Paula Abdul Sues for Sexual Assault


This is another one of those things that allegedly happened a million years ago. It is a true injustice against the defendant. But here is the real question: Was Abdul ever hot enough to even want to assault? I know, nobody ever wants to assault anyone. Certainly I don’t, nor would I ever, condone assault or sexual harassment. I am just curious about the mindset of a man who would do it.

I am thinking that if you are going to expose yourself to such risk then the chick ought to be worth it. It would have to be Margot Robbie level stuff, you know? Of course, maybe there is nothing rational about it. Maybe it’s impulsiveness on the part of the harasser. IDK. I DO know that if I decided to harass/sexually assault a woman, then it would have to be some irrefutable, smoking hot stuff. Perhaps this - rational analysis- indicates that I am not prone to doing such.

If I was considering this I don’t think I would go after Paula Abdul. Sure, she was cute back in the day, and she had a very doable body. But she is a “girl next door” type. This means she is common. Why waste the effort on a celebrity commoner when you can get as good, or better, from a non-celebrity and at much less risk to yourself? You can get a chick like that without even having to resort to force.

This situation is most likely the result of Abdul being readily available, his power over her, and maybe even some drugs and alcohol.
What are you trying to tell yourself? That the reason your long rod isn't functional is that women are not pretty enough?
 
Rape and sexual assault are not the same thing. Not all "sexual assaults" take the form of rape. President Trump was NOT convicted of RAPE. He was convicted of sexual assault - in a Manhattan courtroom, no less - and I believe the judge later opined for the masses that he thought it was "rape," which was and remains pure balderdash. "Rape" refers to the old in&out, and nothing short of it.

It is very frustrating that the current American language includes so many varied behaviors under the umbrella of "sexual assault." A man can brush his hand on the buttocks of an unsuspecting woman, or forcibly rape her, and the conduct is described with the same expression. Ridiculous.
 
Rape and sexual assault are not the same thing. Not all "sexual assaults" take the form of rape. President Trump was NOT convicted of RAPE. He was convicted of sexual assault - in a Manhattan courtroom, no less - and I believe the judge later opined for the masses that he thought it was "rape," which was and remains pure balderdash. "Rape" refers to the old in&out, and nothing short of it.

It is very frustrating that the current American language includes so many varied behaviors under the umbrella of "sexual assault." A man can brush his hand on the buttocks of an unsuspecting woman, or forcibly rape her, and the conduct is described with the same expression. Ridiculous.
That is a good point. Causing another person to die is defined under multiple terms such as voluntary or involuntary manslaughter, first, second and third degree murder, etc. that carry with them varying levels of punishment. Sexual assault is serious business and deserves similar treatment.
 
Sexual assault. Biden hasnt even been charged with anything.
Trump is a self confessed sex pest Your sort excuses that because it doesnt bother maga trash. Low quality trash.
Ah, the old "You guys" gambit, attempting to paint one's opponent with a very broad brush that picks up pigment from other people. Not kosher, lad, not kosher.
 
Actually, you have things half assed backwards, Tom.

Its Democrats who share porn videos between father and son.

And spend a lot of time defending Hamas;s brutal mass rapes and torture of defenseless women, and their obsession with sexually mutilating children and murdering babies by the millions. They really think they're fooling people with their silly attempts at lying.
 
"Its Democrats who share porn videos between father and son."


Ummm???
You really wanna go there, poster Polish?

Notably there was the recent news item about the newly chosen Republican Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, of Louisiana.

There was this:

"Johnson and his teenage son use an app called Covenant Eyes to monitor each other’s internet browsing for porn."

Monitor each other's porn browsing?

Eeeeeuw!!!!
 

This is another one of those things that allegedly happened a million years ago. It is a true injustice against the defendant. But here is the real question: Was Abdul ever hot enough to even want to assault? I know, nobody ever wants to assault anyone. Certainly I don’t, nor would I ever, condone assault or sexual harassment. I am just curious about the mindset of a man who would do it.

I am thinking that if you are going to expose yourself to such risk then the chick ought to be worth it. It would have to be Margot Robbie level stuff, you know? Of course, maybe there is nothing rational about it. Maybe it’s impulsiveness on the part of the harasser. IDK. I DO know that if I decided to harass/sexually assault a woman, then it would have to be some irrefutable, smoking hot stuff. Perhaps this - rational analysis- indicates that I am not prone to doing such.

If I was considering this I don’t think I would go after Paula Abdul. Sure, she was cute back in the day, and she had a very doable body. But she is a “girl next door” type. This means she is common. Why waste the effort on a celebrity commoner when you can get as good, or better, from a non-celebrity and at much less risk to yourself? You can get a chick like that without even having to resort to force.

This situation is most likely the result of Abdul being readily available, his power over her, and maybe even some drugs and alcohol.
With all that thought, it seems you have figured out that sexual assault is the only option you have to get any.
 
Not at all. I just don't get upset because someone found a way to scam the scam that is Title IX.
This is another way of saying, “Fuck those female athletes. Men should be able to compete against them, take their scholarships, and defeat them due to physiological advantage.”

This sounds pretty hateful to me.
 
This is another way of saying, “Fuck those female athletes. Men should be able to compete against them, take their scholarships, and defeat them due to physiological advantage.”

This sounds pretty hateful to me.
.

What an old line! I've heard that from physically brutal men forever. "She deserved it".

.
 

Forum List

Back
Top