to be about whether the Trump kerfluffle will reopen the door for further discussion about the apparently wide spread attitude that women are still "open season" and it's okay, it's just boy stuff, locker room talk, etc.

That is what it's intended to be about.

Yes, this will lead to a discussion of misogyny, but it will not be an honest one as long as people insist on framing it according to identity.

To have this discussion honestly, there are a number of cultural elements that one must recognize as real and that one must accept as disrespectful to women.

Presidents as Role Models:
Like it or not, the President sets the tone that defines the character of the nation. Truly all leaders and would-be leaders do, but in the U.S. there is no more senior leader than the President. The President is a role model; therefore whatever the President does becomes a tacit signal of approbation that signals to the rest of the nation that it's okay for us to do it too. Of all the ways in which that manifests itself is in the ways we interact with one another.

A Kiss is all it Takes, but a Good Spanking Doesn't Hurt Either:
That Trump has been documented as having the attitudes that are expressed by using the words he did in that Access Hollywood tape and he is running for President and his supporters are yet willing to discount the impact of what surely seems** literally sexual assault is the problem. That diminishing of the events and attitude is tantamount not only to condoning -- by acquiescence if even not by affirmation -- sexual assault, but also to declaring that women are objects just as they were in what Trump would surely call the "days when America was great." To this day that notion remains firmly -- as evidenced by Trump's bragged-about behavior and his supporters' insouciance toward it -- in the American psyche. We all know image, and the clip below illustrates the attitude.

​

Who has not seen any of a hundred or more "classic" movie scenes where the beautiful woman is distraught, fuming and struggling to get away from a man who then grabs her, plants a kiss on her lips and suddenly she's swooning and submitting. That mentality -- the idea that any man's kiss is all it takes to subdue, becalm and satisfy any woman -- is exactly what's expressed in Trump's remark about not even waiting to kiss beautiful women. (Hopefully you can think of a specific movie or scene; my mind's drawing a blank yet I know I've seen a ton of them. Sorry.)

**Note:
I write "seems" only because we weren't there when the events occurred. The fact of human sexual interactions, however, is that generally kissing on the lips by newly acquainted individuals (not one's significant other or close friend(s) who may get a "lip peck" as a greeting), and certainly kissing "with tongue," is a form of foreplay, and the point of foreplay is that it is a precursor to sexual interaction/satisfaction.​

For the U.S. to elect a President who espouses the notion that women have so little control of their own emotions and physical desires that kissing them is all it takes for them to submit to the will of a man is preposterous on its own. That we might have a President whom we can see/hear clearly that thinks that way bodes horribly for American women and girls for it gives every testosterone addled boy, teen and man the tacit go ahead to have his way with women regardless of the woman's efforts to rebuff them. Those are the things one must admit to have an honest discussion on this topic.

​

Getting one's panties in a knot over Trump while simultaneously advocating for Islam is like cursing the tom cat that just peed in your petunias while ignoring the saber-toothed tiger with a toddler's head in its jaws.

What is it with folks on this forum? What has one's view about Islam to do with how American women are seen and treated? Why does the treatment and cultural mores pertaining to how males and females are expected to interact have to be connected to Islam? Are not the same standards applicable to American Muslim women?

I'm amazed you had the nerve to write about having an honest discussion yet you also trivialized the appropriateness of our outrage over the mistreatment of women with your "bigger fish to fry" analogy. Women comprise some 50%+ of the U.S. population, and that makes them every bit a "big fish."

Though I neither support nor oppose Islam, from my read of the Quran, it seems to me that how Islam is portrayed re: women and their roles strikes me as a more a matter of how provincial Islamic radicals behave more so than what The Prophet taught. Christianity has more than it's own share of passages that promote violence toward women. That we don't much talk about those verses doesn't make them not be there and very much part of Christianity, yet we focus on such verses when we assail Islam and we ignore them in the Christian tradition. But neither Islam nor Christianity is the point. The point is that it'd be far more honest to simply address what is and is not acceptable about how we in the U.S., in our laws and secular practices, treat and view women.

That we might have a President whom we can see/hear clearly that thinks that way bodes horribly for American women and girls for it gives every testosterone addled boy, teen and man the tacit go ahead to have his way with women regardless of the woman's efforts to rebuff them.

Yes. The "tacit" part is the thing that makes this somewhat difficult for people to recognize. The Women's Movement 2.0 needs to deal with subtle but ingrained attitudes based in a lack of respect for women's personal boundaries, except for their sexual potential which is applauded. Hillary's Depends jokes, her "Ugly" pictures, her "lack of stamina" -- they are all springing from the basis that women are the weaker sex and judged first and foremost by their physical attractiveness. Look at the newscasters: Men wear business suits and sensible shoes. Women wear sleeveless sheath dresses and 4 inch heels. Why? Women are continually on display. We don't even notice it.

Posters here have said it is communist, lesbian, progressive, Muslim loving or class warfare to discuss the Women's Movement 2.0. Since women occupy every class, race and political movement in this country, I don't see it as an 'identity' issue. Unless being a woman is supposed to be, in itself, a thing apart, and I'm happy to say that isn't much of a thing anymore.

But this isn't a movement of only women. It's about men as much as women, it's about how we treat each other.