Lets not forget about Clarence Thomas and Anita Hill

[Penelope]

Former girlfriend says Clarence Thomas was a binge drinker, porn user - CNN.com

This is a video of his ex girlfriend.

 

[theHawk]

Oh my gosh, a man once looked at porn in the 1980’s!

Take to the streets!

 

[shockedcanadian]

Oh my gosh, a man once looked at porn in the 1980’s!

Take to the streets!

The 1980s? He could be looking at porn last night and it shouldn't concern anyone. If porn watching were the worst of activities in society police wouldn't have careers.

I didn't read the original link so I am just responding to your comment and not the full breadth of his activities. Regardless, you have public and private life. If you aren't committing crimes, defrauding the public or harming others, there should be a divide. If someone has a substance problem, that certainly would be problematic. If he is using anything at work, they need to find a new job.

 

[OldLady]

Former girlfriend says Clarence Thomas was a binge drinker, porn user - CNN.com

This is a video of his ex girlfriend.

I can't believe they approved his appointment, but with all of this coming out on all these guys lately, I am beginning to look at this from a different perspective.

Humans are sexual; it is embedded in the deepest, most instinctive and undeniable parts of our brain. Yes, we can control our behavior but our urges frequently win anyway. So legislating sexual behavior is like herding cats. Abuses of power in sexual relationships is another matter, and that is why we have laws about rape, adults (who have an automatic power position) engaging with minors, and those in positions of power using that position to coerce sexual cooperation.
I think we should try to sort out these allegations according to abuse of power/unequal relationships and force.
The flood gates have opened about inappropriate behavior. Clarence Thomas, was that hearing held today, would probably not be on the Supreme Court. But I am asking this question: Did his behavior interfere with his ability to be a good Supreme Court judge? Where does the tsk tsking cross the line into "unfit?" I'm not completely sure.

 

[Penelope]

Former girlfriend says Clarence Thomas was a binge drinker, porn user - CNN.com

This is a video of his ex girlfriend.

I can't believe they approved his appointment, but with all of this coming out on all these guys lately, I am beginning to look at this from a different perspective.

Humans are sexual; it is embedded in the deepest, most instinctive and undeniable parts of our brain. Yes, we can control our behavior but our urges frequently win anyway. So legislating sexual behavior is like herding cats. Abuses of power in sexual relationships is another matter, and that is why we have laws about rape, adults (who have an automatic power position) engaging with minors, and those in positions of power using that position to coerce sexual cooperation.
I think we should try to sort out these allegations according to abuse of power/unequal relationships and force.
The flood gates have opened about inappropriate behavior. Clarence Thomas, was that hearing held today, would probably not be on the Supreme Court. But I am asking this question: Did his behavior interfere with his ability to be a good Supreme Court judge? Where does the tsk tsking cross the line into "unfit?" I'm not completely sure.

Yes , when it comes to women right issues, of course it does.

 

[OldLady]

Former girlfriend says Clarence Thomas was a binge drinker, porn user - CNN.com

This is a video of his ex girlfriend.

I can't believe they approved his appointment, but with all of this coming out on all these guys lately, I am beginning to look at this from a different perspective.

Humans are sexual; it is embedded in the deepest, most instinctive and undeniable parts of our brain. Yes, we can control our behavior but our urges frequently win anyway. So legislating sexual behavior is like herding cats. Abuses of power in sexual relationships is another matter, and that is why we have laws about rape, adults (who have an automatic power position) engaging with minors, and those in positions of power using that position to coerce sexual cooperation.
I think we should try to sort out these allegations according to abuse of power/unequal relationships and force.
The flood gates have opened about inappropriate behavior. Clarence Thomas, was that hearing held today, would probably not be on the Supreme Court. But I am asking this question: Did his behavior interfere with his ability to be a good Supreme Court judge? Where does the tsk tsking cross the line into "unfit?" I'm not completely sure.

Yes , when it comes to women right issues, of course it does.

Explain that more for me, can you?

 

[DrLove]

I can't believe they approved his appointment, but with all of this coming out on all these guys lately, I am beginning to look at this from a different perspective.

Humans are sexual; it is embedded in the deepest, most instinctive and undeniable parts of our brain. Yes, we can control our behavior but our urges frequently win anyway. So legislating sexual behavior is like herding cats. Abuses of power in sexual relationships is another matter, and that is why we have laws about rape, adults (who have an automatic power position) engaging with minors, and those in positions of power using that position to coerce sexual cooperation.
I think we should try to sort out these allegations according to abuse of power/unequal relationships and force.
The flood gates have opened about inappropriate behavior. Clarence Thomas, was that hearing held today, would probably not be on the Supreme Court. But I am asking this question: Did his behavior interfere with his ability to be a good Supreme Court judge? Where does the tsk tsking cross the line into "unfit?" I'm not completely sure.

Obama was correct:

“I would not have nominated Clarence Thomas,” said the presumptive Democratic nominee. “I don’t think that he...” the crowd interrupted with applause. “I don’t think that he was a strong enough jurist or legal thinker at the time for that elevation. Setting aside the fact that I profoundly disagree with his interpretations of a lot of the constitution. I would not have nominated Justice Scalia though I don’t think there is any doubt about his intellectual brilliance. Because he and I just disagree.​

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Obama was correct:

“I would not have nominated Clarence Thomas,” said the presumptive Democratic nominee. “I don’t think that he...” the crowd interrupted with applause. “I don’t think that he was a strong enough jurist or legal thinker at the time for that elevation. Setting aside the fact that I profoundly disagree with his interpretations of a lot of the constitution. I would not have nominated Justice Scalia though I don’t think there is any doubt about his intellectual brilliance. Because he and I just disagree.​

Hahaha....good one!....like Obama had the experience and knowledge to offer an opinion on it.

 

[OldLady]

Obama was correct:

“I would not have nominated Clarence Thomas,” said the presumptive Democratic nominee. “I don’t think that he...” the crowd interrupted with applause. “I don’t think that he was a strong enough jurist or legal thinker at the time for that elevation. Setting aside the fact that I profoundly disagree with his interpretations of a lot of the constitution. I would not have nominated Justice Scalia though I don’t think there is any doubt about his intellectual brilliance. Because he and I just disagree.​

Hahaha....good one!....like Obama had the experience and knowledge to offer an opinion on it.

It seems Obama was making a remark that answered my question--creepin on Anita Hill was not a factor in whether he was qualified for the position.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Obama was correct:

“I would not have nominated Clarence Thomas,” said the presumptive Democratic nominee. “I don’t think that he...” the crowd interrupted with applause. “I don’t think that he was a strong enough jurist or legal thinker at the time for that elevation. Setting aside the fact that I profoundly disagree with his interpretations of a lot of the constitution. I would not have nominated Justice Scalia though I don’t think there is any doubt about his intellectual brilliance. Because he and I just disagree.​

Hahaha....good one!....like Obama had the experience and knowledge to offer an opinion on it.

It seems Obama was making a remark that answered my question--creepin on Anita Hill was not a factor in whether he was qualified for the position.

Just something to keep in mind...Anita Hill followed Thomas when he got a new position in another court. That always bothered me. If it was as bad as she said it was, why would she do that?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Anita Hillololololol

 

[OldLady]

Obama was correct:

“I would not have nominated Clarence Thomas,” said the presumptive Democratic nominee. “I don’t think that he...” the crowd interrupted with applause. “I don’t think that he was a strong enough jurist or legal thinker at the time for that elevation. Setting aside the fact that I profoundly disagree with his interpretations of a lot of the constitution. I would not have nominated Justice Scalia though I don’t think there is any doubt about his intellectual brilliance. Because he and I just disagree.​

Hahaha....good one!....like Obama had the experience and knowledge to offer an opinion on it.

It seems Obama was making a remark that answered my question--creepin on Anita Hill was not a factor in whether he was qualified for the position.

Just something to keep in mind...Anita Hill followed Thomas when he got a new position in another court. That always bothered me. If it was as bad as she said it was, why would she do that?

dunno. Why do women put up with half the shit they do? I'm feeling particularly grumpy about it because I just discovered that a young woman I knew as a girl--who was raised by an extreme, textbook domestic abuser--went ahead and married another one just like him. And she gets upset sometimes but she "really loves him." What the fuck are you going to do?

 

[iamwhatiseem]

dunno. Why do women put up with half the shit they do? I'm feeling particularly grumpy about it because I just discovered that a young woman I knew as a girl--who was raised by an extreme, textbook domestic abuser--went ahead and married another one just like him. And she gets upset sometimes but she "really loves him." What the fuck are you going to do?

Difficult to understand.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

I can't believe they approved his appointment, but with all of this coming out on all these guys lately, I am beginning to look at this from a different perspective.

Humans are sexual; it is embedded in the deepest, most instinctive and undeniable parts of our brain. Yes, we can control our behavior but our urges frequently win anyway. So legislating sexual behavior is like herding cats. Abuses of power in sexual relationships is another matter, and that is why we have laws about rape, adults (who have an automatic power position) engaging with minors, and those in positions of power using that position to coerce sexual cooperation.
I think we should try to sort out these allegations according to abuse of power/unequal relationships and force.
The flood gates have opened about inappropriate behavior. Clarence Thomas, was that hearing held today, would probably not be on the Supreme Court. But I am asking this question: Did his behavior interfere with his ability to be a good Supreme Court judge? Where does the tsk tsking cross the line into "unfit?" I'm not completely sure.

Love this post.
I am afraid we are going to do what societies always do - go from one extreme to the other. What women had to put up with decades ago was truly wrong. I remember it. I am male, but that doesn't mean I wasn't disturbed by it the eons of times I saw it. We have gotten much better about this. Women today don't have a clue what it was like for young women entering the job force 30 years ago. So why can't we just keep on improving instead of going bezerk and start crucifying everyone and suddenly every girl alive is a victim?
There is common sense in this. And I totally agree with you, position of power plays a major role in defining what is simply asshattery to genuine sexual assault.